SS. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission

P.O. Box 7352, York, PA, 17408

717-792-2789

SaintsPeterandPaulRCM.com

SaintsPeterandPaulRCM@comcast.net

To Restore and Defend Our Ecclesiastical Traditions of the Latin Rite to the Diocese of Harrisburg

 

SS. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Chapel

129 South Beaver Street, York PA 17401


 

 “…this missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used… Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. … Accordingly, no one whatsoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, direction, will, decree and prohibition.  Should any person venture to do so, let him understand he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”

Pope St. Pius V, Papal Bull, QUO PRIMUM,

Tridentine Codification of the traditional Roman Rite of the Mass. 

 

image004.jpg

 

Twenty-forth Sunday after Pentecost

St. Elizabeth of Hungary, Widow

St. Pontianus, Pope & Martyr

November 19, 2017

          Since there are twenty-five Sundays after Pentecost this year, today’s Mass is the Mass from the sixth Sunday after Epiphany.  Next Sunday will be the last Sunday after Pentecost.

          “God,” says St. Paul in the night office for this Sunday, “hath spoken to us by His Son, whom He hath appointed heir of all things…. who being the brightness of His glory and the figure of His substance and upholding all things by the word of His power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high…To which of the angels hath he said at any time: Thou art my Son, today have I begotten Thee!….And again, when He bringeth the first begotten into the world he saith: And let all the angels of God adore Him” (First Nocturn, Introit).

          St. Athanasius remarks that the Apostle affirms the superiority of Christ to the angels, by way of showing the difference between the nature of the Son and that of His creatures (Second Nocturn).  Similarly the Mass for today brings out the divinity of our Blessed Lord.  He is God because He utters things hidden in God and unknown to the world (Gospel).  His word, compared by Him to a tiny seed cast into the field of the world, and to a little leaven in the lump, is divine because it calms our passions and brings forth in our hearts those marvels of faith, hope and charity of which we read in the Epistle.

          Of the Church, stirred to greater effort by our Lord’s words, we have an excellent figure in the three measures of meal, the whole of which was leavened by the expanding force of the yeast (Gospel), and in the mustard tree, the largest of its kind, where the birds of the air gladly come for shelter.

          We must constantly meditate on our Lord’s doctrine, that like leaven it may pervade and transform our hearts, and like the mustard tree may spread abroad its fruits of holiness in those of our neighbor.

          St. Elizabeth of Hungry, whose statue is honored in our chapel, was born in 1207, daughter of King Andrew II of Hungary and died in 1231 at the age of 24 as a Franciscan tertiary.  She married Louis IV, landgrave of Thuringia, but after his death in the Crusades she was deprived of all and driven from her home by her brother-in-law; later the city of Marburg was given her; noted for love of the poor and the lepers.

          St. Pontianus, Pope from 230 to 235 was sentenced to the mines of Sardinia where he died of privation and suffering.

 

INTROIT:

Jer.29.  The Lord saith, I think thoughts of peace, and not of affliction: you shall call upon Me, and I will hear you; and I will bring back your captivity from all places.

Ps. 84.  Lord, Thou hast blessed Thy land; Thou hast turned away the captivity of Jacob.  Glory be, etc.   The Lord saith, etc.

 

COLLECT:

Grant us, we beseech thee, O almighty God, ever to think such things as are reasonable, and, in every word and work of ours, to do that which is pleasing in Thy sight. Through our Lord, etc.

 

Enlighten, O merciful God, the hearts of Thy faithful, and through the glorious prayers of blessed Elizabeth, do Thou make us despise worldly prosperity and ever be gladdened by that consolation which is of heaven.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

Being appeased, turn to Thy flock eternal Shepherd, and through blessed Pontianus, Thy Martyr and Supreme Pontiff, whom Thou didst make the Pastor of the whole Church, guard and protect it forever.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

EPISTLE:  I Thess. 1: 2-10.

Brethren, we give thanks to God for you all, making a remembrance of you in our prayers without ceasing; being mindful of the work of your faith, and labor, and charity, and of the enduring of the hope of our Lord Jesus Christ before God and our Father: knowing, brethren, beloved of God, your election: for our gospel hath not been unto you in word only, but in power also, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much fullness, as you know what manner of men we have been among you for your sakes. And you became followers of us and of the Lord, receiving the word in much tribulation, with joy of the Holy Ghost: so that you were made a pattern to all that believe, in Macedonia and in Achaia. For from you was spread abroad the word of the Lord, not only in Macedonia and in Achaia, but also in every place, your faith, which is towards God, is gone forth; so that we need not to speak anything. For they themselves relate of us what manner of entering in we had unto you; and how ye turned, to God from idols, to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven (whom he raised from the dead), Jesus, who both delivered us from the wrath to come.

EXPLANATION The apostle gives thanks to God in prayer for those inhabitants of Thessalonia, who have been converted to Christianity by his words, and declares to them his joy at their Christian life which they prove by their good works and their perseverance, even through all trials, in expectation of eternal reward through Christ. He assures them also of their salvation, (election) because God had caused the preaching of His gospel, which they so willingly received, to produce in them such extraordinary fruit. He praises them not only for having listened to the gospel and abandoned idolatry, but for having regulated their lives in accordance with the faith, and having become a model to distant nations, for the report of their faith had spread far, and everywhere their zealous reception of the gospel was spoken of. Would that the same could be said of all Christians!

 

GRADUAL:

Ps. 43.  Thou hast delivered us, O Lord, from them that afflict us: and hast put them to shame that hate us.  In God we will glory all the day: and in Thy name we will give praise forever.  Alleluia, alleluia.

Ps. 129.  Out of the depths I have cried to Thee, O Lord: Lord, hear my prayer.  Alleluia.

 

GOSPEL:  St. Matthew, 13: 31-35.

At that time, Jesus spoke this parable to the multitudes: The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard-seed, which a man took and sowed in his field: which is the least indeed of all seeds; but when it is grown up, it is greater than all herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come, and dwell in the branches thereof. Another parable he spoke to them: The kingdom of heaven is like to leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened. All these things Jesus spoke in parables to the multitude, and without parables he did not speak to them, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.

What is here understood by the kingdom of heaven?

The Church and the doctrine of Christ.

Why is the Church compared to a grain of mustard-seed?

Because there is a great similarity between them. The mustard-seed, though so small, grows in Palestine so high and so rapidly, that it becomes a broad tree, in which birds can build their nests. In like manner the Church of Christ was in the beginning very small like the mustard-seed, but it soon spread so wide that numberless people, even great philosophers and princes, came to find peace and protection under its branches.

Why is Christ's doctrine compared to leaven?

Because like the leaven, which quickly penetrates the flour, and makes it palatable bread, the doctrine of Christ, spreading with surprising swiftness over the then known parts of the globe, gave the Gentiles a taste for divine things and for heavenly wisdom. Thus Christ’s doctrine penetrates him who receives it, sanctifies all his thoughts, words, and deeds, and makes him pleasing to God.

By what means, in particular, was the Church of Christ propagated?

By the omnipotence of God and the miracles which He so frequently wrought to prove the truth and divinity of the Christian religion; the courageous faith, and the pure moral life of the early Christians, which led many pagan minds to accept the doctrine of Christ; and the persecution of Christianity, for, as Tertullian says: “The blood of the martyrs was the seed of the Church.” The false doctrine of Mahomet, the erroneous teachings of Luther, Calvin, and earlier and later heretics have, it is true, also spread quickly far and wide; but this is not to be wondered at, for it is easy to lead people to a doctrine that encourages sensuality, and to which they are carried by their evil inclinations, as was the case with the doctrine of the impostor Mahomet, and three hundred years ago with the heresy of Luther; but to spread a doctrine which demands the subduing of the carnal, earthly inclinations, and to bend the will to the yoke of obedience to faith, something more than human eloquence is required. Thus, the Chancellor of England, Thomas More, who gave his blood for the true doctrine of Christ, wrote to Luther, who was boasting of the rapid increase of his sect: “It is easy to descend; seducing the people to a bad life is nothing more marvelous than that a heavy stone should fall of its own accord to the ground;” and Melanchton, a friend of Luther, in answer to his mother's question, whether she should remain a Catholic or receive Luther's doctrine, wrote : “In this religion it is easy to live, in the Catholic it is easy to die.”

Why did Christ always speak in parables?

That His teaching by being simple might be more easily understood, and better remembered. He who is called upon to teach others, should, as did Christ, always speak to them according to their ability to understand, and by no means seek his own honor, but the honor of God, and the benefit of those who hear him.

PRAYER O most benign Jesus. How much do we give Thee thanks that Thou hast permitted us to be born in Thy holy Church, and instructed in Thy holy doctrine, which, like the mustard-seed, has grown to be a large tree, spreading over the whole earth. Grant that under the shadow of this tree, in Thy holy Church, we may ever rest securely, cling to her faithfully, and penetrated, as by leaven, with her doctrine may bring Thee pleasing fruits of faith and virtue.  Amen.

 

OFFERTORY: 

Ps. 129. Out of the depths I have cried to Thee, O Lord; Lord, hear my prayer: out of the depths I have cried to Thee, O Lord.

 

SECRET:

May this oblation, O God, we beseech thee, cleanse us and renovate us, govern and protect us.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

May the sacrifice of Thy holy people be acceptable to Thee, O Lord, and honorable to Thy saints, through whose merits we know that we have been helped in trouble. Through our Lord, etc.

 

By the offered gifts, we beseech Thee, O Lord, that Thou kindly enlighten Thy Church, so that Thy flock may everywhere progress and prosper, and Thy shepherds, under Thy guidance, may be pleasing to Thy name.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

COMMUNION:

Mark 2:24.  Amen, I say to you, whatsoever you ask when you pray, believe that you shall receive, and it shall be done unto you.

 

POSTCOMMUNION:

Fed as we have been, O Lord, on heavenly delights, we pray Thee that we may ever have a longing for those same things by which we truly live.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

Thou hast fed Thy servants, O Lord, with the sacred gifts; comfort us ever, we pray, by her intercession whose festival we celebrate.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

Being appeased, O Lord, guide Thy Church, which has been nourished by holy refreshment, that under Thy direction and powerful rule it may receive increase of liberty and may continue in religious integrity.  Through our Lord, etc.

 

 

PROPER OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 19th:

19

Sun

24th Sunday after Pentecost

[6th Sunday after Epiphany]

St. Elizabeth of Hungary, W

St. Pontianus, PM

sd

G

 

Mass 9:00 AM, Confessions 8:00 AM, Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Members of Ss. P & P

20

Mon

St. Felix of Valois, C

d

W

 

Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:00 AM

21

Tue

Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary

dm

W

 

Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:00 AM

22

Wed

St. Cecilia, VM

d

R

 

Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:00 AM

23

Thu

St. Clement I, PM

St. Felicitas, M

d

R

 

Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:00 AM

24

Fri

St. John of the Cross, CD

St. Chrysogonus, M

d

W

A

Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:00 AM

25

Sat

St. Catharine of Alexandria, VM

d

R

 

Mass 9:00 AM; Rosary of Reparation  Confessions 8:30 AM

26

Sun

25th & Last Sunday after Pentecost

St. Sylvester, Ab

St. Peter of Alexandria, BpM

 

sd

 

G

 

Mass 9:00 AM, Confessions 8:00 AM, Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Members of Ss. P & P

 

St. Elizabeth, who had become the passionate lover of holy poverty, chose to remain among the poor.  She was the first professed Tertiary of the Seraphic Order; and the mantle sent by St. Francis to his very dear daughter became her only treasure.  The path of perfect self-renunciation soon brought her to the threshold of heaven.  She who, twenty years before, had been carried to her betrothed in a silver cradle and robed in silk and gold, now took her flight to God from a wretched hovel, her only garment being a patched gown. 

Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, St. Elizabeth of Hungary

 

 

Epiphany-6th-Sunday

 

 

 

 

I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That they might know that by what things a man sinneth, by the same also he is tormented.

Wisdom 11:17

 

 

 

I will send forth famine into the land, not a famine of bread . . . but of hearing the word of the Lord, . . . they shall go about seeking the word of the Lord and shall not find it.

Amos 8:11

 

 

Faithfully do what God expects of you each moment, and leave the rest up to Him.

I assure you that living in this manner will bring you great peace.

St. Jane Francis de Chantal


 

 

 

Invincible ignorance is a punishment for sin. 

St. Thomas Aquinas (De Infid. q. x., art. 1.)

 

 

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

 

 

 

 

 

A Meditative Prayer on the Precious Blood of Jesus

I adore You, O Precious Blood of Jesus, flower of creation, fruit of virginity, ineffable instrument of the Holy Spirit, and I rejoice at the thought that You came from the drop of virginal blood on which eternal Love impressed its movement; You were assumed by the Word and deified in His person. I am overcome with emotion when I think of Your passing from the Blessed Virgin's heart into the heart of the Word, and, being vivified by the breath of the Divinity, becoming adorable because You became the Blood of God.

I adore You enclosed in the veins of Jesus, preserved in His humanity like the manna in the golden urn, the memorial of the eternal Redemption which He accomplished during the days of His earthly life. I adore You, Blood of the new, eternal Testament, flowing from the veins of Jesus in Gethsemane, from the flesh torn by scourges in the Praetorium, from His pierced hands and feet and from His opened side on Golgotha. I adore You in the Sacraments, in the Eucharist, where I know You are substantially present....

I place my trust in You, O adorable Blood, our Redemption, our regeneration. Fall, drop by drop, into the hearts that have wandered from You and soften their hardness.

 

The soul that is attached to anything however much good there may be in it, will not arrive at the liberty of divine union. For whether it be a strong wire rope or a slender and delicate thread that holds the bird, it matters not, if it really holds it fast; for, until the cord be broken the bird cannot fly. 

St. John of the Cross

 

Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: “We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.” 

Pope St. Pius X, Acerbo Nimis

 

ECUMENISM DEFINED:  And it doesn’t get any better than this!

From theological discussion it can emerge what the essential Christian doctrinal patrimony is, how much of it is communicable authentically and together in different terms that are substantially equal and complementary, and how it is possible for everyone to make the victorious discovery of the identity of faith, in freedom, and in the variety of its expressions, from which union can be happily celebrated. 

Pope Paul VI, January 1969, quoted from Iota Unum

 

Theology of the Body is NOT Catholic because:

1. Its ‘theology’ is man-centered and not God-centered.

2. It has abandoned the perennial teachings of Scholasticism in favor of novel contemporary philosophies including Existentialism, Phenomenology (the philosophy of consciousness), and Personalism.

3. It distorts the Gospel message of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

4. It denies a fundamental premise of the Faith- the fragility of human nature and its tendency towards sin, which is confirmed by the entire history of mankind and everyone’s individual experience.

5. It contradicts the traditional teaching of the Church concerning the ends and hierarchy of ends of marriage.

6. It promotes the sensuous over the spiritual.

7. It leads us away from Christ, down the road of Modernism.

Randy Engel, Commentary on ‘Theology of the Body’.  Mrs. Engel is the author of Sex Education: The Final Plague and The Rite of Sodomy: Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church, which is built upon the foundation of Rev. Enrique Rueda’s work, The Homosexual Network.

 

St. Paul offers Catholic ‘Antidote’ to Theology of the Body

But I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway. 1 Cor. 9:27

For whom the Lord loveth, he chastiseth; and he scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. Heb 12:6

For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Eph 6:12

But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind, and captivating me in the law of sin, that is in my members.  Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? Rom 7:23-24

Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh.  For if you live according to the flesh, you shall die: but if by the Spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live. Rom 8:12-13

 

When it comes to sexuality, the Catholic Church's understanding is about at the level of a teenager.

Hugh Hefner is my muse... I see historical connections between Hugh Hefner and John Paul II.

Christopher West, Guru, Theology of the Body

note: There are many quotes of Chris West that are far too vulgar to publish.

 

Comments from Alice von Hildebrand on Christopher West

    My feeling is that Christopher West has become famous because he started discussing the Theology of the Body, which is extremely appealing topic. The difficulty is that, in the meantime, he became so famous that I do believe he has become much too self-assured and has lost sight of the extreme sensitivity of the topic… My feeling is that his vocabulary and his way of approaching it totally lacks reverence… Reverence is the key to purity. (The intimate sphere) is not a topic of public discussion; it is extremely serious.
    It seems to me that his presentation, his vocabulary, the vulgarity of things that he uses are things that simply indicate that even though he might have good intentions he has derailed and is doing a lot of harm.  (The subject requires) a humility, a spirit of reverence, and totally avoiding the vulgarity that he uses in his language…. I’m shocked and horrified by the words that he uses. His mere mention of Hugh Hefner is to my mind an abomination.

Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, On Christopher West, Guru, Theology of the Body, Catholic News Agency

 

And now, for the Modernist take on Theology of the Body

We are convinced that John Paul II's Theology of the Body is a treasure for the Church, indeed a gift of the Holy Spirit for our time. Yet, its scholarly language needs to be “translated” into more accessible categories if the average person is to benefit from it. To do this is the specific mission of the Theology of the Body Institute, and we believe that Christopher West, the Institute's popular lecturer and spokesman, has been given a particular charism to carry out this mission. With great skill as a presenter, with keen insight as a thinker, and with profound reverence for the mystery of human sexuality, he has been able to reach thousands in our sexually wounded culture with the Gospel of salvation in Christ. 

Cardinal Justin Rigali and Bishop Kevin Rhoades on the Theology of the Body Institute and Christopher West

 

It was one of those epochs which may be called turning–points in history.  The first of the great active Orders (Trinitarians) was about to be raised up in the Church by St. John of Matha; others were soon to follow, called forth by the new requirements of the times.  Eternal Wisdom, who ‘remaining in herself the same reneweth all things’ (Wisdom, 7, 27), would prove that sanctity also never changes, and that charity, though assuming different forms, is ever the same, having but one principle and one aim - God, loved for His own sake. 

Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Feast of St. Felix of Valois

 

Prayer of Consecration to our Blessed Mother on the feast of her Presentation

by St. Alphonsus

    O dearly Beloved of God, most amiable Child Mary, would that today I could offer you the first years of my life and consecrate myself to your service, my blessed and sweet Lady, as you presented and consecrated yourself in the Temple for the honor and glory of God…But time has slipped away and so many years have been spent in serving the world and my own caprice, as it were, forgetful of you and of God.  Woe to the time when I did not love you!….But better late than never.  Behold, O Mary, I present myself to you today, offering myself entirely to your service, for the number of days, whether few or many, that are still left to me on earth.  I renounce all creatures, as you did, and vow myself entirely to the love of my creator.  I consecrate to you, O my Queen, my intellect, that it may always think upon the love you deserve, my tongue, that it may praise you, my heart that it may love you.  Accept, O Most Holy Virgin, the offering which this wretched sinner presents to you; accept it, I beg, by the consolation your heart felt when you gave yourself to God in the Temple.  And if I am late in putting myself at your service, it is but fitting that I redeem the time lost by redoubling my devotion and my love.

    O mother of Mercy, help my weakness by your powerful intercession, and obtain for me from your Jesus the strength to be faithful to you until death.  Grant that after having served you always in this life I may go to praise you eternally in Paradise.

 

God knows what He has in store for us; but if fear does not soon make way for a sentiment more worthy of men and of Christians, all particular existences will be swallowed up in the political crisis.  Come what may, it is time to learn our history over again.  The lesson will not be lost if we come to understand this much: had the first Christians feared, they would have betrayed us, for the word of life would never have come down to us; if we fear, we shall betray future generations, for we are expected to transmit to them the deposit we have received from our fathers. 

Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Feast of St. Cecelia

 

She who aspires to this higher life, must lead like the angels an existence all divine and heavenly.  The virgin cuts herself off from the allurements of the senses; not only does she renounce the right to their even lawful use, but she aspires to that hope which God, who can never deceive, encourages by His promise, and which far surpasses the natural hope of posterity.  In return for her generous sacrifice, her portion in heaven is the very happiness of the angels.

St. Clement I, Pope and Martyr, Letters to Virgins

 

 

 

http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/17079436.jpgStefano Maderno’s magnificent sculpture, "Saint Cecilia," which worthily graces the high altar of the Church of Santa Maria in Trastevere. While it is the genuine work of Maderno’s competent hand, this image owes its origins to a miracle: In 1599, when her body was exhumed, Cecilia’s body was discovered to be incorrupt, so much so that her wounds appeared freshly made. Maderno, charged to sculpt what he saw, rendered a peaceful yet powerful image of innocence, modesty, and delicate beauty.  On a marble slab near the famous statue is carved this statement of the artist, which he made under oath: “Behold the body of the most holy virgin Cecilia, whom I myself saw lying incorrupt in the tomb. I have in this marble expressed for you the same saint in the very same posture.”  The precious relics of the virgin-martyr are directly underneath Maderno’s masterpiece, in the graceful crypt church. They are so situated that a priest offering Mass (or a pilgrim looking at the altar) will see straight into her tomb.

Br. André Marie, M.I.C.M., Feast of St. Cecilia, Virgin and Martyr 

 

 

 

The road and ascent to God, then, necessarily demands a habitual effort to renounce and mortify the appetites; the sooner this mortification is achieved, the sooner the soul reaches the top. But until the appetites are eliminated, a person will not arrive, no matter how much virtue he practices. For he will fail to acquire perfect virtue, which lies in keeping the soul empty, naked, and purified of every appetite.... Until slumber comes to the appetites through the mortification of sensuality, and until this very sensuality is stilled in such a way that the appetites do not war against the spirit, the soul will not walk out to genuine freedom, to the enjoyment of union with its Beloved.  

St. John of the Cross

 

God dwells and is present substantially in every soul, even in that of the greatest sinner in the world. And this kind of union is ever wrought between God and all the creatures, for in it He is preserving their being: if union of this kind were to fail them, they would at once become annihilated and would cease to be. And so, when we speak of union of the soul with God, we speak not of this substantial union which is continually being wrought, but of the union and transformation of the soul with God, which is not being wrought continually, but only when there is produced that likeness that comes from love; we shall therefore term this the union of likeness, even as that other union is called substantial or essential. The former is natural, the latter supernatural. And the latter comes to pass when the two wills -- namely that of the soul and that of God -- are conformed together in one, and there is naught in the one that repugnant to the other. And thus, when the soul rids itself totally of that which is repugnant to the Divine will and conforms not with it, it is transformed in God through love.

St. John of the Cross

 

The soul that is attached to anything however much good there may be in it, will not arrive at the liberty of divine union. For whether it be a strong wire rope or a slender and delicate thread that holds the bird, it matters not, if it really holds it fast; for, until the cord be broken the bird cannot fly. 

St. John of the Cross

 

O spiritual soul, when thou seest thy desire obscured, thy will arid and constrained, and thy faculties incapable of any interior act, be not grieved at this, but look upon it rather as a great good, for God is delivering thee from thyself, taking the matter out of thy hands; for however strenuously thou mayst exert thyself, thou wilt never do anything so faultlessly, so perfectly, and securely as now because of the impurity and torpor of thy faculties—when God takes thee by the hand, guides thee safely in thy blindness, along a road and to an end thou knowest not, and whither thou couldst never travel guided by thine own eyes, and supported by thy own feet. 

St. John of the Cross, The Obscure Night of the Soul

 

Rome honours to-day one of her own illustrious sons. Chrysogonus, who gave his life for Christ at Aquileia in the reign of Diocletian. His splendid church in the Trastevere, which possesses his venerable head, was first built at the very time of the triumph of the Faith over idolatry. Chrysogonus instructed in that holy faith the blessed martyr Anastasia, whose memory is so touchingly united with that of our Saviour’s birth, the Aurora Mass on Christmas day having been from time immemorial celebrated in her church. The names of both Chrysogonus and his spiritual daughter are daily pronounced in the holy Sacrifice. 

Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year

 

St. Gertrude, the Great, from her very infancy, felt a special attraction towards the glorious virgin Catharine.  As she was desirous of knowing how great were her merits, our Lord showed her St. Catharine seated on a throne so lofty and so magnificent, that it seemed her glory was sufficient to have filled the courts of heaven had she been its sole queen; while from her crown a marvelous brightness was reflected on her devout clients.  It is well known how St. Joan of Arc, entrusted by St. Michael to guidance of St. Catharine and St. Margaret, received aid and counsel from them during seven years; and how it was at Saint Catherine-de-Fierbois that she received her sword. 

Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Feast of St. Catharine, Virgin and Martyr 

 

The road and ascent to God, then, necessarily demands a habitual effort to renounce and mortify the appetites; the sooner this mortification is achieved, the sooner the soul reaches the top. But until the appetites are eliminated, a person will not arrive, no matter how much virtue he practices. For he will fail to acquire perfect virtue, which lies in keeping the soul empty, naked, and purified of every appetite.... Until slumber comes to the appetites through the mortification of sensuality, and until this very sensuality is stilled in such a way that the appetites do not war against the spirit, the soul will not walk out to genuine freedom, to the enjoyment of union with its Beloved.  

St. John of the Cross

 

Blessed be the Lady who intends me to quit this life on a Saturday… Glory be to God, I am to chant matins in Heaven…. By the mercy of God, I am going to recite matins in Heaven. 

St. John of the Cross, his last words, who in answer to his prayers, died only moments before midnight on Friday

 

How the will is moved by grace to co-operate with grace is a mystery which we do not fully comprehend; but it is certain that if we go to heaven we shall then render thanks for our salvation to the mercy of God alone: “The mercies of the Lord will I sing for ever.” [Ps. lxxxviii, 2]  We may therefore say with holy King David, and be fully persuaded of its truth, that human nature is weaker and more impotent than we can imagine, because in the nature which we have received of God we have only, through the fall of Adam, ignorance of mind, weakness of reason, corruption of will, disorder of the passions, sickness and misery of the body. We have nothing therefore in which to glory, but in all things we can find fit cause for humiliation.  “Humble thyself in all things,” [Ecclus iii, 20]  says the Holy Ghost, and He does not tell us to humble ourselves in some things only but in all things-----in omnibus. 

Fr. Cajetan Mary da Bergamo, Humility of Heart

 

Two principles form the unalterable basis of the virtue of abandonment.  Firstly, nothing is done, nothing happens, either in the material or in the moral world, which God has not foreseen from all eternity, and which He has not willed, or at least permitted.  Secondly, God can will nothing, He can permit nothing, but in view of the end He proposed to Himself in creating the world, that is, in view of His glory and the glory of the Man-God, Jesus Christ, His only Son.  To these two principles we shall add a third, which will complete the elucidation of this whole subject: As long as man lives upon earth, God desires to be glorified through the happiness of this privileged creature; and consequently in God’s designs the interest of man’s sanctification and happiness is inseparable from the interest of the divine glory. 

Fr. F. Lasance, Peace Not As The World Gives

 

In the interior life to which God introduces us, it is He also who regulates our speed, causing some to advance more rapidly, others more slowly.  Our part is never to resist the hand that is urging us on, and to do nothing to retard our progress.  Now this progress is retarded, or arrested altogether, in various ways and for various reasons, which it would be as well to explain.  It is retarded by cowardice, faint-heartedness, infidelity, inconstancy, and by a great number of tiny faults into which we fall, either for want of vigilance over ourselves, or of attention to what God is telling us in the depths of our heart.  Our progress is arrested when, like a careless traveler, we look to right and left, and stop to examine the things we see.

John Nicholas Grou, S. J., Spiritual Maxims 

 

 

THE GRAIN OF MUSTARD SEED      24th SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST (6th AFTER EPIPHANY)

PRESENCE OF GOD ‑ May Your kingdom come, O Lord, in the whole world and in my heart.

MEDITATION:  

1. The parable of the mustard seed emerges from the text of today’s Mass; it is brief, but rich in meaning: “The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed which a man took and sowed in his field; which is the least indeed of all seeds, but when it is grown up, it is greater than al herbs and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and dwell in the branches thereof” (Gosp: Mt 13,31‑35). Nothing was smaller or more humble in its beginning than “the kingdom of heaven,” the Church: Jesus, its Head and Founder, was born in a stable; He worked for the greater part of thirty years in a carpenter’s shop, and for only three years unfolded His mission to a poor people, preaching a doctrine so simple that all, even the unlettered could understand. When Jesus left the earth, the Church was established by an insignificant group of twelve men, gathered about a humble woman, Mary; but this first nucleus possessed so powerful a vitality that in a few years it spread into all the countries of the vast Roman Empire. The Church, from very tiny seed, sown in the hearts of a Virgin Mother and poor fishermen, became little by little through the centuries a gigantic tree, extending its branches into all regions of the globe, with peoples of every tongue and nation taking shelter in its shade.

    The Church is not merely a society of men, but of men who have for their Head, Jesus, the Son of God; the Church is the whole Christ, that is, Jesus and the faithful incorporated in Him and forming one Body with Him. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ of which each of the baptized is a member. To love the Church is to love Jesus; to work for the extension of the Church is to work for the increase of the Mystical Body of Christ, so that the number of His members may be filled up and each may contribute to the splendor of the whole. All this is summarized and asked of the Father in the brief invocation: “Adveniat regnum tuum.”

    Perhaps there is but little that we can do for the extension of the Church. Let us, at least, do that little; let us contribute our insignificant labor, as a veritable mustard seed, toward the growth of this wonderful tree, beneath whose shadow all men are called to find salvation and repose.

    2. The parable of the mustard seed makes us consider not only the expansion of the kingdom of God in the world, but also its development in our hearts. Has not Jesus said: “The kingdom of God is within you” (Lk 17, 21)? Yes, in us too this wonderful kingdom began as a tiny seed, a seed of grace: the sanctifying grace which, in a hidden and mysterious way, was sown in us by God at Baptism, and the actual grace of good inspirations and of the divine word‑ “semen est verbum Dei” ‑which Jesus the heavenly Sower, has scattered plentifully in our souls. This little seed has germinated slowly, it has sent down ever deeper roots, it has grown progressively, penetrating our whole spirit, until it has entirely conquered us for God, until we have felt the need of saying: Lord, all that I have, all that I am, is Yours; I give myself wholly to You. I want to be Your kingdom.

    To be entirely the kingdom of God, so that He is the only Sovereign and Ruler of the heart, so that nothing exists in it which does not belong to Him or is not subject to His rule, is the ideal of a soul that loves God with perfect love. But how can we attain to the full development of this kingdom of God within us? The second parable which we read in today’s Gospel tells us: “The kingdom of heaven is like to leaven which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened.” Here is another very beautiful image of the work grace must accomplish in our souls grace has been placed in us like leaven which little by little must increase until it permeates our whole being and divinizes it entirely. Grace, the divine leaven, has been given to purify, elevate, and sanctify our entire being, with all its powers and faculties; only when this work will have been brought to completion, shall we be entirely the kingdom of God.

    Let us reflect further on the great problem of our correspondence with grace. This divine seed, this supernatural leaven, is within us; what can prevent it from becoming a gigantic tree, capable of giving shelter to other souls; what can impede the leaven from fermenting the whole mass, if we remove all the obstacles opposed to its development, if we respond to all its motions and requirements?

    Adveniat regnum tuum!” Yes, let us pray for the absolute coming of the kingdom of God in our hearts.

COLLOQUY:

    “O Lord, my God, who created me to Your own image and likeness, grant me this grace which You have shown to be so great and necessary for salvation, that I may overcome my very evil nature that is drawing me to sin and perdition. For I feel in my flesh the law of sin contradicting the law of my mind and leading me captive to serve sensuality in many things. I cannot resist the passions if Your most holy grace warmly infused into my heart does not assist me ....

    “O Lord, without grace I can do nothing, but with its strength I can do all things in You.

    “O grace, truly heavenly, without which our merits are nothing and no gifts of nature are to be esteemed! O most blessed grace, which makes the poor in spirit rich in virtues, which renders him who is rich in many good things humble of heart, come descend upon me, fill me quickly with your consolation lest my soul faint with weariness and dryness of mind.

    “Let me find grace in Your sight, I beg. Lord, for Your grace is enough for me, even though I obtain none of the things which nature desires. If I am tempted and afflicted with many tribulations, I will fear no evils while Your grace is with me. It is my strength. It gives me counsel and help.  It is more powerful than all my enemies and wiser than all the wise.

    “Let Your grace, therefore, go before me and follow me, O Lord, and make me always intent upon good works, through Jesus Christ, Your Son” (Imit. III, 55).

 

All God's works, and the disposition of them, as they were to be called into being, the Lord had in his mind ab initio [from the beginning], and He numbered and weighed them according to His equity and rectitude. He knew the constitution of the world before its creation, as it is written in the Book of Wisdom (7:18-20). He knew the beginning, the middle and the end of time, the changes of the years and the courses of the ages, the disposition of the stars, the powers of the elements, the nature of animals, the wrath of wild beasts, the force of winds, the difference of plants, the virtues of roots and the thoughts of men. All He weighed and counted (Wisdom 11:21), not only that which is literally true of the rational and irrational creatures, but He pre-ordained also all that which is signified by these creatures. 

St. Mary of Agreda, The Mystical City of God, The Conception

 

A lamentable spectacle is that presented by the aberrations of human reason when it yields to the spirit of novelty, when against the warning of the Apostle, it seeks to know beyond what it is meant to know, and when relying too much on itself it thinks it can find the truth outside the Catholic Church wherein truth is found without the slightest shadow of error. 

St. Pius X, Pascendi

 

On the Nature of Sin

First, then, what is sin? There are many definitions of it, and one is this: it is the transgression of the law. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 John 3:4). God is a law to Himself; His perfections are the law of His own nature; and God wrote upon the conscience of man, even in the state of nature, the outline of His own perfections. He made man to know right from wrong; He made him to understand the nature of purity, justice, truth and mercy. These are perfections of God, and on the conscience of man the obligations of this law are written. Every man born into the world has this outline of God's law written upon him, and sin is the transgression of that law. Another definition of sin is: any thought, word, or deed contrary to the will of God.

Now, the will of God is the perfection of God Himself — holy, just, pure, merciful, true; and anything contrary to these perfections in thought, word, or deed is sin. The conformity of man to the will of God, to the perfections of God, is the sanctity or the perfection of the human soul; and the more he is conformed to the will of God, the holier and more perfect he is. Therefore, to be at variance with God is to be deformed; and the monstrous deformity of the human frame is not more humbling nor more hideous — nay, it is not humbling and hideous, compared with the deformity of the soul. When the soul is unlike to God, when it is departed from the perfection of God, when instead of purity there is impurity, instead of justice there is injustice, instead of truth there is falsehood, instead of mercy there is cruelty, instead of the perfections of God there is the direct contrary of those perfections: no deformity or hideousness that can strike the eye is so terrible.

The malice, then, of sin consists in this, that it is a created will in conscious variance with the uncreated will of God. God made us to His own image and to His own likeness; He gave us all that He could bestow upon us. He could not bestow upon us His own nature, because that is uncreated, and no creature can partake of the uncreated nature of God; but God could bestow, and He did by His omnipotence with His mercy, bestow upon us His likeness, His image, an intelligence and a will, a heart and a conscience, so that we become intelligent and moral beings. The malice of sin consists, then, in this: that an intelligent creature, having a power of will, deliberately and consciously opposes the will of its Maker. The malice of sin is essentially internal to the soul. The external action whereby the sinner perpetrates his sin adds, indeed, an accidental malice and an accidental increase of wickedness; but the essence, the life of the malice, consists in the act of the soul itself.

We see, then, that sin is the conscious variation of our moral being from the will of God. We abuse our whole nature: we abuse our intellect by acting irrationally, in violation of the will of God which is written upon the conscience; we abuse our will, because we deliberately abuse the power of the will, whereby we originate our actions in opposition to the will of God who gave it. We apply our intellect and will, with our eyes open and with freedom and choice, to the perpetration of acts, or the utterance of words, or the harboring of thoughts which are known to be contrary to the will of God; and, therefore, in every sin there is the knowledge of the intellect of what we are doing, the consent of the will in doing it, and the consciousness of the mind fixed upon the action despite these two objects: the law and the Lawgiver — the law of God known to us, and the Giver of that law, who is God Himself; so that we deliberately, with our eyes open and of our own free will, break God's law in God's face. Now, that is the plain definition and description of sin; and here I must, for a moment, turn aside from our path. 

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Sin and its Consequences

 

A clear explanation of the essential problem: What is for faithful Catholic the “Rule of Faith”?  Is it Dogma or the Pope?  Those who believe it is the Pope will follow Pope Francis even if he takes them to Hell!

Maike Hickson: Where does Prof. Rocco Buttiglione (who defends the new morality of Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia), in your eyes, leave the solid foundation of the Catholic moral teaching, perhaps in order to maintain loyalty toward Pope Francis?

 

Professor Josef Seifert: I think (1) with respect to his “two principles” that separate us, they do not correspond to sound Catholic teaching because it is Catholic teaching (and the basis for all condemnation of heresies in the history of the Church) that a) truth has priority over unity and b) that no Catholic has an absolute duty to accept everything a Pope or Council are saying if it is not dogmatic and de fide, and if he has good reason to believe that it is contrary to natural or revealed truth or to both (to claim otherwise would be papolatry). Besides, (2) I  believe that Professor Buttiglione’ s concrete and brilliant but unsuccessful efforts to reconcile the novelties of Amoris Laetitia with Familiaris Consortio, Veritatis Splendor, Evangelium Vitae, Humanae Vitae, and the Tradition of the Church all fail and put him at the risk of using overcomplicated and sophistical reasons and of contradicting dogmas of the Church such as (a) that God never commands things which we cannot obey, with the help of grace (a Lutheran heresy denied this and was condemned in the Council of Trent), or (b) that extramoral evils (such that the partner of a second “marriage” will leave me) can never be greater evils than a sin and the intention to prevent them can never justify committing a sin (VS and Trent affirmed this and condemned its negation as heretical), or (c) that weighing good versus bad effects of any action can never justify committing one of the many intrinsically evil acts (Veritatis Splendor made this very solemnly clear).

 

More Conservative Catholics Recognizing that Dogma is the Rule of Faith. We pray that the implications of this truth sink in!

Only robots would blindly follow a Pope in error: Catholic academic

LifeSiteNews | November 10, 2017 -- Catholics who insist that the faithful are duty-bound to submit to a pope whose teachings clearly contradict previous popes and even the Bible inadvertently fulfill the “crude protestant caricature of papal authority,” wrote Catholic academic Dr. Edward Feser

“Protestants sometimes accuse Catholics of believing that a pope has the authority to make up new doctrines or even to contradict Scripture,” wrote Feser, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Pasadena City College in California, in an article published in Catholic World Report October 30. 

According to the “crude protestant caricature of papal authority,” if a pope “decided one day to add a fourth Person to the Trinity, or to declare abortion morally permissible, or to delete the Sixth Commandment, then – so the idea goes – Catholics would be duty bound to salute crisply, bark an enthusiastic ‘Yes, sir!,’ and fall in line robotically with the new doctrine du jour.”

Feser said the reverse is actually true, namely that the Church “puts the pope in a doctrinal box.”

“Even when he is speaking ex cathedra [authoritatively from the chair], he must stay within the parameters he has inherited,” he said. 

“He can draw out implications implicit in earlier doctrine, but he cannot make up new doctrines out of whole cloth. And what he teaches must be consistent with the entire body of past binding teaching. He is not permitted to contradict past doctrine and he cannot pit one doctrine against another,” he added. 

The professor in his article was responding to arguments made by Dr. Robert Fastiggi in support of the Pope Francis’s recent move to seemingly overturn Catholic teaching on capital punishment by declaring “contrary to the Gospel.” 

The professor quoted from recent Vatican Councils to demonstrate how the pope is tasked by God to, in the words of the First Vatican Council, “not…make known some new doctrine, but…religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.”

He also quoted the Second Vatican Council’s teaching that the Church cannot teach contrary to Scripture.

“[T]he living teaching office of the Church… is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully,” Feser quoted of Dei Verbum [Word of God].

The professor said that a pope is not permitted to “work around these restrictions by coming up with novel reinterpretations of Scripture or of past binding doctrine.”

He quoted from the First Vatican Council which taught that the “meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by Holy Mother Church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.”

Added the Council: “May understanding, knowledge and wisdom increase as ages and centuries roll along… but this only in its own proper kind, that is to say, in the same doctrine, the same sense, and the same understanding.”

Feser said that the pope is “not protected from all theological error when not speaking ex cathedra [from the chair].

“This is not some novel opinion put forward by theological liberals or radical traditionalists. On the contrary, the Church has always recognized this, and it was commonly acknowledged in the very conservative approved manuals of theology in the pre-Vatican II period,” he said. 

He quoted from Van Noort’s 1957 Dogmatic Theology to back his point. 

“All theologians admit that the pope can make a mistake in matters of faith and morals when so speaking: either by proposing a false opinion in a matter not yet defined, or by innocently differing from some doctrine already defined. Theologians disagree, however, over the question of whether the pope can become a formal heretic by stubbornly clinging to an error in a matter already defined. The more probable and respectful opinion, followed by Suárez, Bellarmine and many others, holds that just as God has not till this day ever permitted such a thing to happen, so too he never will permit a pope to become a formal and public heretic. Still, some competent theologians do concede that the pope when not speaking ex cathedra could fall into formal heresy.”

Commented Feser: “Notice that the Church permits theologians to hold that a pope could even in principle fall into formal heresy when not speaking ex cathedra, and some approved theologians have in fact held this, even if they disagreed about how likely this is in practice.”

The professor went on to answer the argument that a pope should never be accused of error because it could serve to undermine people’s confidence in the office of the pope and in papal authority. 

“In fact, the opposite is the case. You cannot reinforce people’s confidence in the papal Magisterium unless you first make it clear exactly what are the scope and limits of that Magisterium,” he said. 

“When well-meaning theologians… tie themselves in logical knots in order to avoid having to admit that a pope might have misspoken or made a mistake when not speaking ex cathedra – despite the fact that the Church herself has always acknowledged that this can happen! – they reinforce the slander that Catholics are committed to what I have called the Crude Protestant Caricature of papal authority,” he added.

Feser said that arguing that Catholics must follow a pope when and if he commits doctrinal error does not help anybody. 

“In particular, they give (however unintentionally) the false impression that popes can reinvent doctrine at will and simply stipulate, by dictatorial fiat, that the novelties they are teaching are ‘scriptural’ and ‘traditional,’ he said 

“They thereby make a laughingstock of Catholic claims to have preserved the deposit of faith whole and undefiled. And they thereby undermine confidence in the papal Magisterium. Non-Catholics are liable to conclude that Catholic claims about the papacy are a kind of Orwellian sophistry. Some Catholics are liable to conclude this too, and to lose their faith as a result – whereas if they were reassured instead that the Church does not require them to deny the obvious, their faith will be saved,” he added.

Feser’s position is similar to that of Catholic philosopher Dr. Josef Seifert, who recently argued that faithful Catholics “have an obligation” not to follow or obey the Pope if he clearly contradicts perennial teachings of the Catholic Church.

“I think that as soon as we find that a new teaching is false, we are obliged not to obey it. And as soon as we find a new pastoral decision of the Pope inapplicable in good conscience, such as giving the sacraments to unrepentant sinners on the basis of an (impossible for us) ‘discernment’ of whether their sin is compatible with their being in the state of grace for subjective reasons, we are likewise morally obliged not to obey it,” he said in an interview this month. 

There can be no real “unity with the Pope” unless there is a prior unity based on “truth,” he said.

 

Can. 1323 No one is liable to a penalty who, when violating a law or precept: acted under the compulsion of grave fear, even if only relative, or by reason of necessity or grave inconvenience, unless, however, the act is intrinsically evil or tends to be harmful to souls.

1983 Code of Canon Law

 

 

I accuse Islam but not individual Muslims, who are the prime victims of Islam. I have made up my mind to denounce the source of the terrorism: the main source of Islamic radicalism in the world is the University of al-Azhar” in Cairo, Egypt, where the deadly ideology is taught as the official doctrine of Islam. I accuse the University of al-Azhar in Cairo, supposedly the embodiment of moderate Islam, of creating a spirit of fanaticism, intolerance and hatred in millions of students and Muslim clerics coming from all over the world to receive a formation in its institutes. By this means al-Azhar becomes one of the main sources of terrorism worldwide.

I accuse Islam itself and not just “extremist Islamism,” because Islam is by nature both political and radical. 25 years ago I wrote that Islamism is merely Islam stripped bare, in all its logic and rigour. It plans for a society aiming for a worldwide caliphate based on Shariah law, which is the only legitimate law, as coming from God. It is a plan taking in the en tire globe, all-encompassing and wholly totalitarian. I accuse all those who pretend that the crimes committed by Muslims “have nothing to do with Islam,” of being deliberate liars. These crimes are committed in the name of the Koran and its clear instructions. The mere fact that the Muslim call to prayer and the call to kill non-Muslims are preceded by the same cry “Allah-ou Akhbar” (God is great), is highly significant.

I accuse learned Muslims of the 10th century of promulgating the decrees, now irreversible, which have led Islam into its present frozen state. The first of these decrees cancelled every kind of precedence for the Koran’s verses from Mecca calling for peace and harmony, and it gave priority instead to the verses from Medina which call for intolerance and violence. Two further decrees were promulgated to make this first decree irreversible: the Koran was decreed to be the uncreated word of Allah, hence immutable; and any further e ffort at reflection was forbidden by “the gate of ijtihad (reflection) being closed once and for all.” These three decrees, made sacred, have fossilized Muslim thinking, and contributed to the keeping of Muslim countries in a state of backwardness and chronic stagnation.

I accuse the Vatican II Decree “Nostra Aetate” of launching an inter-religious dialogue meant to be open, welcoming and understanding of Muslims, because for 50 years we have not taken one step forward, and now we are stopped dead. The dialogue with a sheikh from al-Azhar ended up with his proclaiming that “all Christians are going to Hell.” Nothing is moving, just as nothing has moved for the last 11 centuries. Dialogue, yes, but I want a dialogue based on truth. Charity without truth goes nowhere! I accuse the Catholic Church of pursuing a dialogue with Islam based on seeking to please, on making compromises and on double-dealing. After 50 years of initiatives all goi ng one way, the Church’s monologue has got nowhere. By giving way to the “politically correct,” by pretending that the dialogue must not offend the Muslims because we must “live together,” all thorny but vital questions are studiously avoided. But true dialogue begins with the truth. I have asked to meet Pope Francis. No reply.

Fr. Henry Boulad, 86 year-old Jesuit priest born in Alexandria, Egypt, of an old Syrian Christian family of the Melkite rite, former Professor of Theology in Cairo, Superior of the Jesuits in Alexandria and of the Jesuits in Egypt. Quotation taken from Bishop Richard Williamson's newsletter, Eleison Comments

 

$38 million? That’s a lot of baby body parts!

While reports vary, Planned Parenthood Action Fund Political Action Committee said last year that it was spending $30 million to support the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and other pro-abortion candidates. That amount was “unprecedented” for the Planned Parenthood PAC, its director said, and twice what it spent in the previous cycle. Planned Parenthood’s Action Fund had estimated in late 2015 that it would spend $20 million on candidates in the 2016 election cycle. As of Election Day last year, individuals and entities associated with the nation’s largest abortion provider had spent at least $38 million on candidates between the 2012 and 2016 election cycles.

Lisa Bourne, LifeSiteNews

 

FBI signals criminal probe into Planned Parenthood’s trafficking of aborted baby parts

LifeSiteNews | Pete Baklinski | WASHINGTON, D.C., |  November 14, 2017 — The FBI has requested unredacted documents from Congress that were obtained during the 2015 hearings on Planned Parenthood’s allegedly illegal trafficking of aborted baby body parts for profit, reported The Hill. Pro-life activists have welcomed the move as a first sign of a criminal probe into the abortion giant. 

Reported The Hill

The request was made in recent days, the sources said, to the Senate Judiciary Committee, whose chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), last December refered Planned Parenthood and several other abortion providers to the FBI for investigation after a lengthy probe into the transfers of fetal tissue.

Grassley said at the time that his committee had uncovered enough evidence in its final investigative report to show abortion providers had transferred tissue and body parts from aborted fetuses to firms for use in research by charging dollar amounts above their actual costs.

The Justice Department declined comment, saying it does not confirm nor deny whether an investigation is taking place.

It was two summers ago that the Center for Medical Progress released undercover videos allegedly showing Planned Parenthood’s illegal selling of aborted baby parts, including hearts, lungs, livers, and brains, for profit. 

The videos led to Planned Parenthood facing investigations at both state and federal levels. The abortion organization has so far managed to dodge any conviction for the wrongdoing suggested in the undercover videos. 

Pro-life groups around the country welcomed the news of a possible criminal investigation of Planned Parenthood. 

“We welcome the Justice Department’s investigation of Planned Parenthood,” said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser

“Not content with their status as the nation’s largest abortion business, evidence shows Planned Parenthood sought to squeeze every last opportunity for cash from the sale of hearts, brains, lungs, and livers of the unborn children whose lives they end,” she said. 

“Planned Parenthood and its associates are terrified of having their sordid business model exposed. We commend the Trump administration for holding them accountable and urge Congress to follow through on the promise to redirect the half billion dollars in taxpayer funding the abortion giant receives each year,” she added. 

Planned Parenthood has reacted by saying it “strongly disagrees with the recommendations of the Senate Republican staff to refer this matter to the Justice Department.”

“These accusations are baseless, and a part of a widely discredited attempt to end access to reproductive health care at Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood has never, and would never, profit while facilitating its patients’ choice to donate fetal tissue for use in important medical research,” said Dana Singiser, vice president of Government Affairs for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, reported The Hill

But David Daleiden, founder and project lead at the Center for Medical Progress, said that his undercover videos of Planned Parenthood show otherwise. 

“After Planned Parenthood’s top doctors were caught on camera casually negotiating the sale of aborted baby hearts, lungs, livers, and brains, two Congressional investigations confirmed there were ‘systematic’ violations of federal law in Planned Parenthood’s aborted baby parts business and issued criminal referrals to the FBI and US DOJ,” he said in a statement. 

“The FBI’s investigation of Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer-funded, criminal abortion enterprise is long overdue. Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted baby body parts is the greatest human atrocity of our times and must finally be brought to justice under the law,” he added. 

Jeanne Mancini, president of March for Life, said the FBI's request for documents on the abortion giant “gives us hope that justice will be served for the millions of Americans who have fallen victim to the deceptive and exploitive practices of the abortion industry.”

Catherine Glenn Foster, CEO and president of Americans United for Life, echoed Mancini, saying she was “encouraged to see signs of an investigation moving forward.” 

“There is a great deal of evidence showing the abortion industry has skirted both state and federal laws that serve as the bare-minimum protection for the dignity of human life. … We hope that this unprecedented investigation will uncover the truth. Only a thorough investigation by the Justice Department will ensure that women and their unborn children are protected from the dangerous motivations behind this criminal conduct,” she said. 

A video released earlier this month by the Center for Medical Progress shows a former abortion worker discussing the intimate relationship between baby parts harvester StemExpress, LLC, and Planned Parenthood.

 

Pope Francis betraying Chinese Catholics into the power of the Communist State

Mass for a deceased underground priest. Card. Zen asks for God’s grace to save the Church in China and the Holy See from the ‘precipice’

Fr. Wei Heping, 41, died in mysterious circumstances, his body dumped in a river in Taiyuan (Shanxi). For the police claim he committed suicide. Family members are not allowed to even see the autopsy report. For Card. Zen the Holy See (which “is not necessarily the Pope”) seeks a compromise at all costs with the Chinese government, risking “to sell out the faithful Church”. Justice and Peace publish a booklet about Fr. Wei, not to forget.

Li Yuan | 11-11-2017 | AsiaNewsIT | Hong Kong - Card. Joseph Zen, Emeritus Bishop of Hong Kong, has asked God to save the Holy See “from the brink of the precipice and not sell out the faithful Church [to the Chinese government]”. The cardinal expressed his concerns in his homily recalling Fr. Wei Heping (alias Yu Heping), who died two years ago in mysterious and suspicious circumstances.

The Mass was held last night in the Church of St. Jude, organized by the Diocesan Commission for Justice and Peace. Pointing out that “the Holy See is not necessarily the Pope,” the cardinal remarked that in recent years, in which an initial dialogue between Beijing and the Vatican is taking place, the Holy See has often remained silent about the grave events of the Chinese Church such as death of Fr. Wei, the captivity of Msgr. Giacomo Su Zhimin, the destruction of crosses and churches in Zhejiang.

“Dialogue - said Card. Zen - is important and necessary. However, it [the Holy See] is too optimistic about the communist regime. It has depended on its diplomacy instead of faith. It does not have a bottom line to reach an agreement.”

He continued “The Holy See is ceaselessly compromising and has even arrived at the point of selling itself out to appease. This is by no means what God expects of the Church and by no means faithful to the mission that Christ gave the Apostles.”

These comments seem to have been provoked by some news the Cardinal has recently received and which is “very shocking”. Previously, Card. Zen had thought the negotiations were stalled, that “the Pope was more cautious” perhaps because “Beijing had expressed other demands on which he could not agree.”

Without mentioning the diocese, the emeritus bishop of Hong Kong said that “they are pushing for an evil plan: to ask faithful bishops to resign in order to leave room for illicit and excommunicated bishops. This is a bolt out of the blue! And it is the approach of a huge disaster for the Church.”

“Someone - he added - might think I'm using the Mass to complain. No, I think Fr. Wei is using my mouth to communicate. These words serve to let us know what kind of grace we are asking for today.”

The body of Fr. Wei, an active 41-year-old priest of the underground community, was found in suspicious circumstances in the Ren River, near Taiyuan City (Shanxi) on November 8, 2015. He had been expected to return the day before from a trip to Liaoning Province.

According to ecclesial sources, who closely followed his case, the autopsy revealed  a wide hemorrhagic area in the right part of the brain, but there were no visible wounds on the skin. The police concluded that he had committed suicide and archived the case.

To the family of Fr. Wei was not allowed to have a copy of the autopsy report and they asked to reopen the investigation but the police refused.

A faithful in the underground community thanked Card. Zen for remembering Fr. Wei and the Church's difficulties in China, and said she was saddened after reading the Cardinal's homily, posted today on his blog: “After reading this, my heart bleeds. As the cardinal said, maybe we should retreat to a cave and weep. But my heart does not give me peace.” [……]

 

Church of England tells schools to let children 'explore gender identity'

Independent.jpg'Pupils need to be able to play with the many cloaks of identity and to explore the possibility of who they might be' say guidelines likely to fuel debate
The Independent | Rachael Roberts | 11-12-2017

Children should be able to try out “the many cloaks of identity” without being labelled or bullied, the Church of England has said in new advice issued to its 5,000 schools.

The Church said youngsters should be free to “explore the possibilities of who they might be” – including gender identity - and says that Christian teaching should not be used to make children feel ashamed of who they are.

Nursery and primary school is a time of intense “creative exploration”, the fresh guidelines say, and children should be able to choose the tutu, tiara and heels, as well as or instead of the helmet, tool belt and superhero cloak “without expectation or comment”.

Guidance for Church of England schools on homophobic bullying was first published three years ago, and has now being updated to cover "transphobic and biphobic bullying" – which means bullying people who consider themselves to be either transgender or gender fluid.

The guidelines warn that schools must take action to stamp out bullying based on perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity, because of the psychological damage it can cause.

The guidelines say that schools which “promote dignity for all” enable pupils to “accept difference of all varieties and be supported to accept their own gender identity or sexual orientation and that of others.”

The advice goes on to say: “In the early years context and throughout primary school, play should be a hallmark of creative exploration.

Welby_Francis.jpg“Pupils need to be able to play with the many cloaks of identity (sometimes quite literally with the dressing up box). Children should be at liberty to explore the possibilities of who they might be without judgement or derision.

“For example, a child may choose the tutu, princess's tiara and heels and/or the fireman's helmet, tool belt and superhero cloak, without expectation or comment.”

It adds: “Children should be afforded freedom from the expectation of permanence. They are in a 'trying on' stage of life, and not yet adult and so no labels need to be fixed.

“This should inform the language teachers use when they comment, praise or give instructions.

“It may be best to avoid labels and assumptions which deem children's behaviour irregular, abnormal or problematic just because it does not conform to gender stereotypes or today's play preferences.”

In a foreword to the advice, the Archbishop of Canterbury says: “All bullying, including homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying causes profound damage, leading to higher levels of mental health disorders, self-harm, depression and suicide.

“Central to Christian theology is the truth that every single one of us is made in the image of God. Every one of us is loved unconditionally by God. We must avoid, at all costs, diminishing the dignity of any individual to a stereotype or a problem.”

The Most Rev Justin Welby adds: “This guidance helps schools to offer the Christian message of love, joy and the celebration of our humanity without exception or exclusion.”

The guidance acknowledges a wide range of views among Christians and people of all beliefs about same-sex marriage, sexual orientation and gender identity.

The new guidelines are likely to reignite the debate around the idea of children being allowed to “self identify”, with critics asking whether there is a sudden “trend” towards gender fluidity and gender neutral.

Campaign groups including Christian Concern have raised concerns that any dissenting voices in the debate around gender identity are being silenced or labeled as bigoted.

A Christian Maths teacher from Oxfordshire is due to appear before a disciplinary hearing to answer allegations that he referred to a pupil born female as a “girl”.

Joshua Sutcliffe claims not to have been given any instructions on how to refer to the pupil, and said he did not mean to cause any offence.

According to Christian Concern: “Since the pupil started at the school, Joshua has tried to balance his sincerely held Christian belief that biological sex is God-given and defined at birth, with the need to treat sensitively the pupil. He avoided the use of gender-specific pronouns, and instead referred to the pupil by the pupil’s chosen name. Joshua admits saying ‘Well done girls’ when he addressed a group of students including the pupil in question. The pupil became irate at this and Joshua sought to diffuse the situation and apologised

Responding to the proceeding against him, Mr. Sutcliffe said: “I have been shocked and saddened by the actions of the school, which, in my opinion, reflect an increasing trend of seeing Christians, people like me, being marginalised in the public square, and our beliefs punished and silenced.

“While the suggestion that gender is fluid conflicts sharply with my Christian beliefs, I recognise my responsibility as a teacher and Christian to treat each of my pupils with respect and dignity.”

“I have balanced these factors by calling the pupil by the chosen name and although I did not intentionally refer to the pupil as a ‘girl’, I do not believe it is unreasonable to call someone a girl if they were born a girl.

“The aggressive way in which transgender ideology is being imposed is undermining my freedom of belief and conscience, as well as the conscience of many people throughout our nation who believe that gender is assigned at birth.”

 

Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you.’ (II John 10). 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos

 

A lamentable spectacle is that presented by the aberrations of human reason when it yields to the spirit of novelty, when against the warning of the Apostle, it seeks to know beyond what it is meant to know, and when relying too much on itself it thinks it can find the truth outside the Catholic Church wherein truth is found without the slightest shadow of error.

St. Pius X, Pascendi

 

I also warn and exhort the same brothers that, in the preaching they do, their words be fire-tried and pure for the utility and edification of the people, announcing to them vices and virtues, punishment and glory, with brevity of speech because the Lord made His words short while He was upon this earth. 

St. Francis of Assisi

 

Pope Francis proselytizing for his Gaia Cult Earth Worship!

The Pope says anyone who denies climate change is 'perverse'

·       Pope Francis has hit out at climate change deniers calling them 'perverse'

·       Called global warming 'the most worrisome phenomena humanity is facing'

·       Pontiff spoke during a message to climate change meeting in Bonn, Germany

·       Urged negotiators to take action 'free of political or economic pressures'

Associated Press | November 16, 2017

Pope Francis has rebuked those who deny the science behind global warming, warning world leaders against listening to such 'perverse attitudes'. Francis issued a message to the climate change meeting in Bonn, Germany, and called climate change 'one of the most worrisome phenomena that humanity is facing.' He urged negotiators to take action free of political or economic pressures, and to accelerate efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. [....]

 

I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it is not contradicted in Scripture. I myself could not and would not abstain from impurity. 

Martin Luther, Heresiarch, Table Talks

 

Remember in your charity the following pray requests:       

For the bodily and spiritual welfare of Sandra Peters,

The welfare of the Anthony & Janice Mazzone family,  

Lorena Vagedes, the grandmother of Charles Zepeda, who is in failing health,

Dominic Villani and Megan Rodenbough, for their spiritual welfare,

Sean McLaughlin, who has had recent serious medical problem,

Spiritual welfare of Christina Hoffman,

The spiritual welfare of our friend, John Henderson,

For the health and spiritual welfare of Jill Kephart, the daughter of Gail, and her children,

The Drews ask your prayers for the welfare of the Philip Nell Family,

Donna Marbach, who is recovering from surgery after a recent fall,

Luis Rafael Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, who is seriously ill,

For the health of Kim Cochran, the daughter-in-law of Joseph and Brenda Cochran, the wife of their son Joshua,

Louie Verrecchio, Catholic apologist, who has a health problem,

John Minidis, Jr. family, for help in their spiritual trial,  

John & Joan DeMarco, for their health and spiritual welfare,

Helen Brugger, for the grace of a holy death,

Regina (Manidis) Miller, her spiritual welfare and health,   

Melissa Elena Levitt, her health and conversion, and welfare of her children,

For the grace of a holy death, Nancy Marie Claycomb,

The health and spiritual welfare of Tom Grow, Amanda Gardner, and Alex Estrada,

Conversion of Annette Murowski, and her son Jimmy,

Brent Keith from Indiana has petitioned our prayers for the Keith Family,

The welfare of the Schmedes Family, and the Mike and Mariana Donohue Family,

The spiritual welfare Robert Holmes Family,

For the welfare of Fr. Paul J. Theisz, who is seriously ill with cancer, is the petition of Fr. Waters,

For the spiritual and temporal welfare of Irwin Kwiat,

Fr. Waters asks our prayers for Elvira Donahy, who is recovering from a stroke,

Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual welfare,

Mufide Rende, a traditional Catholic from India has asked our prayers for her welfare,

Mary & Bill Glatz, the welfare of their family,

Barbara Harmon, who is gravely ill, and still cares for her ailing parents,

Jason Green, a father of ten children who has been seriously injured,

For the health and welfare of Kolinsky and Sorace families,

Fr. Waters asks our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Brian Abramowitz,

Janine Mullen, for her health and help for her family,

Thomas Schiltz family, in grateful appreciation for their contribution to the beauty of our chapel,

Carlo A. De Porto, who is in failing health,

Welfare of Bishop Richard Williamson, for strength and courage in the greater battles to come,

John Rhoad, for his health and spiritual welfare,

Angelina Montesano family & Helen Snyder, for their health and spiritual welfare,

Kathy Boyle, requests our prayers for her welfare,

Michael J. Brigg & his family, who have helped with the needs of the Mission,

Nancy Deegan, her welfare and conversion to the Catholic Church,

Francis Paul Diaz, who was baptized at Ss. Peter & Paul, asks our prayers for his spiritual welfare,

The conversion of David Keithley and the welfare of the Nathaniel Miller family, are the petitions of Gene Peters,

The Drews ask your intercession for the welfare of Brendon McGuire, a young father of three, who has been diagnosed with cancer,

For the conversion of Ben & Tina Boettcher family, Karin Fraessdorf, Eckhard Ebert, and Fahnauer family,

Fr. Waters requests our prayers for Br. Rene, SSPX who has been ill, and for Fr. Thomas Blute, 

Rose Cuono, who is in failing health,

For the health and welfare of Kathryn Lederhos, the aunt of David Drew,

Fr. Peterson asks our prayers for Charles Valenti, who is dying and his wife, Julia,

For the welfare of Fr. Paul DaDamio and Fr. William T. Welsh,

The Drew’s ask our prayers for the welfare of Joe & Tracy Sentmanat family, Keith Drew, Robert Drew Family, Christy Koziol & her children, Fred Nesbit and Michael Nesbit families, and Gene Peters Family, the John Manidis Family, the Sal Messinio Family, Michael Proctor Family,

Ryan Boyle grandmother, Jane Boyle, who is failing health,

Mel Gibson and his family, please remember in our prayers,

Rev. Timothy A. Hopkins, prayers for his mother, the Mission of St. Philomena in Miami, and the welfare of Fr Jean-Luc Lafitte,

Ebert’s request our prayers for the Andreas & Jenna Ortner Family,

Joyce Paglia has asked prayers for George Richard Moore Sr. & his children, and her brother, George Panell, her daughter, Lisa Brandenburg, and her sister, Meridith Stewert,

For the welfare of Anthony & Joyce Paglia, who are responsible for the beautiful statuary in our chapel,

Philip Thees asks our prayers for his family, for McLaughlin Family, the conversion of Bruce Heller, & Janet Gardner, the welfare of Dan Polly Weand, the conversion of Sophia Herman, Tony Rosky, and Carl Ropeter, the welfare Nancy Erdeck, the wife of the late Deacon Erdeck, and the welfare of Frank D’Agustino who is ill, the health of Charles Kanaskie, and the health of his brother, Thomas Thees, John Calasanctis, Stephen Cagorski, Tony Rosky, John Bogda, Maryann Reutter and the conversion of Martha Mochan who is gravely ill.

 

Pray for the Repose of the Souls:

Michael Giannttasio, a traditional Catholic, died during exercises with USMC,

Bishop Jean-Marie Benoît Balla, suspected victim of homosexuals who he opposed, tortured and murdered late June, 

Marie Mackin, the mother of Joseph Mackin, died August 11,

Theresa Marlyn Manidis, July 11 and John Manidis, July 30, following a MVA, both died wearing our Lady’s scapular and fortified with the sacraments,

Thomas Aquinas Francis, a third-order Dominican, father of 10, grandfather of 66, died July 4,

Joseph McLaughlin, who died June 13,

Nicholas Bartko, a 19 year old who drowned June 12,

Joseph Brown, died on Maundy Thursday, April 13,

Helen  Lewis, died April 5 after receiving the last sacraments,

Joseph John Vennari, editor of Catholic Family News, died April 4,

George Kirsch, our good friend and supporter of this Mission, died February 15,

Fr. Mecurio Fregapane, died Jan 17, was not a traditional priest but always charitable,

Fr. Casimir Peterson, a priest who often offered the Mass in our chapel and provided us with sound advice, died December 4,

Fr. Constantine Bellasarius, a faithful and always charitable Eastern Rite Catholic Melkite priest, who left the Roman rite, died November 27,

Christian Villegas, a motor vehicle accident, his brother, Michael, requests our prayers,

Mary Butler, the aunt of Fr. Samuel Waters, died October 17,

Joseph DeMarco, the nephew of John DeMarco, died October 3,

John Fergale, died September 25 after receiving the traditional sacramental rites of the Church wearing the brown scapular,

John Gabor, the brother of Donna Marbach, died September 9,

Fr. Eugene Dougherty, a faithful priest, fittingly died on the Nativity of the BVM after receiving the traditional Catholic sacraments,

Phyllis Schlafly, died September 5,

Helen Mackewicz, died August 14,

Mark A. Wonderlin, who died August 2,

Fr. Carl Cebollero, a faithful priest to tradition who was a friend of Fr. Waters and Fr. DeMaio,

Jessica Cortes, a young mother of ten who died June 12,

Frances Toriello, a life-long Catholic faithful to tradition, died June3, the feast of the Sacred Heart, and her husband Dan, died in 1985, 

John McLaughlin, a friend of the Drew’s, died May 22,

Angela Montesano, who died April 30, and her husband, Salvatore,  who died in July 3, 2013,

Charles Schultz, died April 5, left behind nine children and many grandchildren, all traditional Catholics,

Esperanza Lopez de Callejas, the aunt of Claudia Drew, died March 15,

Fr. Edgardo Suelo, a faithful priest defending our traditions who was working with Fr. Francois Chazal in the Philippines, died February 19,

Conde McGinley, a long time laborer for the traditional faith, died February 12, at 96 years,

The Drew family requests your prayers for Ida Fernandez and Rita Kelley, parishioners at St. Jude,

Fr. Stephen Somerville, a traditional priest who repented from his work with the Novus Ordo English translation, died December 12,

Fr. Arturo DeMaio, a priest that helped this Mission with the sacraments and his invaluable advice, died December 2,

J. Paul Carswell, died October 15, 2015,

Solange Hertz, a great defender of our Catholic faith, died October 3, the First Saturday of the month,

Gabriella Whalin, the mother of Gabriella Schiltz, who died August 25,

Mary Catherine Sick, 14 year old from a large traditional Catholic family, died August 25,

Fr. Paul Trinchard, a traditional Catholic priest, died August 25,

Stephen J. Melnick, Jr., died on August 21, a long-time faithful traditional Catholic husband and father, from Philadelphia,

Patricia Estrada, died July 29, her son Alex petitions our prayers for her soul,

Fr. Nicholas Gruner, a devoted priest & faithful defender of Blessed Virgin Mary and her Fatima message, died April 29,

Sarah E. Shindle, the grandmother of Richard Shindle, died April 26,

Madeline Vennari, the mother of John Vennari, died December 19,

Salvador Baca Callejas, the uncle of Claudia Drew, died December 13,

Robert Gomez, who died in a motor vehicle accident November 29,

Catherine Dunn, died September 15,

Anthony Fraser, the son of Hamish Fraser, died August 28,

Jeannette Rhoad, the grandmother of Devin Rhoad, who died August 24,

John Thees, the uncle of Philip Thees, died August 9,

Sarah Harkins, 32 year-old mother of four children, died July 28,

Anita Lopez, the aunt of Claudia Drew,

Fr. Kenneth Walker, a young traditional priest of the FSSP who was murdered in Phoenix June 11,

Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for Gilberte Violette, the mother of Fr. Violette, who died May 6,

Pete Hays petitions our prayers for his brothers, Michael, died May 9, and James, died October 20, his sister, Rebecca,  died March17, and his mother, Lorraine Hayes who died May 4,

Philip Marbach, the father of Paul Marbach who was the coordinator at St. Jude in Philadelphia, died April 21,

Richard Slaughtery, the elderly sacristan for the SSPX chapel in Kansas City, died April 13,

Bernedette Marie Evans nee Toriello, the daughter of Daniel Toriello , died March 31, a faithful Catholic who suffered many years with MS, 

Natalie Cagorski, died march 23,

Anita Lopez de Lacayo, the aunt of Claudia Drew, who died March 21,

Mario Palmaro, Catholic lawyer, bioethicist and professor, apologist, died March 9, welfare of his widow and children,

Daniel Boyle, the uncle of Ryan Boyle, died March 4,

Arthur Harmon, died January 18,

Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for the soul of Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died January 17,

Joseph Proctor, died January 10,

Susan Scott, a devote traditional Catholic who made the vestments for our Infant of Prague statue, died January 8,

Brother Leonard Mary, M.I.C.M., (Fred Farrell), an early supporter and friend of Fr. Leonard Feeney, died November 23,

John Fergale, requests our prayers for his sister Connie, who died December 19,

Jim Capaldi, died December 15,

Brinton Creager, the son of Elizabeth Carpenter, died December 10, 

Christopher Lussos, age 27, the father of one child with an expecting wife, died November 15,

Jarett Ebeyer, 16 year old who died in his sleep, November 17, at the request of the Kolinsky’s,

Catherine Nienaber, the mother of nine children, the youngest three years of age, killed in MVA after Mass, 10-29,

Nancy Aldera, the sister of Frances Toriello, died October 11, 2013 at 105 years of age,

Mary Rita Schiltz, the mother of Thomas Schiltz, who died August 27,

William H. (Teddy) Kennedy, Catholic author of Lucifer’s Lodge, died August 14, age 49, cause of death unknown,

Alfred Mercier, the father of David Mercier, who died August 12,

The Robert Kolinsky asks our prayers for his friend, George Curilla, who died August 23,

John Cuono, who had attended Mass at our Mission in the past, died August 11,

Raymond Peterson, died July 28, and Paul Peterson, died February 19, the brothers of Fr. Casimir Peterson,

Margaret Brillhart, who died July 20,

Msgr. Joseph J. McDonnell, a priest from the diocese of Des Moines, who died June 8,

Patrick Henry Omlor, who wrote Questioning The Validity of the Masses using the New, All English Canon, and for a series of newsletters which were published as The Robber Church, died May 2, the feast of St Athanasius,  

Bishop Joseph McFadden, died unexpectedly May 2,

Timothy Foley, the brother-in-law of Michelle Marbach Folley, who died in April,

William Sanders, the uncle of Don Rhoad, who died April 2,

Gene Peters ask our prayers for the repose of the soul of Mark Polaschek, who died March 22,

Eduardo Gomez Lopez, the uncle of Claudia Drew, February 28,

Cecelia Thees, died February 24,

Elizabeth Marie Gerads, a nineteen year old, the oldest of twelve children, who died February 6, 

Michael Schwartz, the co-author with Fr. Enrique Rueda of “Gays, Aids, and You,” died February 3,

Stanley W. Moore, passed away in December 16, and Gerard (Jerry) R. Pitman, who died January 19, who attended this Mission in the past, 

Louis Fragale, who died December 25,

Fr. Luigi Villa, Th.D. author of Vatican II About Face! detailing the heresies of Vatican II, died November 18 at the age of 95,

Rev. Michael Jarecki, a faithful traditional Catholic priest who died October 22,and Rev. Hector Bolduc, who died September 10,

Jennie Salaneck, died September 19 at 95 years of age, a devout and faithful Catholic all her life,

Dorothy Sabo, who died September 26,

Cynthia (Cindy) Montesano Reinhert, the mother of nine children, four who are still at home, died August 19,

Regina Spahalsky, who died June 24, and for the soul of Francis Lester, her son,

Julia Atkinson, who died April 30,

Antonio P. Garcia, who died January 6, 2012 and the welfare of his teenage children, Andriana and Quentin,

Helen Crane, the aunt of David Drew who died February 27,

Fr. Timothy A. Hopkins, of the National Shrine of St. Philomena, in Miami, November 2,

Frank Smith, who died February 7, and the welfare of his wife, Delores,

Eduardo Cepeda, who died January 26,

Larry Young, the 47 year old father of twelve who died December 10 and the welfare of his wife Katherine and their family,

Sister Mary Bernadette, M.I.C.M., a founding member of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, died December 16,

Joeseph Elias, who died on September 28,

William, the brother of Fr. Waters, who died September 7,

Donald Tonelli, died August 1,

Rev. Fr. Gregory Hesse, of Austria, a great defender of Catholic Truth, died January 25, 2006,

Emma Colasanti, who died May 29,

Mary Dullesse, who died April 12, a Catholic convert who died wearing our Lady’s scapular,

Ruth Jantsch, the grandmother of Andre Ebert, who died April 7, Derrick and Denise Palengat, his godparents,

Philip D. Barr, died March 5, and the welfare of his family, 

Judith Irene Kenealy, the mother of Joyce Paglia, who died February 23, and her son, George Richard Moore, who died May 14, 

For Joe Sobran who died September 30,

Fr. Hector Bolduc, a great and faithful priest, died, September 10, 2012,

John Vennari asks our prayers for Dr. Raphael Waters who died August 26,

Stanley Bodalsky, the father of Mary Ann Boyle who died June 25,

Mary Isabel Kilfoyle Humphreys, a former York resident and friend of the Drew’s, who died June 6th,

Rev. John Campion, who offered the traditional Mass for us every first Friday until forbidden to do so by Bishop Dattilo, died May 1,

Joseph Montagne, who died May 5,

For Margaret Vagedes, the aunt of Charles Zepeda, who died January 6,

Fr. James Francis Wather, died November 7, 2006, author of The Great Sacrilege and Who Shall Ascend?, a great defender of dogma and liturgical purity,

Fr. Enrique Rueda, who died December 14, 2009, to whom our Mission is indebted,

Fr. Peterson asks to remember, Leonard Edward Peterson, his cousin, Wanda, Angelica Franquelli,  and the six priests ordained with him.

Philip Thees petitions our prayers for Beverly Romanick, Deacon Michael Erdeck, Henry J. Phillips, Grace Prestano, Connie DiMaggio, Elizabeth Thorhas, Elizabeth Thees, Theresa Feraker, Hellen Pestrock, and James & Rose Gomata,

Fr. Didier Bonneterre, the author of The Liturgical Movement, and Fr. John Peek, both were traditional priests,

Brother Francis, MICM, the superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, NH, who died September 5,

Rodolfo Zelaya Montealegre, the father of Claudia Drew, who died May 24,

Rev. Francis Clifford, a devout and humble traditional priest, who died on March 7,

Benjamin Sorace, the uncle of Sonya Kolinsky.

 

 

 

 

Müller, Buttiglione and the “confusion” of those criticizing the Pope

After the articles of the philosopher and the preface of the cardinal to his book, now everyone admits that there are cases in which the way to the sacraments is open for remarried divorcees. Demonstrating in this way the absurdity of the accusation of “heresy” addressed to the Pontiff, but also how the dubia need to be radically reformulated

andrea tornielli | vatican city | 07/11/2017

Professor Rocco Buttiglione’s new book “Friendly answers to Amoris laetitia’s critics and above all the introductory essay written by Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller seem to have sown a certain confusion among the liveliest critics of Pope Francis. To realize this, we only need to start from the latest article published on Sandro Magister’s blog, which in the title warns us that “the dubia are more alive than ever”. And that “Müller adds one of his own”. Actually, it is hard to understand in the text exactly what Müller’s new doubt would be. It is well understood, instead, that the cardinal demolishes the first doubt of the cardinals (and consequently all the others).  

According to Magister “the cardinal proposes - explicitly - a single case of possible access to communion by a Catholic who has passed to a new union and with their first spouse still alive. It’s the case when the first marriage, though celebrated in church, is to be considered invalid due to the absence of faith or other essential requirements at the time of the celebration, but such invalidity “cannot be canonically proven”. Let’s leave aside the fact that Cardinal Müller also considers other cases of diminished responsibility – one just need to read the preface to Buttiglione’s book. Let us therefore limit ourselves to this only case recognized by Magister. Not only does the author of the blog “Settimo cielo” recognize that the cardinal considers this case as acceptable, but it seems that he too considers it acceptable. And he even says that this thesis had already been proposed by Joseph Ratzinger.  

We then have at least one case in which it is legitimate to give communion to remarried divorcees. It’s a “completely traditional” case, Magister tells us. This is not entirely true, as traditionally, a disciplinary prohibition existed on this issue. But one can be excused from the disciplinary prohibition, which can be eventually diminished or removed. At this point, however, the first and fundamental doubt of the four cardinals (Carlo Caffarra, Raymond Leo Burke, Walter Brandmüller and Joachim Meisner) has been clearly overcome. For the sake of completeness, we shall recall the text of dubia number 1: “It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Amoris Laetitia (300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the sacrament of penance and thus to admit to holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person more uxorio without fulfilling the conditions provided for by Familiaris Consortio, 84, and subsequently reaffirmed by Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 34, and Sacramentum Caritatis, 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in Note 351 (305) of the exhortation Amoris Laetitia be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live more uxorio?” The answer, according to Müller (and at this point, we must consider for Magister as well) is, yes: there is at least one case in which this can be lawful.  

If there is at least one case in which this is legitimate, then the accusation of heresy made against the Pope by the signatories of the “Correctio filialis” is false, and those who have signed it have slandered the Successor of Peter. [….]

 

COMMENT: Andrea Tornielli is not a reporter. He is a Vatican shill who publishes prepared scripts. He demonstrates with every published article that he is not his own man. His faith is based upon the person of the pope and not the revealed truths of the Catholic religion. Reason is at the service of his ideology. Cardinal Müller is no better. In his tenure as head of the CDF, he defended nothing. He was the dog who would not bark. A Catholic marriage is presumed to be Francis_Luther_1.jpgvalid unless proven otherwise and the proof must be necessarily compelling to declare the Catholic sacrament invalid. If a nullity of marriage cannot be proven it must necessarily be assumed to be valid. This argument proposes that if a married person believes that their marriage is invalid, but the invalidity cannot be canonically proven, then they may marry again outside the Catholic Church without grave sin of adultery being imputable based upon their subjective conviction. Then what is knowable as objectively true becomes entirely dependent upon subjective speculations. This in fact if carried to its logical conclusion will not just call every marriage into question, but will destroy all Catholic morality. Pope Francis’ moral system can excuse any and every intrinsically evil act. St. Paul wrote to St. Timothy, “Some men's sins are manifest, going before to judgment: and some men they follow after. In like manner also good deeds are manifest: and they that are otherwise, cannot be hid” (I Tim 5:24-25). What are “manifest” sins? St. Paul said, “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind (sodomites), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God” (I Cor. 6:9-10).  St. Paul could say this because such acts cannot be committed without imputable sin because they are intrinsically evil violations of the natural law written on the heart of every man and cannot admit a good intention. They are “manifest sins” and to recognize them as such is not entering into unjust judgment. Those that do not recognize “manifest sins” for what they are will invariably “give that which is holy to dogs… and cast pearls before swine” (Matt 7:6).

The moral system of Pope Francis is nothing more than situation ethics that places the subjective actor as the primary determinate of the morality of any action. And why should it be limited to the subjective speculation of just one of the married parties? Suppose one spouse does not share in the others subjective speculation? Then if they both marry again, does only one commit adultery? Now with the novel grounds of “lack of faith” used to establish invalidity, anyone is free to speculate on validity of anyone’s Catholics marriage because one of the “married” parties doesn’t have the “right” Catholic faith. Pope Francis calls into question the validity of every Novus Ordo Catholic marriage! Every heretic eventually attacks the sacrament of Matrimony because marriage is the metaphor God uses to describe His relationship with His Church and each individual faithful.  Heretics cannot abide the integrity of the metaphor.

 

 

 

De Mattei: Pope Francis and his “Lutheran turning point”

Roberto de Mattei | Corrispondenza Romana | November 8, 2017

          On October 31st 2016, Pope Francis inaugurated the year of Luther by meeting STAMP_Luther_and_Melanchton_1.jpgwith representatives of Lutheranism from all over the world in the Swedish Cathedral of Lund. Since then, meetings and “ecumenical” celebrations ad abundantiam have followed one after the other in the Catholic Church.

          A year exactly from that date, the “”Lutheran turning point ”was sealed by a symbolic act the gravity of which very few have noticed. The Vatican Post Office issued a stamp which celebrates the birth of Protestantism on October 31st 1517, the date Luther hung his 95 theses on the door of Wittenberg Cathedral.

          “V Centenary of the Protestant Reformation”can be read at the top of the stamp, presented on October 31st of this year by the Vatican Philatelic Office.  The official communiqué describes the stamp: “It depicts Jesus Crucified in the foreground on a gold, timeless background showing Wittenberg city. In an attitude of penance, on their knees respectively on the left and the right of the the Cross, Martin Luther holds a Bible, source and point of his doctrine, while Philip Melanchthon, theologian and a friend of Martin Luther’s, one of the most important protagonists of the Reformation, holds in his hand the Augsburg Confession, Confessio Augustuana, the first official exposition of the principles of Protestantism drawn up by him.”

          The substitution of Our Lady and St. John at the foot of the Cross with the  two heresiarchs, Luther and Melanchthon is a blasphemous offense that no Catholic cardinal or bishop has, to date, openly condemned. The significance of this image is explained by the joint declaration of the World Lutheran Federation and the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity, published the same day as the stamp. The note refers to the positive outcome of the dialogue between Catholics and Lutherans, endorsing the “new understanding of those XVI century events which lead to our separation” and affirms how both sides are “very grateful for the theological and spiritual gifts received through the Reformation”.

          As if that weren’t enough, around the same time, La Civiltà Cattolica, the Pope’s “unofficial” voice, celebrated Luther  with  an article by Father Giancarlo Pani (Martin Luther, Five Hundred Years Later, in La Civiltà Cattolica , of October 21st – November 4th 2017, pp. 119-130)

Father Pani is the same priest who said in 2014 that the Fathers of the Council of Trent had admitted the possibility of divorce and remarriage in the case of adultery, according to the custom established in the schismatic Greek Church. Now he is sustaining that Martin Luther was in no way a heretic, but an authentic “reformer”.  In fact, “ the theses of Wittenberg are not a challenge, nor a rebellion against authority, but the proposal to renew the proclamation of the Gospel, in the sincere desire for a “reform” in the Church”. (p.128). Despite the claim “ by the Church of Rome and Luther of incarnating the truth in toto and being dispensers of it ” “ the role Luther had as a witness to the faith cannot be denied: He is “the reformer”he was able to initiate a process of “reform”  where the results of it  have also benefited the Catholic Church.”

          If this is the case then he has been unjustly persecuted and defamed by the Catholic Church for 500 years. The time has come to rehabilitate him.  And in order to rehabilitate him we cannot limit ourselves to presenting only his prophetic side, but must make the Church accept and put into practice his demands of reform. And the Post-Synod Exhortation Amoris Laetitia represents a decisive stage on this path. They are not wrong then the authors of the Correctio filialis  (to Pope Francis) when they underlined “the affinity between Luther’s ideas on the law, justification and matrimony and those taught  or favored by Pope Francis in Amoris laetitia and elsewhere.” 

          At this point it should be remembered that Pope Francis, like Father Pani, belongs to the Company of Jesus, whose Founder, St. Ignatius of Loyola, was the champion of the Faith that Divine Providence raised up in the XVI century against Lutheranism. In Germany, apostles like St. Peter Canisio and Blessed Peter Fabro, fought every inch of the way against the heretics and on the terrain of anti-Protestant controversy no-one can surpass St. Robert Bellarmino.

La Civiltà Cattolica was founded in 1850, with the support of Pius IX, and had a role of doctrinal defense against the errors of the time for a very long time. From its very first edition, on April 6th 1850, it dedicated an extensive anonymous essay (by Father Matteo Liberatore) on The Political Rationalism of the Italian Revolution, in which he saw Protestantism as the cause of all modern errors. These theses were developed, among others, by two famous Jesuit theologians: Fathers Giovanni Perrone (Protestantism and the Rule of the Faith, La Civiltà Cattolica, Rome 1853, 2 voll.), and Hartmann Grisar (Luther, Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1911/1912, 3 voll.).

          But the commemoration of the Lutheran revolt made by the Jesuit journal in October 1917, the fourth centenary marking the 95 theses in Wittenberg, takes on a special meaning.  (Luther and Lutheranism, in La Civiltà Cattolica, IV (1917), pp. 207-233; 421-430). The theologian of La Civiltà Cattolica explained that “The essence of the Lutheran spirit, or rather Lutheranism, is rebellion in all of its extension and in all the force of its word. Rebellion, therefore, which is personified in Luther, was varied and profound, complex and very vast; which apparently appeared but was in fact violent, angry, trivial, obscene and diabolic; deep down it was studied, and directed according to the circumstances, focused on opportunistic ends and interests, intended and wanted with  measured, resolute determination.” (pp.208-309).

          Luther, La Civiltà Cattolica continues, “initiated that contemptible parody, with which the rebel monk attributed to God, his ideas, blasphemies and the abominations of his perverted mind: he outraged the Pope in an unspeakable way in the name of Christ, he cursed Caesar in the name of Christ, he blasphemed against the Church, against bishops, against monks with absolute infernal impetuosity, in the name of Christ; he threw his religious habit onto the tree of Judas, in the name of Christ and in the name of Christ he was married sacrilegiously” (p.209). “With the very convenient pretext of following Scripture, as that which alone contains the word of God, he conducted a war on scholastic theology, tradition, canon law, all the institutions and precepts of the Church and councils: in place of these august and venerated things, he, Martin Luther, perjured monk and self-proclaimed doctor, put himself and his authority! Popes, doctors and Holy Fathers were no longer of any worth; the word of Marin Luther was worth more than all of them!  (p.212). The Lutheran theory of justification, in the end, “was born of Luther’s imagination, not by the Gospel or any other word of God revealed to the writers of the New Testament: for us, every Lutheran novelty finds its origins in the concupiscence he stimulated, and in his development of the falsification of Scripture or in formal lying” (p.214

          Father Pani cannot deny that the opinion he gives of Luther is a 360 degree turnaround from the one his confreres gave in the same journal, a century ago.  In 1917,  he was censured as an apostate, a rebel, a blasphemer; today he is being praised as a reformer, a prophet, [even] holy. No Hegelian dialectic can harmonize yesterday’s judgment with today’s. Luther was either a heretic who denied some basic dogmas of Christianity, or he was a “witness to faith” who initiated  the Reformation of the Church, brought to completion by the Second Vatican Council and Pope Francis.

          In short, every Catholic is called upon to choose whether to side with Pope Francis and the Jesuits of today, or be alongside the Jesuits of yesterday and the Popes of all time.

          It is time for choices and to mediate precisely on St. Ignatius’ two standards (Spiritual Exercises, n. 137)* which will help us make them in these difficult times.

 

 

A clear explanation of the essential problem: What is for faithful Catholic the "Rule of Faith"?  Is it Dogma or the Pope?  Those who believe it is the Pope will follow Pope Francis even if he takes them to Hell!

Maike Hickson: Where does Prof. Rocco Buttiglione (who defends the new morality of Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia), in your eyes, leave the solid foundation of the Catholic moral teaching, perhaps in order to maintain loyalty toward Pope Francis?

 

Professor Josef Seifert: I think (1) with respect to his “two principles” that separate us, they do not correspond to sound Catholic teaching because it is Catholic teaching (and the basis for all condemnation of heresies in the history of the Church) that a) truth has priority over unity and b) that no Catholic has an absolute duty to accept everything a Pope or Council are saying if it is not dogmatic and de fide, and if he has good reason to believe that it is contrary to natural or revealed truth or to both (to claim otherwise would be papolatry). Besides, (2) I  believe that Professor Buttiglione’ s concrete and brilliant but unsuccessful efforts to reconcile the novelties of Amoris Laetitia with Familiaris Consortio, Veritatis Splendor, Evangelium Vitae, Humanae Vitae, and the Tradition of the Church all fail and put him at the risk of using overcomplicated and sophistical reasons and of contradicting dogmas of the Church such as (a) that God never commands things which we cannot obey, with the help of grace (a Lutheran heresy denied this and was condemned in the Council of Trent), or (b) that extramoral evils (such that the partner of a second “marriage” will leave me) can never be greater evils than a sin and the intention to prevent them can never justify committing a sin (VS and Trent affirmed this and condemned its negation as heretical), or (c) that weighing good versus bad effects of any action can never justify committing one of the many intrinsically evil acts (Veritatis Splendor made this very solemnly clear).

 

 

Devotions to the Holy Souls in Purgatory

Requiem aeternam dona eis domine; et lux perpetual luceat eis.   Requiescant in pace. Amen.

(Eleternal rest grant unto them, O Lord; and let perpetual light shine upon them.  May they rest in peace. Amen.)

§  Sunday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the Precious Blood, which Thy divine Son Jesus shed in the Garden, deliver the souls in purgatory, and especially that one which is the most forsaken of all, and bring it into Thy glory, where it may praise and bless Thee forever. Amen.     Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

§  Monday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the Precious Blood which Thy divine Son Jesus shed in His cruel scourging, deliver the souls in purgatory, and among them all, especially that soul which is nearest to its entrance into Thy glory, that it may soon begin to praise Thee for ever. Amen.    Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

§  Tuesday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the Precious Blood of Thy divine Son Jesus that was shed in His bitter crowning with thorns, deliver the souls in purgatory, and among them all, particularly that soul which is in the greatest need of our prayers, in order that it may not  long be delayed in praising Thee in Thy glory and blessing Thee for ever. Amen.    Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

§  Wednesday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the Precious Blood of Thy divine son Jesus that was shed in the streets of Jerusalem whilst He carried on His sacred shoulders the heavy burden of the Cross, deliver the souls in purgatory and especially that one which is richest in merits in Thy sight, so that, having soon attained the high place in glory to which it is destined, it may praise Thee triumphantly and bless Thee for ever. Amen.    Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

§  Thursday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the Precious Body and Blood of Thy divine Son Jesus, which He himself on the night before His Passion gave as meat and drink to His beloved Apostles and bequeathed to His Holy Church to be the perpetual Sacrifice and life-giving nourishment of His faithful people, deliver the souls in purgatory, but most of all, that soul which was most devoted to this Mystery of infinite love, in order that it may praise Thee therefore, together with Thy divine Son and the Holy Spirit in Thy glory for ever. Amen.    Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

§  Friday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the Precious Blood which Jesus Thy divine Son did shed that day upon the tree of the Cross, especially from His Sacred Hands and Feet, deliver the souls in purgatory, and particularly that soul for whom I am most bound to pray, in order that I may not be the cause which hinders Thee from admitting it quickly to the possession of Thy glory where it may praise Thee and bless Thee for evermore. Amen.    Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

§  Saturday  O Lord God omnipotent, I beseech Thee by the precious Blood which gushed forth from the sacred Side of Thy divine Son Jesus in the presence and to the great sorrow of His most holy Mother, deliver the souls in purgatory and among them all especially that soul which has been most devout to this noble Lady, that it may come quickly into Thy glory, there to praise Thee in her, and her in Thee through all the ages. Amen.    Our Father, Hail Mary, Eternal rest, etc.

 

 

A true Catholic is he who loves the truth revealed by God, who loves the Church, the Body of Christ, who esteems religion, the Catholic faith, higher than any human authority, talents, eloquence, and philosophy; all this he holds in contempt, and remains firm and unshaken in the faith which, he knows, has always from the beginning been held by the Catholic Church; and if he notices that anyone, no matter who he may be, interprets a dogma in a manner different from that of the Fathers of the Church, he understands that God permits such an interpretation to be made, not for the good of religion, but as a temptation, according to the words of St. Paul: “For there must be also heresies; that they also, who are reproved, may be made manifest among you” (I Cor. xi. 19). And indeed, no sooner are novel opinions proclaimed, than it becomes manifest what kind of a Catholic a man is. 

St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonit.

 

 

 

 

 

Tracks_4_edit.jpg

 

 

It is a sin to believe there is salvation outside the Catholic Church!

Blessed Pope Pius IX

 

 

 

 

 

 


PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTS BELOW THAT REMAIN TIMELY:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is the difference between this example of Jewish “truth” and Novus Ordo theology and praxis?

Lying is now a “heightened version of reality” because it may be “true in a higher metaphysical sense”!?
 . . . . What anti-Semites keep insisting are “fake Holocaust stories” need to be seen in a more positive light as “the truth of imagination,” to quote the famous phrase of the poet John Keats. If something is perceived as true by the mind, though strictly speaking it may not have happened, and if that event is subsequently seen as a living truth in the minds of millions of other good people who have been exposed to that same heightened version of reality, then it must on no account be dismissed as a “lie” ( . . . ) All such stories are true in a higher metaphysical sense, and to deny them is a sacrilege ( . . . ) We have a sacred obligation to the six million who died under the tyranny of the evil Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler to remember the dead and dismiss with contempt all attempts to deny the Holocaust by referring to “fake Holocaust stories.” I repeat: there is no such thing as a fake Holocaust story. Every Holocaust story is true, 100 per cent true, whether it happened or not. ( . . . ) In the sublime words of Elie Wiesel: “In literature, certain things are true though they didn’t happen, while others are not true, even if they did happen.”

Seymour Zak, defending “fake Holocaust stories” after Herman Rosenblat’s holocaust story, An Angel at the Fence, was publically exposed as a pure fabrication.  Hollywood was unmoved.  The film production based upon the book will proceed as planned.

 

Dogma is the proximate Rule of Faith. Deny this Catholic truth and this is what follows. So now we have an infallibly infallible magisterium and a infallibly non-infallible magisterium.  

This false accusation railed against Pope Francis, claiming that he is teaching or prompting heresy in part of his Ordinary Magisterium is in effect a denial of the one of the essential truths behind the teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, who is granted Divine assistance which prevents him from erring in matters of faith and morals, even when teaching non-infallibly.

So while there may be certain deficiencies present in the Ordinary Magisterium, the faithful are still required to submit their will and intellect to its higher prudential judgment by giving religious assent, and such deficiencies can never fall into error in matters of faith and morals through the promise of Divine assistance accorded to even these non-infallible pronouncements.

Emmett O'Regan, published by Vatican Insider

 

At last, admission by Pope Francis that the purpose of ecumenical dialogue is to make Catholics Lutherans!

 Many members of our communities yearn to receive the Eucharist at one table, as the concrete expression of full unity. We experience the pain of those who share their whole lives, but cannot share God’s redeeming presence at the Eucharistic table. We acknowledge our joint pastoral responsibility to respond to the spiritual thirst and hunger of our people to be one in Christ. We long for this wound in the Body of Christ to be healed. This is the goal of our ecumenical endeavours, which we wish to advance, also by renewing our commitment to theological dialogue.

Pope Francis and “Bishop” Munib A Younan, President of the Lutheran World Federation, joint statement, Oct 31, 2017

 

Pope Francis the Lutheran

[.....] Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin, whether in Latin or any other language, containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected. We forbid each and every one of the faithful of either sex, in virtue of holy obedience and under the above penalties to be incurred automatically, to read, assert, preach, praise, print, publish, or defend them. They will incur these penalties if they presume to uphold them in any way, personally or through another or others, directly or indirectly, tacitly or explicitly, publicly or occultly, either in their own homes or in other public or private places. Indeed immediately after the publication of this letter these works, wherever they may be, shall be sought out carefully by the ordinaries and others [ecclesiastics and regulars], and under each and every one of the above penalties shall be burned publicly and solemnly in the presence of the clerics and people. As far as Martin himself is concerned, O good God, what have we overlooked or not done? What fatherly charity have we omitted that we might call him back from such errors? [.....]

Pope Leo X, Exsurge Domine, condemnation of Martin Luther and all those who embrace his heresy.

 

 

This is the goal of those secret sects which have come forth from the darkness to destroy and desolate both the sacred and civil commonwealth. [.....] “It is an act of great piety to expose the concealments of the impious and to defeat there the devil himself whose slaves they are” (Pope Leo the Great).  Therefore we entreat you to use every means of revealing to your faithful people the many kinds of plots, pretense, errors, deceit and contrivance which are enemies use.[....] Also exhort them unceasingly to flee from the sects and societies of the impious as from the presence of the Serpent earnestly avoiding everything which is at variance with the wholeness of the faith, religion and morality. 

Blessed Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, (Against the Secret Societies)

 

The world is governed by very different personages to what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes....  That mighty revolution which is at the moment preparing in Germany, and which will be, in fact, a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is yet known in England, is developing entirely under the auspices of the Jews. [.....]

One can trace Jewish influence in the last revolutionary explosions in Europe (1848). An insurrection has taken place against traditions, religion and property, the destruction of the semitic principle, the extirpation of the Jewish religion, either under its Mosaic or Christian form, the natural equality of men and the annulment of property are proclaimed by the secret societies which form the provisional government, and men of Jewish race are found at the head of each of them. The People of God cooperate with atheists, the most ardent accumulators of property link themselves with communists. The select and chosen race walks hand in hand with the scum of the lower castes of Europe. And all this because they wish to destroy this Christianity which owes them its very name and whose tyranny they can no longer bear. 

Benjamin Disraeli, Jewish Prime Minister of Great Britain, taken from Vicomte Leon De Poncins, The Secret Powers behind Revolution, Freemasonry and Judaism, 1929

 

 

Therefore the sacred partnership of true marriage is constituted both by the will of God and the will of man. From God comes the very institution of marriage, the ends for which it was instituted, the laws that govern it, the blessings that flow from it; while man, through generous surrender of his own person made to another for the whole span of life, becomes, with the help and cooperation of God, the author of each particular marriage, with the duties and blessings annexed thereto from divine institution. Now when We come to explain, Venerable Brethren, what are the blessings that God has attached to true matrimony, and how great they are, there occur to Us the words of that illustrious Doctor of the Church whom We commemorated recently in Our Encyclical Ad salutem on the occasion of the fifteenth centenary of his death: “These,” says St. Augustine, “are all the blessings of matrimony on account of which matrimony itself is a blessing; offspring, conjugal faith and the sacrament.” And how under these three heads is contained a splendid summary of the whole doctrine of Christian marriage, the holy Doctor himself expressly declares when he said: “By conjugal faith it is provided that there should be no carnal intercourse outside the marriage bond with another man or woman; with regard to offspring, that children should be begotten of love, tenderly cared for and educated in a religious atmosphere; finally, in its sacramental aspect that the marriage bond should not be broken and that a husband or wife, if separated, should not be joined to another even for the sake of offspring. This we regard as the law of marriage by which the fruitfulness of nature is adorned and the evil of incontinence is restrained.

Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, On Christian Marriage

 

Do you need to convince the other to become Catholic? No, no, no! Go out and meet him, he is your brother. This is enough. Go out and help him and Jesus will do the rest.  

Pope Francis the Neo-Evangelist

 

Europe will return to the faith or…. perish. 

Hilaire Belloc

 

Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer.... Are our communities capable of .... accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine?  

Synod of the Family, First Relatio written by Pope Francis’ Hand Picked  Clerics

 

 

“Revelation manifests itself more and more each day… it’s always moving.”  

It is a dogma of divine and Catholic faith that Revelation was completed at the death of the last Apostle!

Ideologies are bewitching; and so Paul says: “Oh foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you?” Those who preach with ideologies: everything’s right! They are bewitching: it’s all clear!  But look, God’s revelation isn’t clear eh? God’s revelation manifests itself more and more each day; it is always moving. Is it clear? Crystal clear! It is Him, but we have to find it along the way. Those who think they possess the whole truth are not just ignorant, Paul goes as far as to call them ‘foolish’ for letting themselves be bewitched.

Pope Francis, sermon, October 6, 2016

COMMENT:

O senseless Galatians, who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish, that, whereas you began in the Spirit, you would now be made perfect by the flesh? Have you suffered so great things in vain? If it be yet in vain. He therefore who giveth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you; doth he do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of the faith?

As it is written: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice. Know ye therefore, that they who are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing, that God justifieth the Gentiles by faith, told unto Abraham before: In thee shall all nations be blessed. Therefore they that are of faith, shall be blessed with faithful Abraham. For as many as are of the works of the law, are under a curse. For it is written: Cursed is every one, that abideth not in all things, which are written in the book of the law to do them.

But that in the law no man is justified with God, it is manifest: because the just man liveth by faith. But the law is not of faith: but, He that doth those things, shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written: Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Christ Jesus: that we may receive the promise of the Spirit by faith. Brethren (I speak after the manner of man,) yet a man’ s testament, if it be confirmed, no man despiseth, nor addeth to it.

To Abraham were the promises made and to his seed. He saith not, And to his seeds, as of many: but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. [.....] For you are all the children of God by faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you be Christ’ s, then are you the seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise.   Galatians 3: 1-29

You can only surmise that Pope Francis has never read Galatians, chapter 3.  Whatever he has learned about the text could only have been derived from secondary sources attempting to indoctrinate by an exegesis that is ideologically driven. The liberation theologians Pope Francis admires routinely used these methods. Suffice to say, St. Paul is not berating the Galatians because they claimed to “possess the whole truth” but because they did not “obey the truth.”  They could not be chastised for failing to “obey the truth” if they in fact did not “possess the whole truth.” They had been “bewitched” by Judaizers whose purpose in persecuting the Catholic Church was to reduce it to a Jewish sect and destroy it.  The Galatians were called “foolish” for turning away from the “whole truth” which they had received from St. Paul and following the Judaizers.  Perhaps the “bewitching” was the fault of the first pope, St. Peter, who was guilty of Judaizing by his “dissimulation” when he “walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel.” 

But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that some came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them who were of the circumcision. And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented, so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all: If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? We by nature are Jews, and not of the Gentiles sinners.  Galatians 2: 11-15

St. Peter was guilty of the same sin that Pope Francis regularly commits, Judaizing.  It is the sin that characterizes Protestantism, particularly the Calvinist variety.  Pope Francis has claimed that the Old Testament is still valid and has performed Old Testament rituals.  Suffice to say, Pope Francis is as ignorant as a stick in his understanding of St. Paul’s letter to the Galatians.  The Catholics he addresses were “bewitched” because, they were led by the “dissimulation” of St. Peter, and like him, “walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel.”

Pope Francis says that “Ideologies are bewitching.”  True.  And no one is more “bewitched” than Francis/Bergoglio himself who, like our first pope, must be “withstood to the face.”  Pray that the grace of God may prevail upon him.  Until then, whenever this “senseless” man is quoting scripture let the listener beware!

 

 

          Thus, We have reached one of the principal points in the Modernists' system, namely the origin and the nature of dogma. For they place the origin of dogma in those primitive and simple formulae, which, under a certain aspect, are necessary to faith; for revelation, to be truly such, requires the clear manifestation of God in the consciousness. But dogma itself they apparently hold, is contained in the secondary formulae.

          To ascertain the nature of dogma, we must first find the relation which exists between the religious formulas and the religious sentiment. This will be readily perceived by him who realises that these formulas have no other purpose than to furnish the believer with a means of giving an account of his faith to himself. These formulas therefore stand midway between the believer and his faith; in their relation to the faith, they are the inadequate expression of its object, and are usually called symbols; in their relation to the believer, they are mere instruments.

          Hence it is quite impossible to maintain that they express absolute truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sentiment in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sentiment. But the object of the religious sentiment, since it embraces that absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner, he who believes may pass through different phases. Consequently, the formulae too, which we call dogmas, must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. An immense collection of sophisms this, that ruins and destroys all religion. Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and as clearly flows from their principles. For amongst the chief points of their teaching is this which they deduce from the principle of vital immanence; that religious formulas, to be really religious and not merely theological speculations, ought to be living and to live the life of the religious sentiment. This is not to be understood in the sense that these formulas, especially if merely imaginative, were to be made for the religious sentiment; it has no more to do with their origin than with number or quality; what is necessary is that the religious sentiment, with some modification when necessary, should vitally assimilate them. In other words, it is necessary that the primitive formula be accepted and sanctioned by the heart; and similarly the subsequent work from which spring the secondary formulas must proceed under the guidance of the heart. Hence it comes that these formulas, to be living, should be, and should remain, adapted to the faith and to him who believes. Wherefore if for any reason this adaptation should cease to exist, they lose their first meaning and accordingly must be changed. And since the character and lot of dogmatic formulas is so precarious, there is no room for surprise that Modernists regard them so lightly and in such open disrespect. And so they audaciously charge the Church both with taking the wrong road from inability to distinguish the religious and moral sense of formulas from their surface meaning, and with clinging tenaciously and vainly to meaningless formulas whilst religion is allowed to go to ruin. Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can rest and maintain truth itself.

          ....... To finish with this whole question of faith and its shoots, it remains to be seen, Venerable Brethren, what the Modernists have to say about their development. First of all they lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change, and must change, and in this way they pass to what may be said to be, among the chief of their doctrines, that of Evolution. To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death.

St. Pius X, Pascendi

 

 

The faith of Pope Francis is directed toward his utopian dream and the facts of current apostasy and decay are immaterial to his judgment for apostasy and decay are of “space” and his utopian dream is of “time”!

“Time is Greater than Space: A constant tension exists between fullness and limitation. Fullness evokes the desire for complete possession, while limitation is a wall set before us. Broadly speaking, “time” has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of enclosure. People live poised between each individual moment and the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future as the final cause which draws us to itself. Here we see a first principle for progress in building a people: time is greater than space.”

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, “Time is Greater than Space

 

God manifests himself in historical revelation, in history. Time initiates processes, and space crystallizes them. God is in history, in the processes. We must initiate processes, rather than occupy spaces.” 

Pope Francis, Interview with Anthony Spadaro

 

Since “time is greater than space,” I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral, or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle…needs to be inculterated, if it is to be respected and applied.”

Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia

 

 

“If you love me you will keep my commandments… He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him… If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have kept my Father’ s commandments, and do abide in his love… In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and keep his commandments.” (John 14:15; 14:21; 15:10; 1 John 5:2)

Pope Francis will learn, souls are “condemned for ever” who teach the Lutheran heresy of justification & deny the Catholic dogma that to abide in “true charity” is “conditional” upon keeping the commandments!

The way of the Church is not to condemn anyone for ever; it is to pour out the balm of God’s mercy on all those who ask for it with a sincere heart… For true charity is always unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous….

It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial com-munity and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!

Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia, paragraphs 296 and 297

 

CATHOLIC PROPHECY

May 13, 1820: I saw also the relationship between the two popes. . . I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city (of Rome). The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness. . . Then, the vision seemed to extend on every side. Whole Catholic communities were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom. I saw many churches close down, great miseries everywhere, wars and bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took to violent action. But it did not last long.

Once more I saw that the Church of Peter was undermined by a plan evolved by the secret sect, while storms were damaging it. But I saw also that help was coming when distress had reached its peak. I saw again the Blessed Virgin ascend on the Church and spread her mantle [over it]. I saw a Pope who was at once gentle, and very firm. . . I saw a great renewal, and the Church rose high in the sky.

Sept. 12, 1820: I saw a strange church being built against every rule. . .  No angels were supervising the building operations. In that church, nothing came from high above. . . There was only division and chaos. It is probably a church of human creation, following the latest fashion, as well as the new heterodox church of Rome, which seems of the same kind. . .

I saw again the strange big church that was being built there (in Rome). There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints and other Christians. But there (in the strange big church) all the work was being done mechanically (i.e. according to set rules and formulae). Everything was being done according to human reason. . .

I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed to be very successful. I did not see a single Angel nor a single saint helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw the seat of a cruel people armed with spears, and I saw a laughing figure which said: “Do build it as solid as you can; we will pull it to the ground.”

Blessed Anna Katherina Emmerich, Catholic Prophecy by Ives DuPont

 

Moreover, one baptism regenerating all baptized in Christ, just as “one God and one faith”, is to be faithfully confessed by all, which, celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, we believe to be the perfect remedy for salvation for both adults and children…... one is the universal Church…. Outside of which absolutely no one is saved, one is the Lord, one is the faith and one is the baptism of all.

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312

         

For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be manifest among you. 

St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 11:19

 

Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,” as the Truth says, “enter into the Kingdom of Heaven’ (John 3:5).  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water. 

Pope Eugene IV, Exultate Deo, Council of Florence

 

 

 

COMMENT: It always gets back to the first heresy on which Vatican II was grounded.  John XXIII declared at the opening convocation that there existed a disjunction between the truths of faith and their dogmatic formulations, that the truths of our faith were one thing and how they were expressed another thing altogether.  This Modernist error had already been exposed and condemned by St. Pius X yet it was accepted without opposition by the assembled bishops. 

Now Pope Francis takes the error a step further when he says that, “It is not enough to find a new language in which to articulate our perennial faith; it is also urgent, in the light of the new challenges and prospects facing humanity, that the Church be able to express the “new things” of Christ’s Gospel, that, albeit present in the word of God, have not yet come to light. This is the treasury of “things old and new” of which Jesus spoke when he invited his disciples to teach the newness that he had brought, without forsaking the old”.  

The Church Fathers have always understood the “things old and new” to refer to the Old Testament and the New Testament of Jesus Christ who said, “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”  Francis is claiming that when Jesus Christ said to His apostles that He would send the Holy Ghost, the “Spirit of Truth,” to “lead them into all truth,” He really meant that He would not lead them into all truth but would lead their successors into all truth, or rather, that He would lead Francis himself into all truth so that he could declare a new gospel.

Those who hold that the pope is the rule of faith will be lead into heresy by Pope Francis.  Only those who hold the perennial Catholic truth that Dogma is the rule of faith will be able to keep it whole and inviolate. Tradition is only a “living reality” in the sense that the faith is received by living people.  As St. Paul said, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you,” (Cor 11:23) and “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.” (2 Thes 2:14).  The truth of the matter is that St. Vincent of Lerins would condemn everything that Pope Francis has done.

These two articles from Vatican Insider offer the best, but most feeble defense of Francis the Destroyer.

 

“Doctrine cannot be preserved without allowing it to develop”

In Francis’ words at the conference for the 25th anniversary of the promulgation of Catechism, the key to read the current debate on Amoris laetitia

Vatican Insider | andrea tornielli | vatican city | Octover 12, 2017

Vatican Insider.jpgThe theme that Pope Francis wanted to focus his attention on when he spoke at the meeting promoted by the Department for the New Evangelization was that of the death penalty and the need of a “more adequate and coherent treatment” in the Catechism. Given its relevance, it was only natural that this topic attracted the attention of the media. But the intervention of the Pontiff served also to reaffirm that doctrine and Tradition can really be preserved and handed down only by “allowing it to develop”. Considerations based on the Church’s fathers and councils, which help to frame the debate also on other topics of which the “fidelity to doctrine” is called into question.  

Francis started by quoting Saint John XXIII, who opened the Second Vatican Council on October 11, 1962 with the historic sentence, “It is necessary first of all that the Church should never depart from the sacred patrimony of truth received from the Fathers. But at the same time she must ever look to the present, to the new conditions and new forms of life introduced into the modern world, which have opened new avenues to the Catholic apostolate”. “Our duty - continued Pope Roncalli - is not only to guard this precious treasure, as if we were concerned only with antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our era demands of us, pursuing thus the path which the Church has followed for twenty centuries.”  

Pope Bergoglio has therefore explained that “to guard” and “to pursue” are “in the very nature of the Church, so that the truth present in Jesus’ preaching of the Gospel may grow in fullness until the end of time”. Saint John Paul II himself, in presenting the new Catechism of the Catholic Church, said that “it must take into account the doctrinal statements which down the centuries the Holy Spirit has made known to his Church. It should also help illumine with the light of faith the new situations and problems which had not yet emerged in the past”.  

Today’s challenges are not those of a century ago and not even those of thirty years ago. For this reason, there are Councils and Synods, and for this reason two assemblies of bishops have been held to discuss marriage and family, in social contexts that change at a very fast pace.  

It is not enough - Francis explains - to find a new language in which to articulate our perennial faith; it is also urgent, in the light of the new challenges and prospects facing humanity, that the Church be able to express the “new things” of Christ’s Gospel, that, albeit present in the word of God, have not yet come to light. This is the treasury of “things old and new” of which Jesus spoke when he invited his disciples to teach the newness that he had brought, without forsaking the old”.  

Bergoglio, after recalling a text of the Roman Catechism, highlighted by the new Catechism stating that “The whole concern of doctrine and its teaching must be directed to the love that never ends. Whether something is proposed for belief, for hope or for action, the love of our Lord must always be made accessible” - returns to speak of Tradition as “a living reality”.  

“Only a partial vision - Francis explains - regards the “deposit of faith” as something static. The word of God cannot be moth-balled like some old blanket in an attempt to keep insects at bay! No. The word of God is a dynamic and living reality that develops and grows because it is aimed at a fulfilment that none can halt.” Then Pope reaffirms “the happy formulation” of Saint Vincent of Lérins, “annis consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate” namely a dogma of the Christian religion that should be, “consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age”. A formulation, Francis states, that “is a distinguishing mark of revealed truth as it is handed down by the Church, and in no way represents a change in doctrine.”  

Therefore, “Doctrine cannot be preserved without allowing it to develop, nor can it be tied to an interpretation that is rigid and immutable without demeaning the working of the Holy Spirit. ‘God, who in many and various ways spoke of old to our fathers’ (Heb 1:1), uninterruptedly converses with the bride of his beloved Son” (Dei Verbum, 8). We are called to make this voice our own by “reverently hearing the word of God” (ibid., 1), so that our life as a Church may progress with the same enthusiasm as in the beginning, towards those new horizons to which the Lord wishes to guide us.” 

As for those significant changes that indicate how doctrine should “look to the present, to the new conditions”, as Pope Roncalli said, one can remember the great leap represented by John Paul II’s Familiaris Consortio. In that post-synodal exhortation, Wojtyla made clear the existence of attenuating circumstances, “Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid”.  

And he affirmed, breaking with a centuries-old tradition, that divorcees in second union, who for various reasons cannot return to their now broken marriages, could access the sacraments if they committed themselves to living as brother and sister, that is, refraining from sexual intercourse. This decision was an important innovation at that time. The divorced who remarried and were willing to live as brothers and sisters (circumstance that obviously has to do with their intimacy and is not written in their identity documents or badges), could not only be welcomed into the Christian community, but could also participate in the Eucharist.  

A few years later, in his letter to Cardinal Penitentiary Major William Wakefield Baum (22 March 1996), Pope Wojtyla stated, “ It should also be remembered that the existence of sincere repentance is one thing, the judgement of the intellect concerning the future is another: it is indeed possible that, despite the sincere intention of sinning no more, past experience and the awareness of human weakness makes one afraid of falling again; but this does not compromise the authenticity of the intention, when that fear is joined to the will, supported by prayer, of doing what is possible to avoid sin”. And the following year, in Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Truijllo’s vademecum for confessors concerning some aspects of the morality of conjugal life, we read that “Frequent relapse into sins of contraception does not in itself constitute a motive for denying absolution; absolution cannot be imparted, however, in the absence of sufficient repentance or of the resolution not to fall again into sin.”  

A more accurate and serene reflection on the history of the Church and on theology would help to understand, for example, that the teaching of Amoris laetitia is traditional, where it says that in the evaluation of guilt there may be mitigating factors. In chapter 8 of the exhortation, result of two Synods, the Pope, in the wake of this tradition, opened to the possibility - without falling into casuistry and without permissiveness or indiscriminate “green lights” - that in some cases divorced persons in second union (who cannot live as sister brother but are aware of their condition and have begun a journey) may also have access to the sacraments, after a period of discernment accompanied by a priest. After all it already happened in the past in some cases.  

 

Memo to Theologians: No to Theological Mob Rule

Theologian Stephen Walford urges the theological community to resist the temptation to create a parallel magisterium that does nothing more than foster disunity in the Church

Vatican Insider | stephen walford | vatican city | October 18, 2017

On October 11, 2017, Pope Francis addressed participants of a meeting organised by the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization. The event marked the twenty fifth anniversary of St. John Paul II’s promulgation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In his speech, the Holy Father focused on the death penalty and his desire for it to be eradicated from all nations. Naturally, he referred to the teachings of the Church in this regard and expressed sadness that even its use in the Papal States had meant the “primacy of mercy over justice” had been neglected. 

Pope Francis spoke forcefully maintaining that capital punishment is an “inhumane measure” that “abases human dignity”. Not only that. He went as far as to state that it is “per se contrary to the Gospel” because it entails the “wilful suppression of a human life that never ceases to be sacred in the eyes of its Creator and of which – ultimately – only God is the true judge and guarantor.”  

Citing the great fifth century theologian St Vincent of Lerins, the Holy Father explained the indispensable factor (in reference to Tradition) of doctrinal development. “Doctrine cannot be preserved without allowing it to develop, nor can it be tied to an interpretation that is rigid and immutable without demeaning the working of the Holy Spirit.” However, the Pontiff was careful to point out that this is no rupture from the past “Here we are not in any way contradicting past teaching, for the defence of the dignity of human life from the first moment of conception to natural death has been taught by the Church consistently and authoritatively.” 

Within hours of course, in the present climate of dissent, some were quick to accuse the Pope of another heresy; this hot on the heels of the “correctio filialis.” Accusations included claims that all past popes who had allowed the death penalty were now guilty of approving “intrinsically evil acts”. 

The reality of the Pope’s teaching seems quite different if taken from the perspective of authentic doctrinal development. On the one hand from a purely legal procedure, by stating there is no contradiction from past papal teaching, Francis would seem to accept the reality that in a very unstable world of the past, the death penalty might have been the only recourse, that only most reluctantly should have been imposed. Now however those circumstances simply don’t exist, thus there is no longer an excuse to utilise this dreadful form of justice. 

The controversy though surrounds his teaching that the death penalty is per se contrary to the Gospel. Why this should be problematic is not entirely apparent. The reality is that the Gospel concerns life. Jesus showed that time and again in his ministry of healing and renewal. We need only look at the way he saved the woman caught in the act of adultery from stoning to know that mercy was his signature. Most significant of all is the truth that Jesus specifically came to save us from the death penalty–the eternal death penalty. Divine justice was now manifest in the application of mercy, and the One sentenced to death freely embraced that punishment, without any desire that we should experience the same fate. 

It seems to me that several factors need separating here: On the one hand is the law on a human level. Jesus said “give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God”; this would also apply to the application of civil law. But on the other hand, divine law is not bound to that code; it exists in another realm where mercy takes primacy over justice. For too long a temptation has existed with millenarian tendencies to “pull” Jesus down to an earthly level, to reduce the full power of eternal realities. But the truth is that Jesus came with the command to transform the world from within until the time that he comes again. This involves the gradual full revelation of the beauty and dignity of every human life. Let us ask, would St Robert Bellarmine of St Thomas More advocate the burning at the stake of heretics if they were on earth now? The Church is called to imitate its Master in an ever more perfect way, and the development of this doctrine as taught recently by Pope Francis is proof that it seeks to do just that.  

Thus if the death penalty was a legitimate tool of human law in former times as previous popes taught, it never conformed to the principle of divine law by which God always desires the salvation of all through repentance, forgiveness and mercy. For some, that opportunity of a new beginning, which Jesus would have surely blessed, would never have had the chance to materialise.  

The reaction to this speech of Pope Francis from certain theologians, along with the correctio filialis, the threatened formal correction of Cardinal Burke, and the letter of 45 theologians several years ago, raises important questions about the relationship between theologians and the magisterium. One could be forgiven for wondering who claims to have ultimate teaching authority in the Church. However, when we look at the teachings of St John Paul II in this area, a clear picture emerges that should serve as a reminder to dissenting theologians of their proper place in the life of the Church. 

The Polish Pontiff defines theologians as those who are to “guard the word of God, to study it more deeply, to explain it, to teach it, to defend it…Theologians have special qualifications for studying and elucidating the reasons for the doctrinal and moral teaching of the Church. By their training and scholarship, and following their specific method, theologians are in a position to probe and illustrate the data of faith and the interpretation that the Magisterium gives of these data in doctrine and morals.” (1) 

So the question arises as to the exact nature of the relationship between theologian and magisterium. Can the theologian correct the magisterium? Can he place limits on the development of magisterial teaching?  

The Pope states that the principle of harmony is the regulating feature where the relationship between the two is concerned, since both are at the service of divine Revelation. But there is a crucial distinction in terms of the authoritativeness of theological teaching: 

“The fruitful exercise of the Magisterium requires us to reflect on various aspects of the mystery of God’s word and its transmission in the Church. We know that the authentic Magisterium of the Church is characterized by unity. It makes no claim to be above the word of God; rather it seeks humbly to serve that word, through its specific charism, exercised in the name of Christ and by his authority. As such, the Magisterium has no parallel in the Church. There is only one authentic ecclesial Magisterium, and it belongs to the Bishops. On the part of individual Bishops, the communion of teaching with the Pope and the whole College is of extreme importance, because it is the guarantee of authentic doctrine and of the supernatural effectiveness of every pastoral initiative.” (2) 

From the beginning of his Pontificate, John Paul II had desired to ensure that no misunderstanding could result in theologians creating their own alternate magisterium, “Only when the teaching of theologians is in conformity with the teaching of the College of Bishops, united with the Pope, can the people of God know with certitude that that teaching is ‘the faith which has been once and for all entrusted to the Saints’ (Jude 3). This is not a limitation for theologians, but a liberation.” (3) 

Similar words are found in a homily given in Treviso Italy “The lay person, aware of the vocation of the apostolate, will never seek to act in discord, to exalt his independence from the Magisterium, will not assume as source of his proclamation his own subjective experience of faith, but will seek from the doctrine proclaimed by the Church the strength of truth.” (4) 

The truth of the matter, and one that is being contested daily it seems, is that regardless of something being proclaimed infallibly or not, Christ preserves the Magisterium from error in matters of faith and morals. For instance we read in a general audience from May 1985: 

“The Magisterium is called to safeguard the whole truth contained in divine revelation. To believe in a Christian way means to adhere to this truth by taking advantage of the guarantee of truth which comes to the Church through its institution by Christ himself. This holds true for all the faithful, and also for theologians and exegetes at the right level and in the proper degree. In this field the merciful providence of God is revealed for everyone. God has willed to grant us not only the gift of his self-revelation, but also the guarantee of its faithful preservation, interpretation and explanation, entrusting it to the hands of the Church.” (5)  

The question of why many things are not proclaimed infallibly is not because they are erroneous– which would be in direct contradiction to the guarantee given by Christ through the Holy Spirit– but because certain teachings and disciplinary measures are either contingent on historical circumstances, or the wisdom of the Church decrees that further theological exploration is needed before any irreformable definition is given. It may also be– as in the case of the doctrine of Mary Co Redemptrix–at least for now, that the term although a teaching of the magisterium is likely to cause too much confusion if it is raised to the level of infallibility. It seems safe to say that in a sense, infallibility “hovers” over all matters related to faith and morals and is there to be utilised when the necessary conditions apply. (6) 

St. John Paul II was fully aware of the necessity if doctrinal development along the lines proposed by St Vincent of Lerins and taught by Pope Francis, “Revealed truth, however, has been entrusted to the Church once and for all. It has reached its completion in Christ. Hence the profound significance of the Pauline expression “deposit” of faith. At the same time, this deposit allows for a further explanation and for a growing understanding as long as the Church is on this earth.” (7) 

It seems to me that the theologians, laypeople and priests who during the present Pontificate have sought to question or even correct the teachings of Pope Francis need to question their own understanding of the way in which God protects his Church. The question needs to be asked: “Is my understanding of doctrinal development and papal authority deficient rather than the Pope’s?” Cardinal Muller recently clarified that the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith doesn’t have the right to correct the Pope and thus that applies to every other person.  

Theology on its own is simply a science, but in order to grasp its greater depth it must be allied to a life of prayer and openness to the possibility that the Holy Spirit has more to reveal. Pope Francis several years ago stated: 

“The theologian who is satisfied with his complete and conclusive thought is mediocre. The good theologian and philosopher has an open, that is, an incomplete, thought, always open to the maius of God and of the truth, always in development, according to the law that St. Vincent of Lerins describes as: “annis consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate” (Commonitorium primum, 23: PL 50, 668): it is strengthened over the years, it expands over time, it deepens with age. This is the theologian who has an open mind. And the theologian who does not pray and who does not worship God ends up sunk in the most disgusting narcissism. And this is an ecclesiastical illness. The narcissism of theologians, of thinkers, is disgusting.” (8) 

I hope that these reflections will serve to show that the theological community must resist the temptation to create a parallel magisterium that does nothing more than foster disunity in the Church, and instead, begin to look into what the Spirit is saying to the Churches at this particular time. There can be no heresy emanating from the See of Peter; that is clear from doctrinal development over the centuries concerning papal primacy, and because of that, mistrust must turn to hope that the Lord is guiding his Bride to a better way of confronting and dealing with the sicknesses so visible of the world.  

1.     St John Paul II, “Ad Limina address to US Bishops”, October 22, 1983  

2.     Ibid  

3.     St John Paul II, “Address to Priests, Missionaries, Religious Brothers and Sisters”, Maynooth Ireland, October 1, 1979  

4.     St John Paul II, “Homily at Mass in Treviso”, June 16, 1985, The Pope Teaches 1985/7 p 194  

5.     St John Paul II “General Audience” May 1, 1985, Ibid, p 199  

6.     Cf. Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri no 18, Bl Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, no 10, Pius XII, Humani Generis, no 18  

7.     St John Paul II, “Ad Limina Address to US Bishops”, October 15, 1988  

8.     Pope Francis, Address to the Community of the Pontifical Gregorian University, April 10, 2014  

 * Stephen Walford is a theologian and lives in Southampton, England with his wife Paula and five children. Educated at Bristol University, he is the author of two books: Heralds of the Second Coming: Our Lady, the Divine Mercy, and the Popes of the Marian Era from Bl Pius IX to Benedict XVI (Angelico Press), and Communion of Saints: The Unity of Divine Love in the Mystical Body of Christ (Angelico Press). He has written articles for various publications on eschatological and mariological themes. He is also a pianist and teacher.  

 

 

Sins That Cry to Heaven for Vengeance:

1.     PhotoFunia-13bf58c0.jpgWillful murder

2.     The sin of Sodom

3.     Oppression of the poor

4.     Defrauding the laborer of his wages

Nine Ways of Being Accessory to Another's Sin

1.     By counsel

2.     By command

3.     By consent

4.     By provocation

5.     By praise or flattery

6.     By concealment

7.     By partaking

8.     By silence

9.     By defense of the ill done

 

 

 

“Gender Ideology”?  - How Queer!  Perhaps a case of Theological AIDS!  The Homosexual Lobby has mutated into the Homosexual Bureaucracy! 

50.   Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

51.   The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

52.  Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority. [All emphases added.]

Extra-Ordinary Synod on the Family from the Extra-Ordinary Pope Francis

         

 

The Mystical Body of Christ is the Roman Catholic Church, and it is therefore, both a divine and human institution.  The Church does not join “cultural revolutions.”

There is a real cultural revolution on the horizon of history at this time. The Church must, first and foremost, be part of it. In this perspective, it is essential to honestly recognize her weaknesses and shortcomings. Forms of subordination that have sadly characterized women's history should definitely be abandoned. A new beginning must be written in the ethos of the peoples, and this can be done by a renewed culture of identity and difference. 

Pope Francis the Pretender, addressing the Academy of Life, October 6, 2017

 

One just soul can attain pardon for a thousand sinners. 

St Margaret Mary Alacoque

 

 “Have confidence, I have overcome the world.” John 16:33

We have here a prophecy of four great facts: first, of a revolt, which shall precede the second coming of our Lord; secondly, of the manifestation of one who is called “the wicked one”; thirdly, of a hindrance, which restrains his manifestation; and lastly, of the period of power and persecution, of which he will be the author. [.....] It seems to need little proof that this revolt or apostasy is a separation, not from the civil, but from the spiritual order and authority; for the sacred writers, again and again, speak of such a spiritual separation; and in one place St. Paul seems expressly to declare the meaning of this word. He forewarns St. Timothy that in the later days, “some shall depart or apostatise from the faith” ; and it seems evident that the same spiritual falling away is intended by the apostasy in this place. The authority, then, from which the revolt is to take place is that of the kingdom of God on earth, prophesied by Daniel as the kingdom which the God of heaven should set up, after the four kingdoms should be destroyed by the stone cut out without hands, which became a great mountain and filled the whole earth; or, in other words, the one universal Church, founded by our Divine Lord, and spread by His Apostles throughout the world. [....] The three notes (of the apostasy) will be schism, heresy and the denial of the Incarnation. [....] The theory, that politics and religion have different spheres, is an illusion and a snare.  For history can only be truly read in the light of faith; and the present can only be interpreted by the light of revelation: for above the human wills which are now in conflict, there is a Will, sovereign and divine, which is leading all things to fulfill its own perfect end.

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, The Present Crisis of the Holy See

 

A very simple but profoundly True faithful Catholic observation that every bishop at Vatican II failed to see!

The implications are wider than those applied to marriage and the church. The partial/fullness breakdown implies that any good in anything can be considered “on the way to fullness.” The problem is that, since evil simply is the privation of good, and anything insofar as it has being at all is good, everything falls into this category. Hence, according to the Vatican II logic, any evil whatsoever can be regarded as, while not meeting the fullness of goodness, possessing a part of it and perhaps some “element of sanctification.” Metaphysically, it is either a meaningless analysis with no implications for morals or it covers (and in some sense excuses?) literally everything; e.g., rape may not be the fullness of conjugal union, but it expresses a part of the real desire for marital unity..... We already see this language applied to the divorced and remarried, but by the same logic it applies to any evil act you can think of. This is a major problem of Lumen Gentium that has to be rectified by a serious theological determination on the part of the church.

“BM”, posted on OnePeterFive commenting on the question of giving communion to Catholics living in adultery because there exists some “good” in their adulterous relationships.

 

Pope Francis the Sophist: He believes in “Absolute Truth” but denies that it can be know or communicated to other!

“We believers and of course above all we priests and we bishops believe in the Absolute, but each in their own way because each one has his own head and thought. So our absolute truth, shared by us all, is different from person to person. We do not avoid discussions in the case where our different thoughts confront each other. So there is a kind of relativism among us as well.”

Pope Francis, quoted by Eugenio Scalfari in La Repubblica, 10-10-17

 

Breaking News from Una Voce Malta: Modernist Vatican will only allow the traditional Mass to be said within the context of the New Church (beginning Advent 2018) if it accepts the Lectionary and Calendar of the Novus Ordo. This would mean that the traditional Catholic Mass would not be allowed within the context of New Church. Notice the section of the story about the Fraternity of St. Peter and the Institute of Christ the King. Also, the SSPX will only be given a “temporary exemption” “in order to make the reconciliation possible.” No other exemptions will be allowed! Note the smug establishment description of Una Voce of itself. Basically, the True Mass with Catholic worship and prayers and celebrations will only be possible in, what Fr. Malachi Martin called 20 years ago, the “Underground Church.” 

Peter Chojnowski, Ph.D.

 

Pope Francis rejects moral absolutes of God!

Papal adviser: We can no longer ‘judge people’ based on moral norms

LifeSiteNews | BOSTON, Massachusetts | October 6, 2017 -- Jesuit priest and papal confidant Father Anthony Spadaro said that Pope Francis holds that the Catholic Church can no longer set down general norms that apply to entire groups of people. 

Spadaro, editor of the Italian magazine La Civiltà Cattolica, made the comment today at a conference at Boston College where liberal Cardinals met with dissident theologians to discuss strategies for implementing Pope Francis’ controversial teachings on marriage and family in dioceses across the United States. 

The Jesuit priest told attendees that Amoris Laetitia, the Pope's 2016 teaching on marriage and family, recognizes that people living in "irregular" family situations, such as the divorced and remarried living in adultery, "can be living in God's grace, can love and can also grow in a life of grace."

"We must conclude that the Pope realizes that one can no longer speak of an abstract category of persons and ... [a] praxis of integration in a rule that is absolutely to be followed in every instance," he said, according to a report by National Catholic Reporter. 

"Since the degree of responsibility is not equal in all cases, the consequences or effects of a rule need not necessarily always be the same," he added. 

"It is no longer possible to judge people on the basis of a norm that stands above all," he concluded.

Jesuit Fr. James Keenan, a dissident theologian at Boston College and one of the main organizers of the October 5-6 event, said the conference will “fortify and further the ongoing reception of Amoris in the U.S."

He said that the event is about “setting an agenda for the future of the Church” in the U.S. 

Today’s discussions at the conference focused on Amoris Laetitia’s call for pastors to, in the words of the National Catholic Reporter, “listen to laypeople and respect decisions they make about their lives after undertaking a process of discernment.”

During his talk, Spadaro praised guidelines issued by the Sicilian Bishops Conference this summer that authorized priests to give Communion to the divorced and civilly remarried without annulment (i.e. in a state of public and permanent adultery). 

"The Sicilian document concludes with clarity that in some circumstances as regards the divorced and remarried, according to the evaluation of the confessor ... it is possible to admit absolution and to admit him or her to the Eucharist," Spadaro said.

The Boston College conference consisted of panel discussions between prelates, theologians, and canon lawyers, many of whom hold positions contrary to perennial Catholic teaching on marriage, the sacraments, conscience, and the existence of absolute moral norms. 

The conference comes about two weeks after 60 Catholic clergy and lay scholars from around the world issued a “Filial Correction” to Pope Francis for “propagating heresy.” They asserted that Pope Francis has supported heretical positions about marriage, the moral life, and the Eucharist that are causing a host of “heresies and other errors” to spread throughout the Catholic Church. 

 

Pope Francis wants to impose his ideology as a moral absolute!

Pope wants Catholic opposition to death penalty increased

AFP | October 11, 2017

AFP.jpgPope Francis speaks during a meeting with participants of the Pontifical Council at the Vatican on

Vatican City (AFP) - Pope Francis called Wednesday for categoric opposition to capital punishment to be written into an update of the most important guide to Catholic teaching.

His comments, which will be controversial with many fundamentalist Christians and some Catholics, came in a speech to clerics attending a conference in Rome to mark the 25th anniversary of the publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The catechism is a question and answer guide to what Catholics should think about a wide range of moral and social issues.

Acknowledging that the Vatican itself had historically had "recourse to the extreme and inhuman remedy" of judicial execution, Francis said past doctrinal errors should be put aside.

"We have to restate that, however grave the crime that may be committed, the death penalty is inadmissible because it attacks the inviolability and the dignity of the person," he said.

The execution of a human being was fundamentally against the teachings of Christ because, by definition, it excluded the possibility of redemption, he argued.

The Catholic church has steadily increased the strength of its opposition to the use of capital punishment in recent years.

Pope John Paul II made an appeal for a global consensus on abolition in 1999 and Francis's predecessor, Benedict XVI issued a similar call in 2011.

The 1992 text of the catechism says authorities should take appropriate measures in the interest of the common good without excluding the use of the death penalty in extremely grave cases.

More recent updates say justifying circumstances are now rare if not practically inexistant. And a version of the catechism aimed at younger people now includes a question, "Why is the Church opposed to the death penalty?"

Francis has made clear his own personal opposition to the death penalty on numerous occasions.

"It doesn't give justice to victims, but it feeds vengeance," he said in June 2016, arguing that the biblical commandment "thou shall not kill," applied to the innocent as well as the guilty.

 

 

Recant! Responding to the Lutheran Heresy of Pope Francis

OnePeterFive | October 11, 2017

Editor’s note: The following comes from Paolo Pasqualucci, a retired professor of philosophy of the law at the University of Perugia, Italy.

It is impossible to forget the stunning high praise Martin Luther’s personality and doctrine won from no less than a Roman pontiff – that is, from the reigning Pope Francis, during one of his customary impromptu speeches. Conversing in Italian and Spanish with the accredited journalists while flying back from Armenia, he answered a question on the relationship between the Catholic Church and the Lutheran world in the following way:

I think that Martin Luther’s intentions were not mistaken; he was a reformer. Perhaps some of his methods were not right, although at that time, if you read Pastor’s history, for example – Pastor was a German Lutheran who experienced a conversion when he studied the facts of that period; he became a Catholic – we see that the Church was not exactly a model to emulate. There was corruption and worldliness in the Church; there was attachment to money and power. That was the basis of his protest. He was also intelligent, and he went ahead, justifying his reasons for it.

Nowadays, Lutherans and Catholics, and all Protestants, are in agreement on the doctrine of justification: on this very important point he was not mistaken. He offered a “remedy” for the Church, and then this remedy rigidified in a state of affairs, a discipline, a way of believing, a way of acting, a mode of liturgy. But there was not only Luther: there was Zwingli, there was Calvin[.] … And behind them? The princes, “cuius regio eius religio”. We have to place ourselves in the context of the times. It is a history that is not easy to understand, not easy[.] …

Then things moved on. Today, the dialogue is very good and I believe that the document on justification is one of the richest ecumenical documents, one of the richest and most profound. Right? There are divisions but they also depend on the churches[.] [1]

This sort of scandal – a pope expressing praise and even admiration for a condemned heretic – was bound to happen after the official agreement reached (after many years of mutual “dialog”) between Catholics and Lutherans on the doctrine of justification. An agreement on this delicate matter, or Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church, was indeed signed on Oct. 31, 1999.

The existence of such an agreement implies that Luther had made no mistakes in his doctrine of justification – Martin Luther, the great heretic, one of the fiercest enemies of the Catholic Church who ever appeared on Earth! But now, after 500 years, we understand that his doctrine “on the very important point of the justification” appears to be so good as to be de facto adopted in the Joint Declaration itself!

The disgraceful Joint Declaration is an unbelievable document, something undoubtedly unique in the whole history of the Catholic Church, the only and true Church of Christ. We are now being told that there are articles of faith that we share with the Lutheran heretics, on the same matters the Lutherans have been misinterpreting and distorting for 500 years.  Of course, there remain some mutual differences, the Declaration tells us, but they are obviously minimized. Since they squarely contradict the contents of the various “joint declarations” scattered in the document, they are left rotting in the cellar, so to say, while the ancient condemnations are devalued to mere “salutary warnings to which we must attend in our teaching and practice”[2]!

Let’s look at some of the Lutheran tenets shared by this Declaration.

In §3, The Common Understanding of Justification, we read, no. 15: “Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works”[3].

Same paragraph, no. 17: it is jointly declared that “God’s saving action in Christ tells us that as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way” [4].

Finally, there is §4.1, Human Powerlessness and Sin in Relation to Justification, no. 19, where it is jointly stated, as if it were absolutely obvious to us Catholics, that “[j]ustification takes place solely by God’s grace”[5].

As far as good works are concerned, the Declaration proclaims, in §4.7, The Good Works of the Justified, no. 37: “We confess together that good works – a Christian life lived in faith, hope and love – follow justification and are its fruits.”[6] This last sentence appears to contradict the truths defined by the Council of Trent, which has solemnly reaffirmed the meritorious character of the good works for eternal life, given the fact that, according to Holy Scripture, they necessarily concur in obtaining it.

All this considered, we cannot be amazed at Pope Francis’s devastating proclamation that “on this very important point Luther was not mistaken.” Indeed, if he was not mistaken, his doctrine of the justification was correct. If it was theologically correct, then Luther was in the right – so much in the right that this doctrine of his is nowadays clearly purported by the Joint Declaration.

Can we accept this? No. As Catholics, as milites Christi, it is our duty to proclaim that this joint profession of faith with the Lutherans openly contradicts the true doctrine of the justification solemnly defined by the dogmatic Council of Trent. At the end of its Decree on Justification, 13 January 1547, we find 33 canons that recapitulate the doctrine expounded and inflict the related anatemata.

Canon no. 9, condemning the heresy of justification sola fide:

If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. [7]

Canon no. 11, condemning the related heresy of justification sola gratia:

If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema. [8]

Canon no. 24, condemning the heresy according to which good works are merely the fruits or consequences of justification obtained sola fide et sola gratia, with absolute exclusion of any cooperation on our part by means of our good works:

If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema. [9]

The anonymous “one” whose heretical opinions are here condemned obviously includes Luther and all those who share and will share his opinions on these matters. Judging from the abstracts quoted above, doesn’t the Joint Declaration seem to be quite clear in its reasoning Lutherana mente?

On this appalling Declaration there is much more to say, but here I want only to make this last point: we cannot forget that this Joint Declaration is the final result of a “dialog” entertained with the Lutherans over the last decades, with the encouragement and approval of Pope John Paul II and cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, afterward Pope Benedict XVI. As far as I know, they have never found anything wrong with the joint declarations of the Joint Declaration! They have, on the other hand, repeatedly credited Martin Luther with a “profound religiosity” and a “Christ-centered spirituality” [10]!

Notwithstanding, let’s pose a humble and simple question: Is Pope Francis’s public praise of Luther’s doctrine on justification, formally condemned as heretical by the Church, to be considered heretical, too?

In fact, declaring to the whole world that Luther “was not mistaken” in his doctrine on justification sola fide et sola gratia, Pope Francis forces us to draw the only possible conclusion in accordance with elementary logic: Luther’s doctrine must be right, given the fact that in itself it is not wrong. But if the Lutheran doctrine is right, then heresy is falsely changed into right doctrine, and we must conclude that Pope Francis is subscribing to what the Church has condemned as heresy for 500 years on end.

But no pope whatsoever can approve of a heresy. By divine command (Lk. 22:32), the sovereign pontiff has the duty to maintain and defend the depositum fidei; he simply cannot modify or alter it, nor is he allowed to pretend it does not exist. Therefore, he simply cannot profess or share errores in fide or haereses, not even as a “private theologian.” If such a disgraceful event happens, the clergy and the faithful are morally obliged to ask him to recant publicly and to reaffirm the right and perennial doctrine of the Church – as it happened in the fourteenth century with reigning pope John XXII.

Against the prevailing belief, the aging John XXII suddenly began to preach in his sermons that the souls of the beati had to wait until the day of the Final Judgment to be admitted to the visio beatifica. After long, passionate, and even violent public discussions, initially promoted by the pope himself, he recanted his opinion in front of three cardinals shortly before his death. His successor, Pope Benedict XII, with the Apostolic Constitution Benedictus Deus, on 29 January 1336 defined the doctrine of the immediate vision as the sole and unique doctrine to be believed by all Christians [11].

John XXII recanted his personal unwise opinion on a matter that had not yet been formally defined as an article of faith by the supreme authority of the Church. He had proposed but not imposed a new doctrine that was in the end rejected as erroneous by the great majority of the Catholics. The famous and solitary example of John XXII – of a papal recantation – serves us as a true precedent, and especially in this sense: that a pope must recant his wrong interpretations of doctrine, even if propagated by him as a mere “private theologian.”

But John XXII never praised heresies already and formally condemned by the Church, as Pope Francis has done. It seems that his unwise and unacceptable praise of Luther’s heresy has no real precedent in the history of the Church.

In fact, thanks to his impromptu remarks, Pope Francis has heavily damaged the authority of the whole Magisterium of the Church in the eyes of world public opinion. If Luther was not in the wrong, who was? Someone must surely have been in the wrong during that great and tragic chaos known as the Lutheran schism. To declare that the heresiarch was not in the wrong implies that all those who condemned him as a formal heretic were – i.e., the three popes that excommunicated him as well as the dogmatic Council of Trent. To say Luther “was not wrong,” then, simply means to contradict five hundred years of Church Magisterium, sapping the authority of this same Magisterium, guilty (we now understand) of condemning for five centuries the righteous, very religious, Christ-centered person Luther was supposed to be.

At this point, someone might perhaps ask the following question: Is it legitimate to say that he who openly shares a known heresy proves to be a heretic himself?

Yes, absolutely. He who approves in his mind of the errors professed by a known heretic becomes his accomplice, morally and spiritually speaking. When we approve something – action or notion – being fully aware of what we are doing, it becomes ours. The alien opinion I freely share becomes my own, first in my mind and then in the eyes of the world, if I inform the public of this approval of mine.

One further objection could be the following: Pope Francis’s peculiar statements were issued while conversing as a “private theologian.” Therefore, they possess no magisterial value. Why don’t we just ignore them?

It is true that Pope Francis’s so far multifarious declarations as a “private theologian” have no magisterial value. However, since they almost always deal with relevant aspects of our faith and morals, it is not possible to ignore them. The heterodox slant they often show has a profoundly negative effect on the faithful. The fact is that a pope, even when he is releasing an interview as a private individual, can never be considered a mere private person. Even when he is not speaking ex cathedra, a pope is always the pope, in the sense that every sentence of his is always studied and weighed as if pronounced ex cathedra. The pope always embodies a superior authority: he is the authority par excellence, his being the authority of an institution (the pontificate) that represents in this world no less than the divine authority and supernatural powers of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

It is in no way acceptable, therefore, for Pope Francis, even as a “private theologian,” privately or publicly, to praise and extol well known heresies, formally damned by the Magisterium of the Church.

For the salvation of his own soul and our own, to avert the legitimate wrath of God on all of us, to repair the offense inflicted against the honor of Our Lord, Pope Francis should publicly recant his imprudent utterances as soon as possible and repeat and confirm the solemn condemnation of Lutheranism in all its aspects.

Notes

[1]In-flight Press Conference of His Holiness Pope Francis from Armenia to Rome, papal flight, Sunday, 26 June 2016, w2.vatican.va, pg. 8/12. Emphasis added. The pope was speaking in Italian. The present article is my own non-literal translation into English of a longer article, originally posted by me in Italian on the blog iterpaolopasqualucci.blogspot.ie on 23 September 2017 and subsequently by Maria Guarini on her blog Chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.ie on 26 September 2017. The English text has been checked by 1Peter5 staff.

[2]Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, www.vatican.va, §5, The Significance and Scope of the Consensus Reached, no. 42, pg. 10/20. Emphasis added.

[3]Ibidem, pg 4/20. Emphasis added.

[4]Ibidem, pg 5/20. Emphasis added.

[5]Ibidem, pg 5/20. Emphasis added.

[6]Ibidem, pg 9/20. Emphasis added. The notion of “good works” hinted at here seems vague.

[7]The Catholic Encyclopedia, www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm, pg. 10/16. See also: DS 819/1559.

[8]Ibidem. See also: DS 821/1561.

[9]Op. cit., pg 11/18. See also: DS 834/1574.

[10]See John Paul II, letter of 31 Oct. 1983 (w2.vatican.va, letters of John Paul II, 1983); speech on 22 June 1996 (w2.vatican.va, speeches of John Paul II, 1996). And also Benedict XVI, speech in the Convent of Erfurt (w2.vatican.va, speeches of Benedict XVI, 2011).

[11]On this specific argument see Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, FSSPX, in a collection of six short articles entitled En cas de doute…, ‘Courrier de Rome,’ Jan 2017, LII, no. 595, pg. 9-11. These articles deal with the doctrinal issue of the “heretical pope” (si deprehendatur a fide devius). See also Giovanni XXII, entry of Enciclopedia Treccani, by Charles Trottman, It. transl. by Maria Paola Arena, pg 25/45, available online. For the magisterial documentation: DS 529-531/990-991; 1000-1002. Benedict XII also confirmed the traditional belief according to which the souls of the damned are precipitated into Hell by Our Lord immediately after their death (mox post mortem suam ad inferna descendunt).

 

Where does the morality underlying Amoris Laetitia” actually come from? 

Dignitatis Humanae (Religious Liberty) taught the novel doctrine that the dignity of man is so great that he does not have to believe the truth that God has revealed or obey his commandments! This article argues that the corrupt immorality of Pope Francis is provenby Dignitatis Humanae! What in fact is offered is material proof that Religious Liberty is heretical and a grave sin that overturns all Catholic morality!

In Amoris Laetitia, Francis' model of conscience empowers Catholics

National_Catholic_Reporter.jpgNational Catholic Reporter | Michael G. Lawler, Todd A Salzman | September 7, 2016

….The essential point for conscience as object-orientation is the relevance of the objective norm from the perspective of the inquiring subject in light of the understanding of all the circumstances in a particular historical cultural context. The implications of this perspective on the relationship between conscience as object-orientation and objective norms is that conscience should be guided by those norms but the authority of conscience is not identified with whether or not it obeys the objective norm. Otherwise, Dignitatis Humanae could not advocate for religious freedom, where "every man has the duty, and therefore the right, to seek the truth in matters religious in order that he may with prudence form for himself right and true [objective] judgments of conscience, under use of all suitable means."

If mere obedience to objective norms was the sole role of conscience, then conscience that leads people to follow religious traditions other than the Roman Catholic church could never be tolerated. That religious pluralism is recognized and affirmed in Dignitatis Humanae shifts authority from the objective norm to conscience as object-orientation, informed by objective norms, where the hermeneutical lens of the conscience as subject-orientation facilitates the process of understanding, judgment and decision of conscience. […..]

 

 

St. Joseph’s forgotten role in Fatima’s ‘Miracle of the Sun’

Voice of the Family | 10-5-2017 – The 13th of October 2017 will be the centenary of the Miracle of Sun and the final apparition of Our Lady of Fatima. Despite being essential for understanding the period of history that we are now living through, the details of these remarkable events are far too little known, including amongst Catholics. In this article, we wish to draw attention to the much-neglected role of St Joseph during that momentous event.

Following the Miracle of Sun, and at the culmination of Our Lady’s final apparition, St Joseph also appeared to the three young seers. Father John de Marchi, in his book The True Story of Fatima, describes it as follows:

To the left of the sun, Saint Joseph appeared holding in his left arm the Child Jesus. Saint Joseph emerged from the bright clouds only to his chest, sufficient to allow him to raise his right hand and make, together with the Child Jesus, the Sign of the Cross three times over the world. As Saint Joseph did this, Our Lady stood in all Her brilliancy to the right of the sun, dressed in the blue and white robes of Our Lady of the Rosary. Meanwhile, Francisco and Jacinta were bathed in the marvelous colors and signs of the sun, and Lucia was privileged to gaze upon Our Lord dressed in red as the Divine Redeemer, blessing the world, as Our Lady had foretold. Like Saint Joseph, He was seen only from His chest up. Beside Him stood Our Lady, dressed now in the purple robes of Our Lady of Sorrows, but without the sword. Finally, the Blessed Virgin appeared again to Lucia in all Her ethereal brightness, clothed in the simple brown robes of Mount Carmel.

This final apparition at Fatima points us towards three particular forms of devotion towards Our Lady that we are called to practice during this “final battle” against Satan. These are devotion to:

·       her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart

·       the Holy Rosary

·       the Brown Scapular.

However, it is of the greatest importance to note that the final apparition of Fatima also directs us towards the intercession of St Joseph, whom Our Lord intimately associated with Himself in his blessing of the world.

Father de Marchi wrote:

Our Lord, already so much offended by the sins of mankind and particularly by the mistreatment of the children by the officials of the county, could easily have destroyed the world on that eventful day. However, Our Lord did not come to destroy, but to save. He saved the world that day through the blessing of good Saint Joseph and the love of the Immaculate Heart of Mary for Her children on earth. Our Lord would have stopped the great World War then raging and given peace to the world through Saint Joseph, Jacinta later declared, if the children had not been arrested and taken to Ourem.

On the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, 8 December 1870, Blessed Pope Pius IX, following appeals received from bishops worldwide, had declared St Joseph to be Patron of the Universal Church, “in this most sorrowful time” when “the Church herself is beset by enemies on every side and oppressed by heavy calamities, so that impious men imagine that the gates of Hell are at length prevailing against her.”

Pope Leo XIII, to whom it was revealed in 1884 that Satan would be given, for a time, increased power to work for the destruction the Church, instituted a new devotion to St Joseph in his encyclical letter Quamquan pluries, promulgated on the Feast of the Assumption, 15 August 1889. The Supreme Pontiff wrote:

During periods of stress and trial – chiefly when every lawlessness of act seems permitted to the powers of darkness – it has been the custom in the Church to plead with special fervour and perseverance to God, her author and protector, by recourse to the intercession of the saints – and chiefly of the Blessed Virgin, Mother of God – whose patronage has ever been the most efficacious.

He further explained:

We see faith, the root of all the Christian virtues, lessening in many souls; we see charity growing cold; the young generation daily growing in depravity of morals and views; the Church of Jesus Christ attacked on every side by open force or by craft; a relentless war waged against the Sovereign Pontiff; and the very foundations of religion undermined with a boldness which waxes daily in intensity. These things are, indeed, so much a matter of notoriety that it is needless for Us to expatiate on the depths to which society has sunk in these days, or on the designs which now agitate the minds of men. In circumstances so unhappy and troublous, human remedies are insufficient, and it becomes necessary, as a sole resource, to beg for assistance from the Divine power.

More than a century after the promulgation of this encyclical the evils identified by Pope Leo XIII have intensified to a degree that would have been inconceivable to most people in 1889. Thousands of innocent children are slaughtered every day with the approval of the governments that ought to be defending them, the sanctity of marriage is defiled by divorce, adultery and contraception, and the bonds between parents and their children are being deliberately targeted for destruction by the most powerful states and institutions in the world. Worst of all, the Pope himself is responsible for the spread of heresies which are leading the flock away from Christ and towards eternal damnation.

Pope Leo XIII urged the faithful, just as Our Lady would do twenty-eight years later at Fatima, to combat these evils through the prayer of the Holy Rosary:

At this proximity of the month of October, which We have already consecrated to the Virgin Mary, under the title of Our Lady of the Rosary, We earnestly exhort the faithful to perform the exercises of this month with, if possible, even more piety and constancy than heretofore. We know that there is sure help in the maternal goodness of the Virgin, and We are very certain that We shall never vainly place Our trust in her. If, on innumerable occasions, she has displayed her power in aid of the Christian world, why should We doubt that she will now renew the assistance of her power and favour, if humble and constant prayers are offered up on all sides to her? Nay, We rather believe that her intervention will be the more marvellous as she has permitted Us to pray to her, for so long a time, with special appeals.

But then, once more anticipating Fatima, he directed the faithful also towards St Joseph:

But We entertain another object, which, according to your wont, Venerable Brethren, you will advance with fervour. That God may be more favourable to Our prayers, and that He may come with bounty and promptitude to the aid of His Church, We judge it of deep utility for the Christian people, continually to invoke with great piety and trust, together with the Virgin-Mother of God, her chaste Spouse, the Blessed Joseph; and We regard it as most certain that this will be most pleasing to the Virgin herself.

He further explained:

The divine house which Joseph ruled with the authority of a father, contained within its limits the scarce-born Church. From the same fact that the most holy Virgin is the mother of Jesus Christ is she the mother of all Christians whom she bore on Mount Calvary amid the supreme throes of the Redemption; Jesus Christ is, in a manner, the first-born of Christians, who by the adoption and Redemption are his brothers. And for such reasons the Blessed Patriarch looks upon the multitude of Christians who make up the Church as confided specially to his trust – this limitless family spread over the earth, over which, because he is the spouse of Mary and the Father of Jesus Christ he holds, as it were, a paternal authority. It is, then, natural and worthy that as the Blessed Joseph ministered to all the needs of the family at Nazareth and girt it about with his protection, he should now cover with the cloak of his heavenly patronage and defend the Church of Jesus Christ.

Therefore the Holy Father instituted a new prayer to said after the Holy Rosary throughout the month of October. He intended this prayer to be said, not just in October 1889, but in October every year. As we prepare for the centenary of the Miracle of Sun, let us learn the lesson of St Joseph’s apparition at Fatima, and turn to him for help and protection.

St Joseph, terror of demons, pray for us!

 

 

 

The Sin of Calumny takes two: a big mouth and an itching ear who share a common vice!

Cardinal Müller: I heard it from some houses here, that people working in the Curia are living in great fear: If they say one small or harmless critical word, some spies will pass the comments directly to the Holy Father, and the falsely accused people don’t have any chance to defend themselves. These people, who are speaking bad words and lies against other persons, are disturbing and disrupting the good faith, the good name of others whom they are calling their brothers.

The Gospel and the words of Jesus are very strong against those who denounce their brothers and who are creating this bad atmosphere of suspicion. I’ve heard that nobody speaks; everyone is a little afraid because they can be snitched on. It’s not the behavior of adult people, but that of a boarding school.

Cardinal Gerhard Müller: excerpt from interview on September 12 with Professor Claudio Pierantoni, one of the signatories of the recent “Filial Correction” of Pope Francis, published by LifeSiteNews on September 29, 2017

 

Apparently, the Homosexual Lobby is running the Vatican!

Psychiatrist: Archbishop behind Vatican sex-ed should be evaluated by sex abuse review board

LifeSiteNews | September 2, 2016 — A renowned psychiatrist who has worked with victims of priestly sexual abuse and priest abusers has strongly condemned the Vatican’s new sex education program as abusive and “the most dangerous threat to Catholic youth” he has seen in the past 40 years.

The gravely concerned psychiatrist is Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons, a counseling center director who has been a consultant to the Congregation for the Clergy at the Vatican and has served as adjunct professor at the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family at the Catholic University of America. In an essay published today by LifeSiteNews, Fitzgibbons warns that the material found in the Vatican’s newly-released sex ed program The Meeting Point “constitutes sexual abuse of Catholic adolescents” and contains pornographic images “similar to those used by adult sexual predators of adolescents.”

“In a culture in which youth are bombarded by pornography, I was particularly shocked by the images contained in this new sex education program, some of which are clearly pornographic,” Fitzgibbons wrote. “My immediate professional reaction was that this obscene or pornographic approach abuses youth psychologically and spiritually. … As a professional who has treated both priest perpetrators and the victims of the abuse crisis in the Church, what I found particularly troubling was that the pornographic images in this program are similar to those used by adult sexual predators of adolescents.”

Fitzgibbons called for Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, who oversaw the development and release of the program when he was head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, to be evaluated according to norms adopted by the United States Catholic Bishops in the wake of the sex abuse scandal. 

Paglia “should be required in justice to go through an evaluation by a review board as described in the Dallas Charter norms for placing youth at risk,” Fitzgibbons wrote. “Such a review is particularly important as he is now been put in charge of further teaching regarding sexuality and marriage at the John Paul II Institute for Family Studies.” [……]

 

 

 

Pope Francis, in corrupting the Sacrament of Matrimony, has perpetrated a terrible injustice to countless Catholics!

Many Catholic families had hoped that the Synod on the Family would address the serious problem of the divorce epidemic and its long-term damage to youth, innocent spouses, the sacrament of marriage, the culture, and the Church. (It did not!) The divorce plague has inflicted severe pain upon Catholic families worldwide. Married couples need to be encouraged by the Church not to give up on their marriages during stressful, unhappy times, and to persevere in loyalty to their marital vows. [.....] Over the past forty years, I have never worked with a Catholic marriage in which both spouses wanted a divorce. In the majority of marriages under stress, one spouse remains happy with the marriage, believes the conflicts can be resolved and is loyal to the sacramental bond.

The spouses who are not happy and who want to pursue divorce and a decision of nullity most often refuse to address their own weaknesses. Instead, they portray themselves as victims of insensitive treatment or emotional abuse.[......]

The majority of spouses who pursue divorce — in our experience with several thousand couples — have never worked on these issues. This explains, in part, why the national survey of divorced men and women, conducted by the Office of Survey Research at the University of Texas at Austin, found the honest response that only one in three divorced spouses claimed that both they and their ex-spouses worked hard enough to try to save their marriage. There is reason to be hopeful about the resolution of marital difficulties. In a major study from the University of Chicago among spouses who rated their marriages as very unhappy, 86 percent of those who persevered reported themselves as happily married five years later.

One grave danger to Catholic marriages and families from the changes made in canon law made by the Holy Father (without a careful study by a commission of experts) is that spouses will not be motivated to engage in the hard work of addressing personal psychological and spiritual weaknesses. Instead, they will pursue divorce and with a belief that they are entitled to a decision of nullity if they can meet the criteria cited, including the new one, “etcetera.”

With all due respect, the determination of nullity by only one priest or by a bishop after 30 to 45 days, is seriously flawed because they lack the proper mental health training to uncover and evaluate the numerous complex psychological conflicts that lead to a decision for divorce. This new process is a grave injustice and, therefore, a manifestation of a severe lack of mercy towards the sacrament of marriage, innocent spouses, children, and Catholic families.

In his closing talk at the Synod, the Holy Father criticized bishops and priests, whom he claimed hide behind rigid doctrines and ignore wounded families. In fact, his radical change in canon law in regard to annulments, made prior to the Synod, will weaken and harm Catholic marriages and families. [.....]

Rick, Fitzgibbons, Psychological Science and the Evaluation of Nullity, published by “The Catholic Thing”

 

Apparently, the morality underlying Amoris Laetitia does not forbid lying!

In fact I hear many comments – they are respectable for they come from children of God, but wrong – concerning the post-synod apostolic exhortation. To understand Amoris Laetitia you need to read it from the start to the end. Beginning with the first chapter, and to continue to the second and then on … and reflect. And read what was said in the Synod

A second thing: some maintain that there is no Catholic morality underlying Amoris Laetitia, or at least, no sure morality. I want to repeat clearly that the morality of Amoris Laetitia is Thomist, the morality of the great Thomas. You can speak of it with a great theologian, one of the best today and one of the most mature, Cardinal Schönborn. 

I want to say this so that you can help those who believe that morality is purely casuistic. Help them understand that the great Thomas possesses the greatest richness, which is still able to inspire us today. But on your knees, always on your knees…

Pope Francis, Attributing the vulgar immorality of Amoris Laetitia to St. Thomas, interview Sept 28, 2017

 


 

“Artificial, superficial, clear divisions” like, Married and Not-married?

My great joy as a result of this document resides in the fact that it coherently overcomes that artificial, superficial, clear division between ‘regular’ and ‘irregular.’

Cardinal Christoph Schonborn, on Amoris Laetitia

 

Faith: the principle cause and sign of unity in the Church; Dogma is the proximate Rule of Faith!

The apostles and their successors are God's vicars in governing the Church which is built on faith and the sacraments of faith. Wherefore, just as they may not institute another Church, so neither may they deliver another faith, nor institute other sacraments. 

St. Thomas Aquinas, ST III, q. 64, a. 2, ad 3

 

 

Francis_Black_Eye_7.jpg

 

 

Pope Francis lays the groundwork to overturn Humanae Vitae

“The welfare of the family is decisive for the future of the world and that of the Church… The anthropological-cultural change, which today affects all aspects of life and requires an analytical and diversified approach, does not allow us to limit ourselves to pastoral and missionary practices that reflect forms and models of the past. We must be conscious and passionate interpreters of the wisdom of faith in a context in which individuals are less sustained than in the past by social structures, in their affective and family life. In the clear purpose of remaining faithful to the teaching of Christ, we must look with the intellect of love and with wisdom of realism to the reality of the family today, in all its complexity, in its lights and in its shadows.”

Pope Francis, in his new Motu Proprio, Summa Familiae Cura, referencing his own document which overturned all Catholic morality, Amoris Laetitia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rights Created from Duties - In the conflict of Law - The “Ends” Determine the Law that Must be Followed!

    Let us examine these words of Aquinas. First, he says that “since a precept of law is binding, it is about something to be done.” This is a truth to which we seldom if ever ad­vert, namely, that although right and duty are correlatives, duty is ultimately the basis of right - not vice versa. And this is so because right and duty are grounded upon law. Law, as we saw, is a directive norm of action which carries with it an obligation. It binds us to do or avoid something. The Eternal, Natural and Positive Laws are ordinations, commands of reason. The fundamental notion of law then is obligation - not the concept of right. We have rights because we have duties. Since a precept of law is binding it is about something to be done.

    Secondly, “that a thing must be done arises from the ne­cessity of some end.” Whenever a man does anything, i.e., whenever he acts as a reasonable being, he acts for an end - to obtain some good; and so the necessity of his doing anything as a man must come from the end. However, because man is a rational being he is free and consequently the necessity exercised by any particular end or good cannot be psychological; it must be moral. That is, man’s will re­mains free but he is obliged morally, he has a duty to seek the end - and that because a precept of law binds him to do so.

    Rights, therefore, are founded upon duties, duties are grounded upon Natural or Positive Law, and because these laws are themselves based upon the Eternal Law all rights and duties have their ultimate source in the same  Eternal Law.

Rev. John A. Driscoll, O.P., S.T.Lr., Ph.D., Rights and Duties - Their Foundation

 

 

Luther the Malicious Liar in his own words!

What harm could it do if a man told a good lusty lie in a worthy cause and for the sake of the Christian Churches?...

To lie in a case of necessity or for convenience or in excuse—such lying would not be against God; He was ready to take such lies on Himself. 

Martin Luther, Lenz: Briefwechsel, vol. 1, page 373 & 375

Rage acts as a stimulant to my whole being. It sharpens my wits, puts a stop to the assaults of the Devil and drives out care. Never do I write or speak better than when I am in a rage. If I wish to compose, write, pray and preach well, I have to be in a rage. 

Martin Luther, “Table Talk,” 1210

 

Remembered Ecumenical Outrages as we approach the 500th anniversary

Pope Benedict greeting the spiritual sons of Luther the Liar

As the Bishop of Rome, it is deeply moving for me to be meeting representatives of Council of the Lutheran Church of Germany here in the ancient Augustinian convent in Erfurt. This is where Luther studied theology. This is where he was ordained a priest in 1507. Against his father’s wishes, he did not continue the study of Law, but instead he studied theology and set off on the path towards priesthood in the Order of Saint Augustine. On this path, he was not simply concerned with this or that. What constantly exercised him was the question of God, the deep passion and driving force of his whole life’s journey. “How do I receive the grace of God?”: this question struck him in the heart and lay at the foundation of all his theological searching and inner struggle. For him theology was no mere academic pursuit, but the struggle for oneself, which in turn was a struggle for and with God. “How do I receive the grace of God?” The fact that this question was the driving force of his whole life never ceases to make an impression on me. 

Pope Benedict to the Lutherans in Germany, September 22, 2011

 

Before thou inquire, blame no man; and when thou hast inquired, reprove justly. 

Ecclesiasticus 11:7

 

Charity seeks not its own convenience.  We must give the spur to this jade of a body of ours, to make it trot on and get forwards.  The good soldier dies in battle, the good sailor on the sea, and the good minister of the sick in the hospital. 

St. Camillus of Lellis

 

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity  

Tradition: From an Objective Truth Received reduced to a Subjective Impression of Historical Events

Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received, and wherein you stand; By which also you are saved, if you hold fast after what manner I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all, which I also received. 

St. Paul, 1 Cor. 15: 1-3

 

Concluding and summing up, we can therefore say that Tradition is not the transmission of things or words, a collection of dead things. Tradition is the living river that links us to the origins, the living river in which the origins are ever present, the great river that leads us to the gates of eternity. 

Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience, April 26, 2006

 

Both the Catholic and Protestant interpretation of Christianity have meaning each in its own way; they are true in their historical moment... Truth becomes a function of time... fidelity to yesterday’s truth consists precisely in abandoning it, in assimilating it into today’s truth. [.....] The truth is whatever serves progress, that is, whatever serves the logic of history.

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology: Building Stones for a Fundamental Theology

 

“Nothing is more insolent than a fact.” 

Dom Gueranger

 

 

Liturgical Instability: the Official Novus Ordo Norm! Pope Francis sets the stage for liturgical in(en)culturation.  After all, shouldn’t a memorial meal be serving local cuisine?

Vatican publishes Magnum Principium giving bishops’ conferences greater control over liturgical translations

Catholic Herald | Staff Reporter | 9 Sep 2017

Catholic_Herald.jpgBishops' conferences will have main responsibility for translations, with the Holy See approving them

Pope Francis has published a motu proprio Magnum Principium granting bishops’ conferences greater control over the translation of liturgical texts.

Until now, Canon 838 has stated that “The direction of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church which resides in the Apostolic See and, according to the norm of law, the diocesan bishop.”

The second paragraph said it was “for the Apostolic See to order the sacred liturgy of the universal Church, publish liturgical books and review their translations in vernacular languages, and exercise vigilance that liturgical regulations are observed faithfully everywhere”.

According to the new formulation, the Apostolic See has the task of “reviewing the approved adaptations under the law of the Episcopal Conference, as well as of ensuring that liturgical norms are observed everywhere faithfully”.

In other words, the power of the Curia is reduced from authorising to revising translations of the texts approved by episcopal conferences.

The motu proprio calls for episcopal conferences to “faithfully” prepare liturgical books in the local language, which must be “appropriately adapted within the defined limits” and published “after the confirmation of the Holy See”.

 

More Timely as Time Goes By:

Excerpt from Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission Open Letter Addressed to Bishop Joseph McFadden, June 29, 2011

The recent document Universae Ecclesiae published by the Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia Dei (PCED) is the instruction on the application of Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, which concerns the use of the 1962 Missal.  That Missal has been variously known as the Missal of John XXIII, the Bugnini transitional Missal of 1962, the Indult Missal, and now, as the “extra-ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo expressing a single ‘lex orandi/lex credendi’ of the later Bugnini edition, which is now called the “ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo.  The 1962 Missal can be identified by any number of descriptive names except, the “received and approved” immemorial Roman rite of the Mass.  It is impossible that the 1962 Missal could be the “received and approved”2 immemorial Roman rite because it is impossible that the immemorial Roman rite could ever be reduced to the status of an Indult, or treated as a grant of legal privilege entirely as a matter of Church discipline subject to the free, independent and arbitrary will of the legislator, or even worse, as the proper subject matter for experimentation by “liturgical experts” staffing “liturgical committees.” The 1962 Missal has never been afforded the standing of immemorial custom by the authorities in Rome and it has proven itself to be just as unstable and transitory today as it was when first published in 1962.  We agree with Pope Benedict that there exists no antithesis between the 1962 Missal and the 1970 edition of that rite.

The Masses offered at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission are offered according to the immemorial Roman rite of Mass before Rev. Annibale Bugnini, as secretary for the Commission for Liturgical Reform, overturned the principles of organic liturgical development and subjected the “received and approved” Roman rite of Mass to artificial manmade theories of liturgical innovation.  These theories, that are clearly foreign to the Catholic sense of liturgical development, are of the same kind used by the Protestants in the 16th century, and later by the Jansenists in the 17th and 18th centuries, to employ liturgy as a means of changing doctrine.3  Since we do not use the 1962 Missal, we are not subject to the PCED, whose particular competency is to govern the use of that edition with its anticipated updates in the ongoing “reform of the reform,” nor are we subject to the restrictive norms established for the use of that Missal.

We have some small appreciation for the challenge facing Pope Benedict in his attempt to correct the Novus Ordo liturgical problems in the Latin rite, problems which he himself described as “a liturgical collapse,”4 but he is not without a share in the responsibility for the current state of affairs.  Implementing his ‘hermeneutic of continuity/discontinuity’ by employing a Hegelian dialectic to create a new liturgical synthesis between the Bugnini Missal of 1962 and the Bugnini Missal of 1970 will only produce another artificial construct by liturgical innovators.  We are not opposed to these “reform of the reform” corrections and anticipate a general benefit for all Catholics when, for example, the high altar is restored to its proper position in Catholic sanctuaries, and such abuses as communion in the hand are ended, but why should these corrections be paid for by a compromise of immemorial tradition?  No one should expect Catholics who have been faithful to tradition over the last 50 years to willingly subject themselves to another liturgical edition of “musical chairs” with no idea where they will end up when the music stops.  Liturgical instability has become the norm.  It is for this reason that we did not consider any suggestion to become an Indult community by Bishop Rhoades.

Ss. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission claims that by virtue of our baptism, whose character both empowers and obligates us to profess our Catholic faith and to worship God in the external forum, we have the right to the “received and approved” immemorial traditions of our Church that are perfectly consonant with that faith we hold in the internal forum and by which our faith is visibly manifested, most importantly, we possess  the right to have the “received and approved rites customarily used in the administration of the sacraments” (Council of Trent).  We further hold that, although these rights can be duly regulated by properly constituted authority, they can never be conditionally exercised by required concessions or compromises of Catholic faith or morals. 

We further publically avow that we have made every effort to insure that our consciences, according to Catholic moral principles, have been properly formed and that they are both true and certain on these questions that pertain to faith and worship; and have made every effort to conform our actions to our conscience which we as Catholics are morally obliged to do. […..]


 

 

Earth Worship is “Moral” Imperative for Pope Francis Ideology

Pope blasts climate change doubters: cites moral duty to act

Associated Press | NICOLE WINFIELD | 9-11-2017

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE -- Pope Francis has sharply criticized climate change doubters, saying history will judge those who failed to take the necessary decisions to curb heat-trapping emissions blamed for the warming of the Earth.

Francis was asked about climate change and the spate of hurricanes that have pummeled the U.S., Mexico and the Caribbean recently as his charter plane left Colombia on Sunday and flew over some of the devastated areas.

"Those who deny this must go to the scientists and ask them. They speak very clearly," he said, referring to experts who blame global warming on man-made activities.

Francis said scientists have also clearly charted what needed to be done to reverse course on global warming and said individuals and politicians had a "moral responsibility" to do their part.

"These aren't opinions pulled out of thin air. They are very clear," he said. "Then they (leaders) decide and history will judge those decisions."

Francis has made caring for the environment a hallmark of his papacy, writing an entire encyclical about how the poor in particular are most harmed when multinationals move into exploit natural resources. During his visit to Colombia, Francis spoke out frequently about the need to preserve the country's rich biodiversity from overdevelopment and exploitation.

For those who have denied climate change, or delayed actions to counter it, he responded with an Old Testament saying: "Man is stupid."

"When you don't want to see, you don't see," he said.

 

 

The Novus Ordo Church in general and Pope Francis in particular, seeks unity as a goal of “dialogue” at the expense of truth. In so doing, their “dialogue” is not dialogue at all but one big “distortion of reality.”

I wish to sum up Plato's stance in three brief statements: The First Statement: To perceive, as much as possible, all things as they really are and to live and act according to this truth (truth, indeed, not as something abstract and "floating in thin air" but as the unveiling of reality)- in this consists the good of man; in this consists a meaningful human existence. The Second Statement: All men are nurtured, first and foremost, by the truth, not only those who search for knowledge- the scientists and the philosophers.  Everybody who yearns to live as a true human being depends on this nourishment.  Even society as such is sustained by the truth publicly proclaimed and upheld.  The Third Statement: The natural habitat of truth is found in interpersonal communication.  Truth lives in dialogue, in discussion, in conversation - it resides, therefore, in language, in the word.  Consequently, the well-ordered human existence, including especially its social dimension, is essentially based on the well-ordered language employed.  A well-ordered language here does not primarily mean its formal perfection, even though I tend to agree with Karl Kraus when he says that every correctly placed comma is decisive.  No, a language is well ordered when its words express reality with as little distortion and as little omission as possible. 

Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power

 

 

More Timely as Time Goes By:

Excerpt from Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission Open Letter Addressed to Bishop Joseph McFadden, June 29, 2011

The recent document Universae Ecclesiae published by the Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia Dei (PCED) is the instruction on the application of Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, which concerns the use of the 1962 Missal.  That Missal has been variously known as the Missal of John XXIII, the Bugnini transitional Missal of 1962, the Indult Missal, and now, as the “extra-ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo expressing a single ‘lex orandi/lex credendi’ of the later Bugnini edition, which is now called the “ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo.  The 1962 Missal can be identified by any number of descriptive names except, the “received and approved” immemorial Roman rite of the Mass.  It is impossible that the 1962 Missal could be the “received and approved”2 immemorial Roman rite because it is impossible that the immemorial Roman rite could ever be reduced to the status of an Indult, or treated as a grant of legal privilege entirely as a matter of Church discipline subject to the free, independent and arbitrary will of the legislator, or even worse, as the proper subject matter for experimentation by “liturgical experts” staffing “liturgical committees.” The 1962 Missal has never been afforded the standing of immemorial custom by the authorities in Rome and it has proven itself to be just as unstable and transitory today as it was when first published in 1962.  We agree with Pope Benedict that there exists no antithesis between the 1962 Missal and the 1970 edition of that rite.

The Masses offered at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission are offered according to the immemorial Roman rite of Mass before Rev. Annibale Bugnini, as secretary for the Commission for Liturgical Reform, overturned the principles of organic liturgical development and subjected the “received and approved” Roman rite of Mass to artificial manmade theories of liturgical innovation.  These theories, that are clearly foreign to the Catholic sense of liturgical development, are of the same kind used by the Protestants in the 16th century, and later by the Jansenists in the 17th and 18th centuries, to employ liturgy as a means of changing doctrine.3  Since we do not use the 1962 Missal, we are not subject to the PCED, whose particular competency is to govern the use of that edition with its anticipated updates in the ongoing “reform of the reform,” nor are we subject to the restrictive norms established for the use of that Missal.

We have some small appreciation for the challenge facing Pope Benedict in his attempt to correct the Novus Ordo liturgical problems in the Latin rite, problems which he himself described as “a liturgical collapse,”4 but he is not without a share in the responsibility for the current state of affairs.  Implementing his ‘hermeneutic of continuity/discontinuity’ by employing a Hegelian dialectic to create a new liturgical synthesis between the Bugnini Missal of 1962 and the Bugnini Missal of 1970 will only produce another artificial construct by liturgical innovators.  We are not opposed to these “reform of the reform” corrections and anticipate a general benefit for all Catholics when, for example, the high altar is restored to its proper position in Catholic sanctuaries, and such abuses as communion in the hand are ended, but why should these corrections be paid for by a compromise of immemorial tradition?  No one should expect Catholics who have been faithful to tradition over the last 50 years to willingly subject themselves to another liturgical edition of “musical chairs” with no idea where they will end up when the music stops.  Liturgical instability has become the norm.  It is for this reason that we did not consider any suggestion to become an Indult community by Bishop Rhoades.

Ss. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission claims that by virtue of our baptism, whose character both empowers and obligates us to profess our Catholic faith and to worship God in the external forum, we have the right to the “received and approved” immemorial traditions of our Church that are perfectly consonant with that faith we hold in the internal forum and by which our faith is visibly manifested, most importantly, we possess  the right to have the “received and approved rites customarily used in the administration of the sacraments” (Council of Trent).  We further hold that, although these rights can be duly regulated by properly constituted authority, they can never be conditionally exercised by required concessions or compromises of Catholic faith or morals. 

We further publically avow that we have made every effort to insure that our consciences, according to Catholic moral principles, have been properly formed and that they are both true and certain on these questions that pertain to faith and worship; and have made every effort to conform our actions to our conscience which we as Catholics are morally obliged to do. […..]

 

 


 

Pope Francis the Nazi declares that the Novus Ordo “irreversible” while condemning Catholics faithful to tradition for believing that the immemorial Roman rite is “irreversible”!!!

The conciliar liturgical reform should not be “reformed”

Francis’ important speech marks the path of his pontificate: the reform’s full reception has not yet been completed; it is not about revisiting the choices made, but of knowing better the underlying reasons that led to the present liturgical books

Vatican Insider | andrea tornielli | vatican city | 8/25/2017

The significant speech delivered on the morning of August 24 by Pope Francis during the audience to the participants of the National Liturgical Week, 70 years after the birth of the Liturgical Action Center, is the second compelling intervention of the week after the message delivered for the Day of the Migrant and Refugee. While the first predictably generated interest, comments and controversy, the latter remained confined to the internal ecclesial debate, even though it is a document that contained some very important and fixed points. (sic?)

“With magisterial authority” Francis defines as “irreversible” the liturgical reform approved by Paul VI and implemented in the post-council. This does not mean that everything has worked out well in the last few decades, or that the reform has been fully implemented. In fact, Pope Bergoglio observes: “Today, there is so much work to do in this direction: we need to rediscover the reasons behind the decisions made with the liturgical reform, overcoming unfounded and superficial readings, partial revelations and practices that disfigure it.” Words that seem to refer to certain and not-uncommon liturgical abuses (“practices that disfigure”), and to unilateral traditionalist-inspired readings that would throw the baby out with the bath water and crystallize a stage of the Catholic liturgy (the missal before Pius XII’s reform in 1954) by defining it as “mass of all time” and considering it to be irreversible. 

Pope Francis was also clear about another point. He said, “It is not about rethinking the reform by reviewing its choices, but about knowing better the underlying reasons, even through historical documentation, how to internalize its inspirational principles and observe the discipline that governs it.” In this way, even without mentioning it directly, he is saying no to a liturgical “reform of the reform”, as some ecclesial branches have long been hoping for. 

The words “reform of the reform” had been used by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who in the interview book God and the world. A conversation with Peter Seewald (2001) urged, “To defeat the temptation of a despotic practice, which sees liturgy as man’s property, and awake the inner sense of the sacred. The second step will be to assess where too cumbersome cuts have been made, to restore the connections with past history in a clear and organic way. I myself have spoken in this sense of a “reform of the reform”. But, in my opinion, all this must be preceded by an educational process able to stem the tendency to mortify the liturgy with personal inventions.” As we see, Cardinal Ratzinger, then Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, hoped for a “Reform of the Reform,” but pointed out already 16 years ago that it should be preceded by an “educational process.” 

During his pontificate (2005-2013), Benedict XVI, however, dropped this expression, inviting also then-Prefect of the Congregation of Divine Worship, the Spanish Cardinal who he had appointed, Antonio Cañizares Llovera, not to use it. Making new changes from above, by decree, without being preceded by an “educational process” from below, would have been useless if not counterproductive. For this reason, Pope Ratzinger chose to communicate by setting an example - emphasizing the centrality of Eucharist and adoration - but without imposing, since he himself had pointed out that new reforms and liturgical changes would have created confusion among the people of God. 

The most significant liturgical decision of his pontificate was to grant, with the motu proprio Summorum pontificum (2007), the liberalization of John XXIII’s missal, the one used before (from 1962) the Council and during the Second Vatican Council. Pope Ratzinger tried to prevent the obvious perplexity that his initiative could have awaken, by writing a letter to the bishops in which he explained that the new missal from the post-conciliar liturgical reform “is and remains the normal form” to celebrate Mass. That ancient one, Benedict XVI observed, is nothing more than an extraordinary form of the same Roman rite. The Pope’s liberalization intent was to serve as a mutual enrichment between the two forms of the rite, enhancing on the one hand the sacredness and the verticality of the pre-conciliar form, and on the other, highlighting the richness of the scriptures and the participation of the faithful of the post-conciliar form. 

It must be admitted that this has not happened, possibly because of closures and responsibilities coming from both sides. Also this area didn’t lack disagreements, abuses, and obsessions: there are those who have disregarded the pontiff’s indication by restricting if not opposing faithful who were still tied to the ancient ritual. And, on the other hand, others who bluntly disobeyed Benedict’s instructions, and instead of using the 1962 missal, reprinted and used the one in place before 1954, thus omitting Pius XII’s reforms (i.e.: the Bugnini’s reforms beginning in 1955). The same Pope Ratzinger, author of the liberalizing motu proprio, has never publicly celebrated according to the ancient missal.  

Today his successor Francis first recalls the profound and inseparable bond between the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform, explaining once again that the two events did not “bloom suddenly” but were the result of a long preparation” with a process that goes from St. Pius X, passes though Pius XII and arrives through the Council until Blessed Paul VI. A path confirmed and sealed by Pope Montini’s successors. 

Francis then recalls the first constitution approved by the fathers of Vatican II, the Sacrosanctum Concilium, “whose general lines of reform responded to real needs and to the concrete hope of renewal; it wanted a living liturgy for a Church made alive by the mysteries it celebrated”. It was about expressing in a renewed way the perennial vitality of the Church in prayer, so that faithful would not assist as outsiders and mute spectators to the mystery of Faith, but, by understanding it well through the rites and prayers, would participate in the sacred action consciously, spiritually, actively.” 

And recalls the post-conciliar liturgical reforms have not yet been fully received: “The reformation of the liturgical books under the decrees of Vatican II have started a process that requires time, faithful reception, practical obedience, and wise implementation first on the part of the ordained ministers, but also of other ministers, singers and all those who participate in the liturgy.”. “Liturgical education of pastors and faithful” is therefore a “challenge” to be addressed “always and again”. Pope Bergoglio, using Paul VI’s words a year before his death, reiterates that, “The time has now come to let the disruptive ferments that are equally pernicious in one sense or the other, and to implement fully, according to its right inspiring criteria, the reform approved by us in application of the decisions [votes] of the council”. He then indicates the direction he intends to take during his pontificate, which is to rediscover the reasons of the decisions made, to “interiorize the principles that inspired them and to observe the discipline that regulates” the liturgical reform.  

Finally, by entering into the theme of the National Liturgical Week, Francis emphasized that “liturgy is alive” because of the living presence of Him who “has destroyed death with his own death and by resurrecting has given us life again.” Without the real presence of the mystery of Christ, there is no liturgical vitality. (Tornielli’s comment inserted between the quotes of Pope Francis)  “Just as without a heartbeat there is no human life, so too without the pulsating heart of Christ there is no liturgical action. What defines the liturgy is in fact the implementation, in the holy signs, of Jesus Christ’s priesthood, that is, the offering of his life until being nailed onto the cross. A constantly present priesthood through rites and prayers, especially in His Body and Blood, but also in the person of the priest, in the proclamation of the Word of God, in the assembly gathered in prayer in his name.” Sufficiently clear words about Eucharist’s central role. 

The Pontiff then expressed peculiar emphasis on the people of God: “by its nature the liturgy is in fact ‘popular’ and not clerical” because “it is an action for the people but also of the people.” As many liturgical prayers recall, it is God’s action in favor of his people, but also the action of the people who listen to God who speak and react by praising him, welcoming him, accepting the inexhaustible source of life and mercy that flows from the holy signs. The Church in prayer gathers all those whose hearts listen to the Gospel, without excluding anyone The small and the great are called, as are the rich and the poor, children and old people, the healthy and the sick, the just and sinners. The “popular” reach of Liturgy reminds us that it is inclusive and not exclusive... We must not forget, therefore, that liturgy is primarily to express the piety of the whole people of God that is prolonged then by pious exercises and devotions that we know by the name of popular religion, which should be valued and encouraged in harmony with the liturgy.” Even in this case, some crucial points have emerged given the re-emergence of a certain neo-clericalism with its formalism and attempts of accentuating the “separation between priest and people. 

 

COMMENT:

Whether in the Ordinary or Extra-ordinary flavor: The “Assembly… Celebrates.”

General Instruction on the Novus Ordo Mass

The Lord’s supper or Mass is the sacred assembly or congregation of the people of God gathering together, with a priest presiding, in order to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.  For this reason, Christ’s promise applies supremely to such a local gathering of the Church: “Where two or three come together in my name, there am I in their midst.”Article 7(1969)

 “Almost any believing Protestant of whatever denomination would be able to assent to such a definition.” Msgr. Klaus Gamber

 

                   The “full reception (of the Novus Ordo) has not yet been completed” in that traditional Catholics have not accepted it which is the sign of the Church’s Indefectibility. It has been nearly fifty years and to speak as if it is simply a question of not knowing or understanding the “liturgical richness” of the Novus Ordo is a claim that makes you wonder about the mental status of the claimant. We know much more about the liturgical reform of the Philistine Bugnini (and alleged Freemason) and his confederates than at any time since the Vatican Council II. The more we know, the uglier the reform becomes in both its theoretical intent and its practical implementation. 

                   “With magisterial authority” Pope Francis calls the Novus Ordo “irreversible” while at the same time he insults those who consider the immemorial Roman Rite, the “mass of all time,….  irreversible.” He argues that we “need to rediscover the reasons behind the decision made with the liturgical reform.” What a liturgical dummy! There has been tremendous liturgical research going into detail exactly how those who hated the immemorial Roman rite reasoned and what they intended. In its best light, it is an incredibly mindless remark unless the problem is refined malice which would explain everything?

                   It is a Dogma of Faith, a formal object of divine and Catholic faith, that “no pastor in the churches whomsoever has the authority change the received and approved rites customarily used in the solemn administration of the sacraments into other new rites.” That includes Pope Francis although some may argue that he is not a “pastor.” Therefore, by the term, “magisterial authority,” Pope Francis is referring to his human authority he possesses by his grace of state and not to the infallible authority of the Church’s Magisterium. For the Church’s Magisterium has already spoken on this question and cannot be gainsaid. It is not the first time Pope Francis has denied divinely revealed truth. Just as he claims to hold the same doctrinal understanding of Justification as Luther, he undoubtedly believes that Luther was right regarding his understanding of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. As said before, we known far better now than our fathers who recoiled from and rejected the Novus Ordo based primarily upon their Catholic sensus fidei grouned upon the virtue of true religion and the gift of piety. We now add to this the Dogmas of our Faith supported with extensive historical documentation, and most importantly, the evil fruit that the evil tree has produced since its unnatural birth. 

                   The treating of the 1962 Bugnini reform missal as an Indult or grant of legal privilege was an indirect yet definite statement that it is not the immemorial Roman rite for no immemorial tradition can be so ignominiously relegated. It is disingenuous to complain that Catholics faithful to tradition, “bluntly disobeyed Benedict’s instructions, and instead of using the 1962 missal, reprinted and used the one in place before 1954, thus omitting Pius XII’s reforms.”  No one “disobeyed” Benedict because no one argued that Benedict could not do whatever he wanted to to the 1962 Bugnini transitional Novus Ordo missal which is not the immemorial Roman rite. What man has created, man can dispose as he pleases. The 1962 Missal occurred at the mid-point of the liturgical revolution and was as much a man-made product as its 1969 version from which both share a common provenance.  Those who reject the Bugnini missal in any of its forms are free as faithful Catholics to use the immemorial Roman rite which Benedict did not possess the authority to restrict because it is a necessary attribute of the Faith to which every baptized Catholic possesses by right.

                   The Bugnini/Montini reform was defined officially as a “memorial meal” because that is what it is. When conservative Catholics complained about the definition, it was changed but the thing itself defined remained the same. It is a memorial meal. Vatican II, a “pastoral council,” has been a pastoral failure by any objective standard of measurement. Pope Francis proclaims that “time is greater than space” meaning that we should look at, or rather over-look, the immediate disasters as temporary adjustments from which the blossoms of spiritual renewal will someday bloom throughout the Church. This is like the perpetual promises of the Communists and their “five year plans” that just never worked as predicted. The failures were always blamed at those who did not sufficiently embrace the theories or apply them with enough rigor. It is therefore impossible to argue cold facts with the likes of Pope Francis. For the liberal, the theory is normative, it is the facts that keep going askew.         

                   The liturgical innovations were implemented by the salami technique, slice by slice, foisting the reforms with a false appeal to authority always defended by an army of lies. Children raised in the traditional Roman rite and exposed to the Novus Ordo in all its “majesty” recoil in horror as if being embracing a corpse.  Having been fairly warned they will not likely be fooled by the re-education agenda that Pope Francis proposes.  Anyway, just who is going to “re-educate” them. 

                   Lastly, a  “memorial meal” is “inclusive.”  The Mass is, and necessarily so, exclusive. It excludes those who have not been baptized, those who do not profess the true faith, those who guilty of heresy, schism or apostasy. It excludes from sacramental reception all those in mortal sin, such as those living in adultery and homosexuals. The claim that the “liturgy is primarily to express the piety of the whole people of God” is not true. The liturgy is primarily the sacrificial worship of God (through the priest as an alter Christus) by God established by God that the faithful are called upon to offer themselves in union with the divine Victim for the forgiveness of sins, trespasses and omissions for themselves and all the faithful, both living and dead. The primary end of the Mass is the glory of God. All this has nothing in common with the man-made Protestant memorial meal of Pope Francis. There is a “separation between priest and people” and the separation is made by God who calls the man to the priestly vocation and sacramentally seals him with an indelible character. All this non-sense of Pope Francis is being dictated to the faithful from the supreme “neo-clericalist” who cannot stand to see God worshiped according to the “received and approved rites” of the Catholic Church. The Novus Ordites are just a new version of Iconoclasts. They wish to destroy the images by which our Faith is known and communicated to others.

 

 

 

Pope Francis “has a strong belief in” Gaia Cult Earth Worship – he can even hear the earth weeping!

Pope Francis to World Leaders: ‘Listen to the Cry of the Earth’

“As Christians, we want to offer our contribution to overcoming the ecological crisis that humanity is experiencing. (The ecological crisis) calls us to a profound spiritual conversion.”


EcoWatch | Lorraine Chow | Aug. 30, 2017

Pope Francis, who has a strong belief in the science of climate change, called upon world leaders on Wednesday to “listen to the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor, who suffer most because of the unbalanced ecology.”

Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew I, the head of the Orthodox Christian Church, will issue a joint message to commemorate the annual “World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation” on Friday, the Associated Press reported.

In 2015, the Pope designated Sept. 1 as “a precious opportunity to renew our personal participation in this vocation as custodians of creation,” framing the preservation of the environment as a moral responsibility.

Similarly, Bartholomew—who backed Francis' 2015 encyclical on the environment, Laudato Si—once said:

“There has never been so much turmoil on our planet, but there has never been greater opportunity for communication, cooperation and dialogue. Basic human rights such as access to water, clean air and sufficient food should be available to everyone without distinction or discrimination. We are convinced that we cannot separate our concern for human dignity, human rights or social justice from the concern for ecological preservation and sustainability.”

Pope Francis has long pressed for strong climate action. In May, during their meeting at the Vatican, the pontiff gifted President Trump a copy of the climate encyclical right as POTUS considered whether the U.S. should exit from the Paris climate agreement. Trump, a notorious climate skeptic who does not agree with Francis about the global phenomenon, apparently didn't take the Pope's message to heart—he controversially withdrew the U.S. from the Paris accord just a month later.

 

 

Just as the denial on one Dogma destroys the Faith, the overturning of one commandment destroys the entire moral law!

Amoris Laetitia is a ticking ‘atomic bomb’ set to obliterate all Catholic morality: philosopher

Life_Site.jpgLIfeSiteNews | August 23, 2017— One of the world’s top Catholic philosophers has called Pope’ Francis’ Exhortation Amoris Laetitia a ticking “theological atomic bomb” that has the capacity to entirely destroy all Catholic moral teaching. 

Dr. Josef Seifert, founding rector of the International Academy of Philosophy in Liechtenstein, said the only way the theological bomb can be defused is by Pope Francis retracting at least one major error in his 2016 Exhortation. 

With philosophical precision, Seifert pinpoints the main problem in Amoris Laetitia (AL) to a passage that he said suggests that God actively wills people, in certain situations, to commit acts that have always been considered objectively evil by the Catholic Church. 

He quotes directly from passage 303 of Amoris where Pope Francis speaks about “irregular couples” living in habitual adultery who decide to forgo following the Six Commandment. 

“Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel,” wrote Pope Francis in his 2016 Exhortation. 

“It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal,” he added. 

Commented Seifert: “In other words, besides calling an objective state of grave sin, euphemistically, ‘not yet fully the objective ideal,’ AL says that we can know with ‘a certain moral security’ that God himself asks us to continue to commit intrinsically wrong acts, such as adultery or active homosexuality.”

But Seifert pointed out that if just one intrinsically immoral act, such as adultery, can be permitted and even willed by God, then there is nothing stopping such a principle being applied to “all acts considered ‘intrinsically wrong.’”

If it is true that God can want an adulterous couple to live in adultery against the Sixth Commandment, he said, then there is nothing to keep the other nine Commandments from falling. 

According to such logic, Seifert continued, evils such as murder, abortion, euthanasia, suicide, lying, thievery, perjury, and betrayal can be “justified in some cases and ‘be what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.’”

“Does not pure logic demand that we draw this consequence from this proposition of Pope Francis?” the philosopher said. 

Seifert said that if his above question is answered in the affirmative, then the “purely logical consequence of that one assertion of Amoris Laetitia seems to destroy the entire moral teaching of the Church.”

The professor’s concern is similar to one of the dubia (questions) raised by the four cardinals to Pope Francis last year asking him to clarify the meaning of his Exhortation. 

Question two of five asks the Pope if, with the publication of Amoris, does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor that there are “absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?” 

In his paper, Seifert pleaded with Pope Francis to withdraw and condemn the notion that God sometimes wills people to commit intrinsically evil acts.  [.....]

 

 “In Freemasonary it is allowed to kill.”

Nedeljko Čabrinović, 1895 –1916, one of seven young men of a Masonic secret society known as the Black Hand who conspired to assassinate Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo in June 1914, on October 12, 1914 at his trial for the murders.

 

 

Serra_Statue_1.jpg

Amid Nationwide Controversy, St. Junípero Serra Statue Vandalized in LA

CNA/EWTN News | August 22, 2017 | LOS ANGELES — A statue of St. Junípero Serra in a Los Angeles public park appeared to have been vandalized last week in a time of national debate about historical statues.

The statue portrays the Franciscan friar in a favorable light, with his arm on the shoulder of an indigenous child. The park is across the street from the Mission San Fernando in the Mission Hills community of Los Angeles. The mission was founded by Father Fermin Lasuen, another Franciscan, in 1797.

A picture of the statue was circulated on social media, showing it spray-painted red with the word “murder” written on the priest in white.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Novus Ordo is irreversible because it lost its way long ago.  There can be no retracing its steps. The fruit of the Novus Ordo is apostasy.  It is a memorial meal with an ever changing menu. Pope Francis does not possess the authority to overturn Dogma, therefore, he cannot overturn God's liturgical laws any more than he can overturn God's laws regarding Sodomy, Fornication and Adultery.

After this magisterium, after this long journey, we can affirm with certainty and with magisterial authority that the liturgical reform is irreversible. 

Pope Francis the Destroyer, addressing the 68th Italian National Liturgical Week, August 24, 2017

 

“If anyone shall say that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church accustomed to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments may be disdained or omitted by the minister without sin and at pleasure, or may be changed to other new rites by any church pastor whomsoever : let him be anathema.”

Council of Trent, Den. 856

   

 

Whether in the Ordinary or Extra-ordinary flavor: The “Assembly…Celebrates.”

General Instruction on the Novus Ordo Mass

The Lord’s supper or Mass is the sacred assembly or congregation of the people of God gathering together, with a priest presiding, in order to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.  For this reason, Christ’s promise applies supremely to such a local gathering of the Church: “Where two or three come together in my name, there am I in their midst.”

Article 7(1969)

COMMENT: “Almost any believing Protestant of whatever denomination would be able to assent to such a definition.” 

Msgr. Klaus Gamber

 

 

Why is it that so often Curial Officials only make truthful comments in secular interviews and not in official Vatican documents?

 “They (documents of Vatican II) are not about doctrines or definitive statements, but, rather, about instructions and orienting guides for pastoral practice. One can continue to discuss these pastoral aspects after the canonical approval, in order to lead us to further clarifications.”

“This is certainly not a conclusion on our part, but it was already clear at the time of the Council. The General Secretary of the Council, Cardinal Pericle Felici, declared on 16 November 1964: ‘This holy synod defines only that as being binding for the Church what it declares explicitly to be such with regard to Faith and Morals.’ Only those texts assessed by the Council Fathers as being binding are to be accepted as such. That has not been invented by ‘the Vatican,’ but it is written in the official files themselves.”

“The secretary for the Unity of Christians said on 18 November 1964 in the Council Hall about Nostra Aetate: ‘As to the character of the declaration, the secretariat does not want to write a dogmatic declaration on non-Christian religions, but, rather, practical and pastoral norms.’ Nostrae Aetate does not have any dogmatic authority, and thus one cannot demand from anyone to recognize this declaration as being dogmatic. This declaration can only be understood in the light of tradition and of the continuous Magisterium.

“For example, there exists today, unfortunately, the view — contrary to the Catholic Faith — that there is a salvific path independent of Christ and His Church. That has also been officially confirmed last of all by the Congregation for the Faith itself in its declaration, Dominus Jesus. Therefore, any interpretation of Nostrae Aetate which goes into this direction is fully unfounded and has to be rejected.”

Archbishop Guido Pozzo, secretary, Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia Dei, Interview German newspaper Die Zeit, August 2016

 

 

What's Going on in Bergoglio's Pontifical Academy for Life Anyway?

Is there no end to the anti-life scandals at Pontifical Academy for Life?  Or is it Death?

Karolinska Institute is NOT a “Medical University.” It’s a Big Auschwitz for unborn children.  

In the selection of its members, the Vatican must also consider the institution that the member represents. In the case of Katarina Le Blanc that institution is the Karolinska Institute – one of the world’s foremost promoters of abortion and abortifacients. The Institute also is involved in non-therapeutic fetal experimentation and the provision of fetal tissues from aborted babies.  Its eugenic mind-set is illustrated by its pioneer promotion of human embryo pre-implantation diagnosis and in-vitro Fertilization.   

Either remove Le Blanc and all the other anti-life characters which infest the “academy” or just shut the growing hell-hole down! Enough is enough!

Randy Engel, U.S. Coalition for Life, July 19, 2017

 

 

Building Bridges to Hell – The homosexual agenda is not seeking to be left alone in their vices but seeking to have their vices recognized as perfectly normal moral behavior!

Many of the gay persons who I met that week revealed a deep spirituality and faith. And most interesting of all, the people I met asked that we, as ministers of the Church, be people of compassion and understanding, and not be afraid to teach the message of the Gospel and the Church with gentleness and clarity even in the midst of ambiguity of lifestyle, devastation, despair and hostility. As a Church and as pastoral ministers, we still have a long journey ahead of us as we welcome strangers into our midst and listen to them.

Over the past weeks, I read many of the critical comments of Jesuit Fr. James Martin’s book, Building a Bridge. I shook my head in bewilderment several times as I read venom and vitriol in some of the critiques. It is one thing to critique and raise questions. It is another to condemn, disparage and dismiss. I sensed palpable fear and anger in some of the negative commentaries. I made it a point to read the book in one sitting last weekend. I was astounded that what I read in commentaries, blogs, some bishops’ messages, had very little to do with what I considered to be very mild, reflections offered by a well-known Jesuit priest who simply invited people to build bridges with those who are on distant shores. Fr. Martin’s book is not dogma or doctrine. It is by no means revolutionary. It is merely an invitation to sit down and talk, face-to-face with people we consider to be different.

Whereas Fr. Martin and Pope Francis invite us to build bridges and become instruments of dialogue, critics of both Fr. Martin, the Pope, and many of us who support Pope Francis thrive in erecting high, impenetrable walls and noisy echo chambers of monologue.

Fr. Thomas Rosica, Vatican spokesman for English speaking people, addressing homosexuals in their haven, Most Holy Redeemer Church, in San Francisco.  Fr. Rosica is defending to homosexuals the homosexual friendly book by the Jesuit, Fr. James Martin.  Homosexuals cannot praise each other too highly.  Martin’s book does not endorse any Catholic ministries that support conversion, repentance, or chastity.  He endorses only those organizations that reject Catholic morality, such as, New Ways Ministry.

The National Catholic Reporter said:

It was a real-life horror story that galvanized Martin to write this manuscript. Just weeks after the massacre of 49 people at Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando (by a conflicted Moslem Homosexual), he was offered the Bridge Building award from New Ways Ministry, a longtime Catholic advocacy and ministry organization for LGBT Catholics and their families. Building a Bridge is an expansion of his acceptance speech. […..] Part of what motivated Martin to accept the Bridge Building Award was the inadequate response offered by Catholic bishops to the Pulse tragedy. Although many church leaders expressed both horror and sorrow, only a handful of the more than 250 Catholic bishops used the words gay or LGBT,” Martin writes. “I found this revelatory.”

 

 

Homosexuals define themselves by their “sexual tendencies”! If they did not, no one would know they are homosexuals!

I am glad that we are talking about “homosexual people” because before all else comes the individual person, in his wholeness and dignity. And people should not be defined only by their sexual tendencies: let us not forget that God loves all his creatures and we are destined to receive his infinite love.

Pope Francis

 

 

Let the reader accept the reasonable fact that the Pontiffs who pronounced these decrees (on No Salvation Outside the Church) were perfectly literate and fully cognizant of what they were saying. If there were any need to soften or qualify their meanings, they were quite capable of doing so..... Dogmas of the faith, like Outside the Church There is No Salvation, are truths fallen from heaven. The very point of a dogmatic definition is to DEFINE PRECISELY and EXACTLY what the Church means by the very words of the formula. If it does not do this by those very words in the formula then it has failed in its primary purpose – to define – and was pointless and worthless. ANYONE who says that we must interpret or understand the meaning of a dogmatic definition, in a way which contradicts its actual wording, is denying the whole point of Papal Infallibility and dogmatic definitions. They who insist that infallible DEFINITIONS must be interpreted by non-infallible statements (e.g., from theologians, catechisms, etc.) are denying the whole purpose of these infallible truths fallen from heaven. They are subordinating the dogmatic teaching of the Holy Ghost to the re-evaluation of fallible human documents,thereby inverting their authority, perverting their integrity and denying their purpose".

Fr. James Wathen, Who Shall Ascend?

 

 

Wisdom is only possible for those who hold DOGMA as the Rule of Faith!

Besides, every dogma of faith is to the Catholic cultivated mind not only a new increase of knowledge, but also an incontrovertible principle from which it is able to draw conclusions and derive other truths. They present an endless field for investigation so that the beloved Apostle St. John could write at the end of his Gospel, without fear of exaggeration: “But there are also many other things which Jesus did: which if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.”

The Catholic Church, by enforcing firm belief in her dogmas—which are not her inventions, but were given by Jesus Christ—places them as a bar before the human mind to prevent it from going astray and to attach it to the truth; but it does not prevent the mind from exercising its functions when it has secured the treasure of divine truth, and a “scribe thus instructed in the kingdom of heaven is truly like a man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old.” He may bring forth new illustrations, new arguments and proofs; be may show now applications of the same truths, according to times and circumstances; he may show new links which connect the mysteries of religion with each other or with the natural sciences as there can be no discord between the true faith and true science; God, being the author of both, cannot contradict Himself and teach something by revelation as true which He teaches by the true light of reason as false. In all these cases the householder “brings forth from his treasure now things and old.” They are new inasmuch as they are the result of new investigations; and old because they are contained in the old articles of faith and doctrine as legitimate deductions from their old principles.

Fr. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The Church of Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Saviour, on the Parable of the Scribe

 

Wisdom of St. Francis of Assisi

The springs of action are to be found in belief, and conduct ultimately rests upon conviction.

St. Francis of Assisi, on the grounds of moral acts

 

There are many who if they commit sin or suffer wrong often blame their enemy or their neighbor. But this is not right, for each one has his enemy in his power, - to wit, the body by which he sins. Wherefore blessed is that servant who always holds captive the enemy thus given into his power and wisely guards himself from it, for so long as he acts thus no other enemy visible or invisible can do him harm. 

St. Francis of Assisi, on Mortification

 

How much interior patience and humility a servant of God may have cannot be known so long as he is contented. But when the time comes that those who ought to please him go against him, as much patience and humility as he then shows, so much has he and no more. 

St. Francis, on Patience

 

And let no man be bound by obedience to obey any one in that where sin or offence is committed. 

St. Francis of Assisi, Letter to all the Faithful

 

 

Women “religious” support taxpayer funded Abortions by Planned Parenthood!

Don’t repeal, don’t reduce the ACA, say US sisters

NationalCathlicReporter | Dan Stockman | Jul 25, 2017

As the United States Senate prepares to again tackle health care reform this week, senators will have the voices of thousands of sisters to consider.

A letter signed by 7,150 women religious from all 50 states was delivered to the Senate on July 24, urging senators to vote against any bill that repeals the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or cuts Medicaid. The effort was coordinated by NETWORK, a Catholic social justice lobby.

“The mission of Catholic Sisters has always been to serve our nation’s most vulnerable people,” Social Service Sr. Simone Campbell, executive director of NETWORK and the letter’s author, said in a statement. “As such, we are united in opposition to the current Republican healthcare proposals.”

A similar letter in 2010 was key to the passage of the Affordable Care Act.

The letter states: 

As Catholic women religious, we have witnessed firsthand the moral crisis of lack of quality, affordable healthcare in this country. We have seen early and avoidable deaths because of lack of insurance, prohibitive costs, and lack of access to quality care. We fought for the expansion of coverage in the Affordable Care Act because we saw the life-giving value of crucial healthcare programs such as Medicaid. This program covers over 70 million Americans, including children, pregnant women (and nearly half of all births in this country), people with disabilities, people struggling to get by, and senior citizens. Further, some of our fellow women religious rely on Medicaid in nursing homes when we can no longer care for our sisters at home.

The House of Representatives passed a bill in May to repeal and replace parts of the Affordable Care Act, but the Senate has twice failed to pass its own version. As of July 24, senators still did not know whether they would be voting on the House bill, one of the two Senate bills or a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act without a replacement.

 

Pope Francis, the leader of the Homosexual Lobby!

U.S. bishop criticizes Vatican advisor for being part of ‘LGBT lobby…within the church’

LifeSiteNews | SPRINGFIELD, Illinois | July 27, 2017 -- A U.S. bishop said that the outcry from “within the Church” against his statement prohibiting unrepentant homosexuals from receiving Communion or a public funeral within his diocese shows the existence of a “strong…LGBT lobby” that has infiltrated the Church.

Illinois Bishop Thomas Paprocki singled out newly-appointed Vatican advisor Father James Martin, S.J., for getting “a lot wrong” in his criticism of the bishop’s June 12 decree.

Father Martin is a Jesuit and editor-at-large of America magazine. In his June 2017 book titled Building a Bridge he urges Catholics who identify as “gay” to begin “conversations” with their bishops so as to move the Church in the direction of eventually accepting homosexuality as part of God’s creation.

When Bishop Paprocki issued his decree on same-sex “marriage”  last month, Fr. Martin responded to it with a series of critical tweets.

Tweeted the priest as quoted by the bishop: “If bishops ban members of same-sex couples from funeral rites, they must also ban divorced and remarried Catholics without annulments ... women who have children out of wedlock, members of straight couples living together before marriage, anyone using birth control ... To focus only on LGBT people, even those in same-sex marriages, without a similar focus on the sexual or moral behavior of straight people is in the words of the Catechism a ‘sign of unjust discrimination.’”

Paprocki said that the “fact that there would be such an outcry against this decree is quite astounding and shows how strong the LGBT lobby is both in the secular world as well as within the church.”

He went on to address specific points raised by Fr. Martin, saying that the priest “gets a lot wrong in those tweets.”

“[C]anon law prohibits ecclesiastical funeral rites only in cases of ‘manifest sinners’ which gives ‘public scandal,’ and something such as using birth control is a private matter that is usually not manifest or made public,” he said.  [......]

 

..the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer. [...] Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists.

St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique (Our Apostolic Mandate), August 15, 1910

 

Pius XII - the man responsible for planting the seed of liturgical destruction!

Fr. Annibale Bugnini had been making clandestine visits to the Centre de Pastorale Liturgique (CPL), a progressivist conference centre for liturgical reform which organized national weeks for priests.
Inaugurated in Paris in 1943 on the private initiative of two Dominican priests under the presidency of Fr. Lambert Beauduin, it was a magnet for all who considered themselves in the vanguard of the Liturgical Movement. It would play host to some of the most famous names who influenced the direction of Vatican II: Frs. Beauduin, Guardini, Congar, Chenu, Daniélou, Gy, von Balthasar, de Lubac, Boyer, Gelineau etc.

It could, therefore, be considered as the confluence of all the forces of Progressivism, which saved and re-established Modernism condemned by Pope Pius X in Pascendi.
According to its co-founder and director, Fr. Pie Duployé, OP, Bugnini had requested a “discreet” invitation to attend a CPL study week held near Chartres in September 1946.

Much more was involved here than the issue of secrecy. The person whose heart beat as one with the interests of the reformers would return to Rome to be placed by an unsuspecting (?) Pope (Pius XII) in charge of his Commission for the General Reform of the Liturgy.
But someone in the Roman Curia did know about the CPL – Msgr. Giovanni Battista Montini, the acting Secretary of State and future Paul VI – who sent a telegram to the CPL dated January 3, 1947. It purported to come from the Pope with an apostolic blessing. If, in Bugnini’s estimation, the Roman authorities were to be kept in the dark about the CPL so as not to compromise its activities, a mystery remains. Was the telegram issued under false pretences, or did Pius XII really know and approve of the CPL? [.....]

This agenda (for liturgical reform) was set out as early as 1949 in the Ephemerides Liturgicae, a leading Roman review on liturgical studies of which Fr. Annabale Bugnini was Editor from 1944 to 1965.
First, Bugnini denigrated the traditional liturgy as a dilapidated building (“un vecchio edificio”), which should be condemned because it was in danger of falling to pieces (“sgretolarsi”) and, therefore, beyond repair. Then, he criticized it for its alleged “deficiencies, incongruities and difficulties,” which rendered it spiritually “sterile” and would prevent it appealing to modern sensibilities.
It is difficult to understand how, in the same year that he published this anti-Catholic diatribe, he was made a Professor of Liturgy in Rome’s Propaganda Fide (Propagation of the Faith) University. His solution was to return to the simplicity of early Christian liturgies and jettison all subsequent developments, especially traditional devotions.
These ideas expressed in 1949 would form the foundational principles of Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium. For all practical purposes, the Roman Rite was dead in the water many years before it was officially buried by Paul VI.

Dr. Carol Byrne, How Bugnini Grew Up under Pius XII

 

“A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit.”

Matt 7:18

Major player at Vatican II confesses to concealing homosexual sex life

Life_Site.jpgLifeSiteNews | February 17, 2017— 93-year-old Gregory Baum, a famed Canadian Catholic ex-priest, has in his latest book revealed that he secretly led an active homosexual life for decades.

Baum, who was a peritus or expert at the Second Vatican Council, reportedly composed the first draft of the conciliar document Nostra aetate, the Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions. Baum advocated for the elimination of the Church’s efforts to encourage Jews to recognize Christ as the Messiah and has since pushed social justice and liberation theology.

The influential cleric reveals candidly in The Oil Has Not Run Dry: The Story of My Theological Pathway, “I did not profess my own homosexuality in public because such an act of honesty would have reduced my influence as a critical theologian.” “I was eager to be heard as a theologian trusting in God as salvator mundi and committed to social justice, liberation theology, and global solidarity.”

Baum was also influential in the Catholic Church in Canada despite his openly heretical positions on sexuality, which he published in various journals. His public dissent from the 1968 declaration of the Church maintaining the ban on contraception — Humanae Vitae — was instrumental in the Canadian bishops’ own dissent from the encyclical of Pope Paul VI. As the foremost expert on the Canadian bishops’ dissent, Monsignor Vincent Foy has written, “If it had not been for the black shadow of Baum over Winnipeg, his influence over some Bishops, the Canadian theological establishment and pressure groups, the Winnipeg Statement of the Canadian Bishops on Humanae Vitae would not have refused to endorse the teaching of the encyclical as it did.”

In his new book, Baum writes, “I was 40 years old when I had my first sexual encounter with a man. I met him in a restaurant in London. This was exciting and at the same time disappointing, for I knew what love was and what I really wanted was to share my life with a partner.”

He says he considered resigning from the priesthood but didn’t go through with the formality, rather choosing to announce it in the national newspaper. He later married a divorced ex-nun who he says “did not mind that, when we moved to Montreal in 1986, I met Normand, a former priest, with whom I fell in love.” Normand, he explains, “is gay and welcomed my sexual embrace.”

Dr. Michael Higgins, the vice president for Mission and Catholic Identity at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Connecticut, in a tribute to Baum published in Commonweal in 2011 noted his key role during Vatican Council II. “The council was the making of Gregory Baum,” he wrote. “He served in various capacities on the commissions charged with preparing documents. … Beginning his work in November 1960, he concluded it with the council’s end in December 1965, an apprenticeship that culminated in his writing the first draft of Nostra aetate.” [....]

 

 

 

Homosexual Heresy - The Great Vatican Silence

·  “We must clearly, explicitly and reservedly say: yes, there is a strong homosexual underground in the Church ... such circles in the Church strongly oppose the truth, morality and Revelation, cooperate with enemies of the Church [and] incite revolt against Peter of our times.

·  “It is for [his] accuracy of opinion that he is so vehemently opposed, or even hated by some in the Church, especially by members of the homolobby which represents the very center of internal opposition against the Pope.”

·  “If homolobbyists are allowed to act freely, [in Poland] in a dozen or so years they may destroy entire congregations and dioceses — like in the USA, where priestly vocation is more and more now called a gay profession.”

·  “The global network of the homolobbies and homomafias must be counterbalanced by a network of honest people. An excellent tool that can be used here is the Internet, which makes it possible to create a global community of people concerned about the fate of the Church, who have resolved to oppose homoideology and homoheresy. The more we know, the more we can do.”

·  “This is about the Church’s to be or not to be. If homolobbyists are allowed to act freely, in a dozen or so years they may destroy entire congregations and dioceses – like in the USA, where the priestly vocation is more and more now called a gay profession (particularly with reference to American Jesuits), or like in Ireland, where men are hesitant about joining the emptying seminaries for fear of being suspected of suffering from some disorders.”

·  “The Church does not generate homosexuality, but falls victim to dishonest men with homosexual tendencies, who take advantage of its structures to follow their lowest instincts. Active homosexual priests are masters of camouflage. They are often exposed by accident. ... The real threat to the Church are cynical homosexual priests who take advantage of their functions on their own behalf, sometimes in an extraordinarily devious way. Such situations cause great suffering to the Church, the priestly community, the superiors. The problem is indeed a very difficult one.” F. Józef Augustyn

Fr. Dariusz Oko, Ph.D., WITH THE POPE AGAINST THE HOMOHERESIES

 

 

Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission refused the offer of becoming an Indult community.  Our reply to the Bishop of Harrisburg was that the immemorial ecclesiastical traditions are in fact necessary attributes of the Faith without which it can neither be known nor communicated to others.  These traditions are not nor have ever been matters of mere Church discipline, but are in fact grounded in Catholic dogma, the formal object of divine and Catholic Faith.  Therefore, the immemorial Roman rite of Mass can never in fact be reduced to ignominious status of an Indult or grant of legal privilege.  Those who have accepted the 1962 Indult Mass as a grant of legal privilege have already relinquished any claim of right and have no grounds of complaint if what is described in this article comes to be.

Vatican rumblings: Pope Francis aiming to end Latin Mass permission

LifeSiteNews | ROME | July 26, 2017 – Sources inside the Vatican suggest that Pope Francis aims to end Pope Benedict XVI’s universal permission for priests to say the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), also known as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. While the course of action would be in tune with Pope Francis’ repeatedly expressed disdain for the TLM especially among young people, there has been no open discussion of it to date.

Sources in Rome told LifeSite last week that liberal prelates inside the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith were overheard discussing a plan ascribed to the Pope to do away with Pope Benedict’s famous document that gave priests freedom to offer the ancient rite of the Mass.

Catholic traditionalists have just celebrated the tenth anniversary of the document, Summorum Pontificum. Pope Benedict XVI issued it in 2007, giving all Latin Rite priests permission to offer the TLM without seeking permission of their bishops, undoing a restriction placed on priests after the Second Vatican Council.

The motu proprio outraged liberal bishops as it stripped them of the power to forbid the TLM, as many did. Previously priests needed their bishop’s permission to offer the TLM.

Additionally, Summorum Pontificum stated that wherever a group of the faithful request the TLM, the parish priests should willingly agree to their request.

The overheard plans are nearly identical to comments from an important Italian liturgist in an interview published by France’s La Croix earlier this month. Andrea Grillo a lay professor at the Pontifical Athenaeum of St Anselmo in Rome, billed by La Croix as “close to the Pope,” is intimately familiar Summorum Pontificum. Grillo in fact published a book against Summorum Pontificum before the papal document was even released.

Grillo told La Croix that Francis is considering abolishing Summorum Pontificum. According to Grillo, once the Vatican erects the Society of Saint Pius X as a Personal Prelature, the Roman Rite will be preserved only within this structure. "But [Francis] will not do this as long as Benedict XVI is alive.” […..]

 

 

Worth recalling how the Catholic universities in the U.S. were destroyed.  This was orchestrated by the president of Notre Dame University, Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, who divorced Catholic education from Catholic doctrine and Catholic morality at the Land O’Lakes Conference in 1967.  These schools have not simply been secularized but have in fact become anti-Catholic.  A Catholic student is much more likely to keep his faith in a secular university than in a “Catholic” university.  This revolution by Hesburgh was unopposed by the Catholic hierarchy!

50 years later, Catholic colleges still reeling from statement rejecting Church authority

LifeSiteNews | DENVER, Colorado | July 26, 2017– On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Land O’Lakes statement on Catholic Life_Site.jpgeducation, Lincoln Bishop James Conley likened the controversial declaration to the ultimate rejection of God.

Bishop Conley described the statement as the “the ‘non serviam’ moment of many of America’s Catholic universities.”

Non serviam,” a Latin phrase for “I shall not serve,” is typically attributed to Lucifer’s Old Testament words expressing his rejection of serving God. The prophet Jeremiah also used it to describe the Hebrew people’s disobedience to God.

“The Land O’Lakes statement proposed to redefine the mission of the Catholic university,” Bishop Conley said. “It rejected the authority of the Church, and of her doctrinal teaching.”

“It rejected the idea that faith and reason work best in communion with one another,” he continued. “It prioritized the standards and culture of secular universities over the authentic mission of Catholic education. It was a statement of self-importance, and self-assertion.”

This self-importance “defies an authentically Catholic view of education,” he said.

The statement “declared that Catholic universities would become independent from the hierarchy of the Church, from any obligation to orthodoxy, and from the authentic spirituality of the Church,” the bishop went on to say.

Speaking July 5 to teachers and principals at the Regional Catholic Classical Schools Conference at the Institute for Catholic Liberal Education in Denver, Bishop Conley said, “Fifty years ago, a ‘declaration of independence’ in Catholic education transformed the Church.”

The document came from some 26 presidents and administrators from 10 institutions who convened at a retreat center in Land O’Lakes, Wisconsin, for the North American summit for the International Federation of Catholic Universities. Holy Cross Father Theodore Hesburgh, Notre Dame’s president and head of the federation at the time, had summoned the attendees.

The meeting’s purpose was to establish a vision for Catholic higher education in the wake of Vatican II. The “Statement on the Nature of the Contemporary Catholic University” was signed July 23, 1967.

It is considered by many to have devastated Catholic education because of the ensuing loss of Catholic identity in Catholic colleges and universities. Bishop Conley spoke about the ripple effects on the U.S. church.

“Land O’Lakes sought to make many parts of the Catholic university indistinguishable from secular counterparts,” Bishop Conley said. “And that has impacted the entire Church in the United States.”

In the 50 years since the statement, he said, secularization in Catholic universities has caused secularization in many Catholic elementary and high schools. There are textbooks that don’t reflect Catholic perspectives and, he said, “teachers who have, regrettably, not been trained to think or teach from the heart and wisdom of the Church.”

“An entire generation of bishops, priests, religious, and lay Catholics — myself included — were formed in the wake of Land O’Lakes,” stated Bishop Conley. “And we formed another generation, which now forms another, all of us doing the best we can, but regrettably, without being exposed to much of truth, goodness, and beauty of the Church’s tradition.” […..]

 

 

COMMENT: Bishop Athanasius Schneider, abandoning his own diocesan duties, has been traveling throughout the world for the last five years playing the role of the Judas Goat to bring traditional Catholics under to direct control of Novus Ordo structures. The problem with Vatican II is not simply a question of ambiguities but of heretical statements that are incompatible with Catholic faith.  The biggest heresy of all was uttered by John XXIII at the opening bell of the Council that established the Council’s overriding theme when he announced that the truth of dogma was one thing and the words to express dogma were quite another. He divorced revealed truth from the effective sign established by God to signify the truth.  Pope John said while we must keep the unvarying truth, we are free to change the words by which dogma is expressed to better communicate to a modern generation.  This is a condemned modernist error that could only lead to the destruction of dogma.  The entire theme of Vatican II was to change dogma by changing praxis and usher in the great apostasy. Bishop Schneider advises Catholics to just keep their teeth tightly clenched while the swallowing the swill.

Vatican II should be clarified, not rejected: Bishop Schneider

LifeSiteNews |July 25, 2017 — Ambiguous teachings in the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) have been used for the past five decades and are still being used today to create “another church” that claims to be Catholic, but is not, said Kazakhstan Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

This does not mean, however, that Vatican II must be rejected, but it must be interpreted according to the “entire Tradition and of the constant Magisterium of the Church,” he wrote in an article published July 21 by Rorate Caeli.

Stated Schneider: “As to the attitude towards the Second Vatican Council, we must avoid two extremes: a complete rejection (as do the sedevacantists and a part of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) or a ‘infallibilization’ of everything the council spoke.”

“Vatican II was a legitimate assembly presided by the Popes and we must maintain towards this council a respectful attitude. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we are forbidden to express well-founded doubts or respectful improvement suggestions regarding some specific items, while doing so based on the entire tradition of the Church and on the constant Magisterium,” he added.

The Bishop’s article comes at a time when many faithful Catholics perceive a general crisis within the Church and have a tendency to place the blame for the crisis squarely on the shoulders of Vatican II.

Schneider said the Vatican II council must be interpreted as the Council Fathers meant it to be, namely a “primarily pastoral council,” not a council that proposed “new doctrines.” […..]

 

 

The Reform-of-the-Reform is back on the front burner!

A common calendar and lectionary for the Novus Ordo and TLM?

A committee already tried, and failed: 
Cardinal Sarah's La Nef article marking the 10th anniversary of Summorum Pontificum has awakened the debate over the possibility (and desirability) of a "common rite" derived from the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo. One of Cardinal Sarah's main proposals is that of common calendar and lectionary for the TLM and the NOM. The proposal does not come out of the blue; versions of it have been floated by some proponents of the Reform of the Reform since the 1990's. Furthermore, from 1991 to 2007 the use of the Novus Ordo lectionary was theoretically permitted in celebrations of the 1962 Missal, and was actually imposed on such celebrations in a handful of dioceses.
Right after the article came out, the Claretian liturgist Fr. Matías Augé -- an old liberal but very well-informed - noted that a common calendar and lectionary was already attempted in the previous pontificate:

“In fact, the cardinal has the merit of expressing his concrete proposal to arrive ‘at a reformed common Rite in order to facilitate reconciliation within the Church.’ First of all, the cardinal hopes that we can arrive at a common liturgical calendar for the two forms of the Roman Rite, and also to a ‘convergence’ of the lectionaries. His Eminence knows better than I, that an ad hoc committee had worked during the years of the pontificate of Pope Ratzinger without being able to produce a concrete proposal, given the difficulty of the task.”

 

 

 “The child belongs to the father,” and is, as it were, the continuation of the father’s personality; and speaking strictly, the child takes its place in civil society, not of its own right, but in its quality as member of the family in which it is born. And for the very reason that “the child belongs to the father” it is, as St. Thomas Aquinas says, “before it attains the use of free will, under the power and the charge of its parents.” The socialists, therefore, in setting aside the parent and setting up a State supervision, act against natural justice, and destroy the structure of the home. 

Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum

 

God, who is the perfect and infinite intelligence—that is, the infinite and perfect reason—created man to His own likeness, and gave him a reasonable intelligence, like His own. As the face in the mirror answers to the face of the beholder, so the intelligence of man answers to the intelligence of God. It is His own likeness. What, then, is the revelation of faith, but the illumination of the Divine reason poured out upon the reason of man? The revelation of faith is no discovery which the reason of man has made for himself by induction, or by deduction, or by analysis, or by synthesis, or by logical process, or by experimental chemistry. The revelation of faith is a discovery of itself by the Divine Reason, the unveiling of the Divine Intelligence, and the illumination flowing from it cast upon the intelligence of man; and if so, I would ask, how can there be variance or discord? How can the illumination of the faith diminish the stature of the human reason? How can its rights be interfered with? How can its prerogatives be violated? Is not the truth the very reverse of all this? Is it not the fact that the human reason is perfected and elevated above itself by the illumination of faith?

Cardinal Edward Henry Manning, The Revolt of the Intellect Against God

 

 

Vatican Response: Three days later the Vatican released information linking Benedict/Ratzinger’s brother, Fr. Georg Ratzinger, with homosexual ring abusing boys during Fr. Georg Ratzinger’s tenure with the Regensburger Domspatzen Boys Choir.

What particularly impressed me from my last conversations with the now passed Cardinal was the relaxed cheerfulness, the inner joy and the confidence at which he had arrived. We know that this passionate shepherd and pastor found it difficult to leave his post, especially at a time  in which the Church stands in particularly pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship of the spirit of the age and who live and think the faith with determination. However, what moved me all the more was that, in this last period of his life, he learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even if [sometimes] the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.

Bishop of Rome Emmeritus, Benedict/Ratzinger, message delivered at the funeral of Cardinal Joachim Meisner’s

 

 

As if homosexual “marriage” was not a “bursting of a dam.”  Anyway, didn’t the homophilic pope already apologize?  Anyway, why just homosexuals?  How about all those other paraphilics out there still labeled with their DSM-IV codes?

Cardinal Marx: Homosexuals deserve an apology from the Church

LifeSiteNews | AUGSBURG, Germany | July 19, 2017– Cardinal Reinhard Marx is more concerned about the Catholic Church apologizing for its inaction against previous German law prohibiting homosexuality than the country’s recent legalization of gay “marriage.”

The Munich cardinal, who is head of the German bishops’ conference and a member of Pope Francis’ Council of Cardinals, was decisive in saying he firmly upholds the Church’s teaching on marriage in a recent interview with Augsberger Algemeine.

But he criticized the Church for not being at the forefront on homosexual rights in Germany and said the Church must express regret for not acting to oppose the former law against homosexuality.

It must be recalled, Cardinal Marx said, “that the Church has not exactly been a trailblazer as far as the rights of homosexuals are concerned.”

“We must express our regret that we did nothing to oppose homosexuals from being prosecuted,” he continued.

“The (German) law (against homosexuality) was not rescinded until 1994,” he said, “and we, as a Church, did not concern ourselves with it.”

The German parliament voted 393 to 226 on June 30 to legalize gay “marriage.”

The new law was not a defeat for the Church, Cardinal Marx said, because marriage and family were issues that extend beyond the Church.

“The Christian position is one thing. It’s another thing to ask if I can make all the Christian moral concepts (state) laws,” he said, according to LaCroix International. “Whoever fails to understand that the one does not automatically lead to the other has not understood the essence of modern society.”

He also dismissed concerns that legalized gay “marriage” would lead to incest and threesome marriages in Germany.

“The new law is concerned with allowing same-sex partners – and not close relations or three or more people – to marry,” he said. “One shouldn’t immediately conjure up the bursting of a dam.” [.....]

 

 

Pope says Church should ask forgiveness from gays for past treatment

Philip Pullella | Reuters | 6-26-16

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (Reuters) – Pope Francis said on Sunday that Christians and the Roman Catholic Church should seek forgiveness from homosexuals for the way they had treated them.

Speaking to reporters aboard the plane taking him back to Rome from Armenia, he also said the Church should ask forgiveness for the way it has treated women, for turning a blind eye to child labour and for “blessing so many weapons” in the past.

In the hour-long freewheeling conversation that has become a trademark of his international travels, Francis was asked if he agreed with recent comments by a German Roman Catholic cardinal that the Church should apologise to gays.

Francis looked sad when the reporter asked if an apology was made more urgent by the killing of 49 people at a gay club in Orlando, Florida this month.

He recalled Church teachings that homosexuals “should not be discriminated against. They should be respected, accompanied pastorally.”

He added: “I think that the Church not only should apologise … to a gay person whom it offended but it must also apologise to the poor as well, to the women who have been exploited, to children who have been exploited by (being forced to) work. It must apologise for having blessed so many weapons.”

The Church teaches that homosexual tendencies are not sinful but homosexual acts are, and that homosexuals should try to be chaste.

Francis repeated a slightly modified version of the now-famous “Who am I to judge?” comment he made about gays on the first foreign trip after his election in 2013.

“The questions is: if a person who has that condition, who has good will, and who looks for God, who are we to judge?”

FORGIVENESS, NOT JUST APOLOGY

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said that the pope, by saying “has that condition”, did not imply a medical condition but “a person in that situation”. In Italian, the word “condition” can also mean “situation”.

“We Christians have to apologise for so many things, not just for this (treatment of gays), but we must ask for forgiveness, not just apologise! Forgiveness! Lord, it is a word we forget so often!” he said.

Francis has been hailed by many in the gay community for being the most merciful pope towards them in recent history and conservative Catholics have criticised him for making comments they say are ambiguous about sexual morality.

He told reporters on the plane “there are traditions in some countries, some cultures, that have a different mentality about this question (homosexuals)” and there are “some (gay) demonstrations that are too offensive for some”.

But he suggested that those were not grounds for discrimination or marginalisation of gays.

The pope did not elaborate on what he meant by seeking forgiveness for the Church “having blessed so many weapons”, but it appeared to be a reference to some Churchmen who actively backed wars in the past.

In other parts of the conversation, Francis said he hoped the European Union would be able to give itself another form after the United Kingdom’s decision to leave.

“There is something that is not working in that bulky union, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water, let’s try to jump-start things, to re-create,” he said. He also denied reports that former Pope Benedict, who resigned in 2013, was still exercising influence inside the Vatican.

“There is only one pope,” he said. He praised Benedict, 89, for “protecting me, having my back, with his prayers”. Francis said he had heard that when some Church officials had gone to Benedict to complain that Francis was too liberal, Benedict “sent them packing”.

 

 

“Global Warming” elevated to the level of certainty of a Novus Ordo Dogma!

Vatican archbishop: All should accept that global warming is a fact

LifeSiteNews | ROME, Italy | July 19, 2017– The head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences has again inferred that denial of the controversial concept of manmade climate change equates to flat earth mentality.

“From the scientific point of view, the sentence that the earth is warmed by human activity is as true as the sentence: The earth is round!” said Archbishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo.

The archbishop has been a consistent and zealous promoter of manmade climate change as a non-negotiable Church issue, despite the status of care for the environment as a prudential matter.  

Climate change ideology continues to be contested as a ploy perpetrated with manipulated data by the left to enact environmental regulations and taxes.

Even so, Archbishop Sorondo dismissed deniers of climate change in a recent Vatican Radio interview as “a small, negligible minority.”

The interview conducted in German contained the headline: “Vatican: ‘Climate change is a fact,’” and centered on reception of Pope Francis’ eco-encyclical Laudato Si’ two years after its release.

Archbishop Sorondo went on in the interview to say that human-affected climate change was considered science. He added that the pope not only has the right but also the duty to rely on science in addition to doctrine and philosophy in seeking out truth.

If the pope expresses himself on such a subject, then this was not arbitrary, he said, as the pope’s words are not restricted to the area of ​​”doctrine of faith and morals.” 

The pope makes use of the truths of science or philosophy to not only explain to man how to get to heaven, said the archbishop, but also what he must do on earth. 

All human activities have to do with ethics, the Argentinean archbishop said, so they are already within the jurisdiction of the pope.

Archbishop Sorondo is a close adviser to Pope Francis and the Chancellor of both the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. He has repeatedly welcomed pro-abortion and population control advocates to the Vatican for conferences under the pretext of the climate issue.

Last month, just before President Donald Trump announced the U.S. would pull out of the controversial Paris Climate Agreement, the archbishop likened climate ideology skeptics to flat-earthers as well.

Withdrawal from the Paris accord “would not only be a disaster but completely unscientific,” he said.

“Saying that we need to rely on coal and oil is like saying that the earth is not round,” Archbishop Sorondo stated. “It is an absurdity dictated by the need to make money.”

He has also repeatedly made the claim that those who don’t subscribe to the manmade climate change theory are in some way subsidized by the oil industry. He did so again in the Vatican Radio interview. [.....]

 

 

In his Confessions of a Revolutionist, M. Proudhon wrote these remarkable words: “It is wonderful how we ever stumble on theology in all our political questions.” There is nothing here to cause surprise, but the surprise of M. Proudhon. Theology, inasmuch as it is the science of God, is the ocean which contains and embraces all sciences, as God is the ocean which contains and embraces all things. […..]

Donoso Cortes, Marquis of Valdegamas, Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism

 

Close apparatchinks of Pope Francis supported by the international Jew George Soros attack U.S. traditional Catholics as “Catholic Integralists” who engage in an “ecumenism of hate” because  they align with conservative Protestants in opposition to “abortion, same-sex marriage, religious education in schools and other matters generally considered moral or tied to values” and become “xenophobic and Islamophobic.”

There is no such thing as separation of Church and state, for all political problems are ultimately theological problems.  The liberal preaches separation of church and state because he does not want any other religion competing with his own.  Below is a typical example of this vulgar hypocrisy of the Catholic left:  

Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism in the USA: A surprising ecumenism

Antonio Spadaro S.J., Editor-in-chief of La Civiltà Cattolica

Marcelo Figueroa, Presbyterian pastor, Editor-in-chief of the Argentinean edition of L’Osservatore Romano

[….]Fundamentalist ecumenism

 Some who profess themselves to be Catholic express themselves in ways that until recently were unknown in their tradition and using tones much closer to Evangelicals. They are defined as value voters as far as attracting electoral mass support is concerned. There is a well-defined world of ecumenical convergence between sectors that are paradoxically competitors when it comes to confessional belonging. This meeting over shared objectives happens around such themes as abortion, same-sex marriage, religious education in schools and other matters generally considered moral or tied to values. Both Evangelical and Catholic Integralists condemn traditional ecumenism and yet promote an ecumenism of conflict that unites them in the nostalgic dream of a theocratic type of state.

However, the most dangerous prospect for this strange ecumenism is attributable to its xenophobic and Islamophobic vision that wants walls and purifying deportations. The word “ecumenism” transforms into a paradox, into an “ecumenism of hate.” Intolerance is a celestial mark of purism. Reductionism is the exegetical methodology. Ultra-literalism is its hermeneutical key.

Clearly there is an enormous difference between these concepts and the ecumenism employed by Pope Francis with various Christian bodies and other religious confessions. His is an ecumenism that moves under the urge of inclusion, peace, encounter and bridges. This presence of opposing ecumenisms – and their contrasting perceptions of the faith and visions of the world where religions have irreconcilable roles – is perhaps the least known and most dramatic aspect of the spread of Integralist fundamentalism. Here we can understand why the pontiff is so committed to working against “walls” and any kind of “war of religion.”

The temptation of “spiritual war”

The religious element should never be confused with the political one. Confusing spiritual power with temporal power means subjecting one to the other. An evident aspect of Pope Francis’ geopolitics rests in not giving theological room to the power to impose oneself or to find an internal or external enemy to fight. There is a need to flee the temptation to project divinity on political power that then uses it for its own ends. Francis empties from within the narrative of sectarian millenarianism and dominionism that is preparing the apocalypse and the “final clash.”[2] Underlining mercy as a fundamental attribute of God expresses this radically Christian need.

Francis wants to break the organic link between culture, politics, institution and Church. Spirituality cannot tie itself to governments or military pacts for it is at the service of all men and women. Religions cannot consider some people as sworn enemies nor others as eternal friends. Religion should not become the guarantor of the dominant classes. Yet it is this very dynamic with a spurious theological flavor that tries to impose its own law and logic in the political sphere.

There is a shocking rhetoric used, for example, by the writers of Church Militant, a successful US-based digital platform that is openly in favor of a political ultraconservatism and uses Christian symbols to impose itself. This abuse is called “authentic Christianity.” And to show its own preferences, it has created a close analogy between Donald Trump and Emperor Constantine, and between Hilary Clinton and Diocletian. The American elections in this perspective were seen as a “spiritual war.”[3]

This warlike and militant approach seems most attractive and evocative to a certain public, especially given that the victory of Constantine – it was presumed impossible for him to beat Maxentius and the Roman establishment – had to be attributed to a divine intervention: in hoc signo vinces.

Church Militant asks if Trump’s victory can be attributed to the prayers of Americans. The response suggested is affirmative. The indirect missioning for President Trump is clear: he has to follow through on the consequences. This is a very direct message that then wants to condition the presidency by framing it as a divine election. In hoc signo vinces. Indeed.

Today, more than ever, power needs to be removed from its faded confessional dress, from its armor, its rusty breastplate. The fundamentalist theopolitical plan is to set up a kingdom of the divinity here and now. And that divinity is obviously the projection of the power that has been built. This vision generates the ideology of conquest.

The theopolitical plan that is truly Christian would be eschatological, that is it applies to the future and orients current history toward the Kingdom of God, a kingdom of justice and peace. This vision generates a process of integration that unfolds with a diplomacy that crowns no one as a “man of Providence.”

And this is why the diplomacy of the Holy See wants to establish direct and fluid relations with the superpowers, without entering into pre-constituted networks of alliances and influence. In this sphere, the pope does not want to say who is right or who is wrong for he knows that at the root of conflicts there is always a fight for power. So, there is no need to imagine a taking of sides for moral reasons, much worse for spiritual ones.

Francis radically rejects the idea of activating a Kingdom of God on earth as was at the basis of the Holy Roman Empire and similar political and institutional forms, including at the level of a “party.” Understood this way, the “elected people” would enter a complicated political and religious web that would make them forget they are at the service of the world, placing them in opposition to those who are different, those who do not belong, that is the “enemy.”

So, then the Christian roots of a people are never to be understood in an ethnic way. The notions of roots and identity do not have the same content for a Catholic as for a neo-Pagan. Triumphalist, arrogant and vindictive ethnicism is actually the opposite of Christianity. The pope on May 9 in an interview with the French daily La Croix, said: “Yes Europe has Christian roots. Christianity has the duty of watering them, but in a spirit of service as in the washing of feet. The duty of Christianity for Europe is that of service.” And again: “The contribution of Christianity to a culture is that of Christ washing the feet, or the service and the gift of life. There is no room for colonialism.” […..]

 

Definition:

Catholic Integralist: A Catholic who believes the revealed truth of God literally and makes a real and sincere effort to actually keep the commandments of God.  

 

 

The Pope’s Dubia?

Source: Before Dismissal of Cardinal Müller, Pope Asked Five Pointed Questions

Maike Hickson | July, 10, 2017 | OnePeterFive

The following information comes from the report of a trustworthy German source, who spoke to OnePeterFive on condition of anonymity. He quotes an eyewitness who recently sat with Cardinal Müller at lunch in Mainz, Germany. During that meal, Cardinal Müller is alleged to have disclosed in the presence of this eyewitness certain information about his final meeting with the pope, during which he was informed that his mandate as Prefect of the CDF would not be renewed.

According to this report, Cardinal Müller was called to the Apostolic Palace on 30 June, and he thus went there with his working files, assuming that this meeting would be a usual working session. The pope told him, however, that he only had five questions for him:

·       Are you in favor of, or against, a female diaconate? “I am against it,” responded Cardinal Müller.

·       Are you in favor of, or against, the repeal of celibacy? “Of course I am against it,” the cardinal responded.

·       Are you in favor of, or against, female priests? “I am very decisively against it,” replied Cardinal Müller.

·       Are you willing to defend Amoris Laetitia? “As far as it is possible for me,” the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith replied: “there still exist ambiguities.”

·       Are you willing to retract your complaint concerning the dismissal of three of your own employees? Cardinal Müller responded: “Holy Father, these were good, unblemished men whom I now lack, and it was not correct to dismiss them over my head, shortly before Christmas, so that they had to clear their offices by 28 December. I am missing them now.”

Thereupon the pope answered: “Good. Cardinal Müller, I only wanted to let you know that I will not extend your mandate [i.e., beyond 2 July] as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith.” Without any farewell or explanation, the pope left the room. Cardinal Müller at first thought that the pope left in order to fetch a token of gratitude, and thus he waited patiently. But, there was no such gift, nor even an expression of gratitude for his service. The Prefect of the Papal Household, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, then had to explain to him that the meeting was over, and that it was time for him to leave.

At the time of this writing, we have not been able to obtain confirmation of these events from Cardinal Müller, nor from his secretary, to whom we reached out for comment. Similarly, we requested a comment from Greg Burke at the Vatican Press Office has denied the story, saying the reconstruction of events as we have presented it is “totally false”. [….]

 

‘A Fish Rots From the Head’</