↧
Watching S+L TV makes me ...
↧
Who knew? Patricia Januzzi is a Powerhouse!!!
From National Review.
↧
↧
Dolan's thugs caught in the act! Seen on video targeting Michael Voris
Cardinal Timothy Dolan's thugs are clearly visible targeting Michael Voris.
It's going to all come tumbling down.
Watch it for yourself.
It's going to all come tumbling down.
Watch it for yourself.
↧
Compromised Catholic Media
↧
Pope Francis on the death penalty - opinions are not magisterial
Vatican Radio reports that Pope Francis said that "no crime ever deserves the death penalty."
He has also said in the past that a life sentence is like a"death sentence." Presumably, it would follow that Charles Manson and Paul Bernardo should be let out of prison.
The Pope has a personal opinion and in my opinion, he is wrong.
This is no more magisterial than if he were to say tomorrow that the moon is made of creamed cheese.
The danger here is that the establishment Catholic media and others will use this for political argument. This Pope continues to invade into areas that are out of his league, as his comments on economics and the soon to come the environment encyclical display. Frankly, it is Marxist rhetoric. I am not calling the Bishop of Rome a Marxist but his rhetoric on these issues are not founded in the doctrine of the Church as articulated in the Catechism and seem to come from a 1970's mentality of South American Jesuits imbued with their heretical internationalist and liberationist theologies.
The Pope is entitled to his personal opinions. The Pope is not entitled to state it in such a way that it can be interpreted as Magisterial.
Vox.
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/03/20/pope_francis_no_crime_ever_deserves_the_death_penalty/1130871
He has also said in the past that a life sentence is like a"death sentence." Presumably, it would follow that Charles Manson and Paul Bernardo should be let out of prison.
The Pope has a personal opinion and in my opinion, he is wrong.
This is no more magisterial than if he were to say tomorrow that the moon is made of creamed cheese.
The danger here is that the establishment Catholic media and others will use this for political argument. This Pope continues to invade into areas that are out of his league, as his comments on economics and the soon to come the environment encyclical display. Frankly, it is Marxist rhetoric. I am not calling the Bishop of Rome a Marxist but his rhetoric on these issues are not founded in the doctrine of the Church as articulated in the Catechism and seem to come from a 1970's mentality of South American Jesuits imbued with their heretical internationalist and liberationist theologies.
The Pope is entitled to his personal opinions. The Pope is not entitled to state it in such a way that it can be interpreted as Magisterial.
Vox.
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/03/20/pope_francis_no_crime_ever_deserves_the_death_penalty/1130871
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htmLegitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.66
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68
↧
↧
Who's on first?
Perusing this morning's post by Barona at Toronto Catholic Witness blog, I discovered this:
![]()
Richard Gaillardetz Joseph Professor of Catholic Systematic Theology at Boston College said the above in the September 25 2013 issue of the National Catholic Reporter as highlighted below:
![]()
I'm confused.
On March 2, 2015, LifeSiteNews reported the following:
![]()
In other news.
Richard Gaillardetz Joseph Professor of Catholic Systematic Theology at Boston College said the above in the September 25 2013 issue of the National Catholic Reporter as highlighted below:
I'm confused.
On March 2, 2015, LifeSiteNews reported the following:
In other news.
↧
We want our religion back!
And if you don't give it back we will take it back!
↧
But Jesus Hid Himself
From First Vespers tonight until the Paschal Vigil, the Gloria Patri is not said after the Psalms in the Office or at Mass. It is another stripping away within the liturgy which began on Septuagesima. While our penance continues, the focus is now shifting towards the passion of Our Blessed Lord and his saving work of redemption. Abbot Gueranger writes that, "During the preceding four weeks, we have noticed how the malice of Jesus' enemies has been gradually increasing. His very presence irritates them; and it is evident that any little circumstance will suffice to bring the deep and long-nurtured hatred to a head." His passion then has begun.
There is one element that remains in the modernist liturgy depending on the parish's own tradition. While it was once obligatory it is now optional and that is the veiling of the Crucifix and statues, though not Stations of the Cross or the imagery in windows.
The tradition is thought to have begun around the 9th century in Germany. When Lent began (which in most languages is a derivative of Quadregesimae, the Latin for forty days), a cloth called a hungertuch or hunger cloth, was used to cover the altar. It was removed on the Tuesday of Holy Week during the reading of the of Passion according to St. Mark when, “The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.”The Gospels in the three year cycle in the New Lectionary do not reflect the symbolism and beauty of Passiontide and the veiling. They are all from St. John’s Gospel and are in sequence – “I am the Resurrection and the Life;” … “If a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it bears much fruit;” and, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”
For the Mass on the Fifth Sunday according to the Roman Missal of 1962, the Gospel is what it has been for 1600 years; there was no reason to change it.
GOSPEL ¤ John 8. 46-59 † A continuation of the holy Gospel according to St. John.
At that time Jesus said to the multitudes of the Jews: Which of you shall convince Me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe Me? He that is of God heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God. The Jews therefore answered and said to Him: Do not we say well, that Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? Jesus answered: I have not a devil: but I honor My Father, and you have dishonored Me. But I seek not My own glory: there is One that seeketh and judgeth. Amen, amen, I say to you: If any man keep My word, he shall not see death for ever. The Jews therefore said: Now we know that Thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the Prophets: and Thou sayest: If any man keep My word, he shall not taste death for ever. Art Thou greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? and the prophets are dead. Whom dost Thou make Thyself? Jesus answered: If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing: it is My Father that glorifieth Me, of whom you say that He is your God, and you have not known Him: but I know Him: and if I shall say that I know Him not, I shall be like to you, a liar. But I do know Him, and do keep His word. Abraham your father rejoiced that he might see My day: he saw it and was glad. The Jews therefore said to Him: Thou art not yet fifty years old: and hast Thou seen Abraham? Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was made, I am. They took up stones therefore to cast at Him: but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple.
“But Jesus hid Himself.”
St. Augustine said that at this moment by virtue of His divine nature, Jesus in fact become invisible.
“He hides not himself in a corner of the temple as if afraid or running into a cottage or turning aside behind a wall or column; but by His Divine Power making Himself invisible he passed through their midst.”
In the Catechism of the Catholic Church we read the following:
205 God calls Moses from the midst of a bush that burns without being consumed: "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob."9 God is the God of the fathers, the One who had called and guided the patriarchs in their wanderings. He is the faithful and compassionate God who remembers them and his promises; he comes to free their descendants from slavery. He is the God who, from beyond space and time, can do this and wills to do it, the God who will put his almighty power to work for this plan.
"I Am who I Am"
Moses said to God, "If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you', and they ask me, 'What is his name?' what shall I say to them?" God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you'. . . this is my name for ever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations."10206 In revealing his mysterious name, YHWH ("I AM HE WHO IS", "I AM WHO AM" or "I AM WHO I AM"), God says who he is and by what name he is to be called. This divine name is mysterious just as God is mystery. It is at once a name revealed and something like the refusal of a name, and hence it better expresses God as what he is - infinitely above everything that we can understand or say: he is the "hidden God", his name is ineffable, and he is the God who makes himself close to men.11
207 By revealing his name God at the same time reveals his faithfulness which is from everlasting to everlasting, valid for the past ("I am the God of your father"), as for the future ("I will be with you").12 God, who reveals his name as "I AM", reveals himself as the God who is always there, present to his people in order to save them.
208 Faced with God's fascinating and mysterious presence, man discovers his own insignificance. Before the burning bush, Moses takes off his sandals and veils his face in the presence of God's holiness.13 Before the glory of the thrice-holy God, Isaiah cries out: "Woe is me! I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips."14 Before the divine signs wrought by Jesus, Peter exclaims: "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord."15 But because God is holy, he can forgive the man who realizes that he is a sinner before him: "I will not execute my fierce anger. . . for I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst."16 The apostle John says likewise: "We shall. . . reassure our hearts before him whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything."17
Jesus revealed to the Temple authorities, the leadership of Israel who He was. He knew Abraham and did so in such a way that they would know with clarity who He was. He hid Himself. We now hide Him only to be unveiled when we recall His Crucifixion when we "ecce lignum crucis." If we hide Him we cannot abide the glory of His saints, so they are also hidden. He declared Himself before all Israel to be one with I AM of the Burning Bush; and for this, they would kill Him.
+ + +
In the sermon below from 1846 we find an incredible dissertation on Jesus hiding Himself. Please take the time to read it. The profundity with today is simply prophetic. Vox.
SERMONS FOR SUNDAYS AND OTHER LITURGICAL OCCASIONS
CONTRIBUTED BY
BISHOPS AND OTHER CLERGY OF THE CHURCH.
EDITED BY THE REV. ALEXANDER WATSON, M.A.,
CURATE OF ST. JOHN'S, CHELTENHAM.
Second Series. VOL. I.
OXFORD: J. H. PARKER. CAMBRIDGE: T. GREEN.
MDCCCXLVI. (1846)
Then took they up stones to cast at Him."
Thus are we brought down from the whole Gospel for the day to that portion of it which will engage our chief attention during the brief remainder of this morning's service. "But Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the Temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by."
1. Jesus "hid Himself," as man, in prudence: according to the will of His Heavenly Father. As He had been born in "the fullness of time," so it was at an appointed hour that He was to die. But "His hour was not yet come ": and He therefore avoided whatever might unduly quicken the course of events, or put forward the grand horologe of time. And this He did in obedience to the Will of His Heavenly Father. This obedience was the mainspring of His conduct throughout His earthly sojourn. "Lo I come to do Thy will, O God," was His motto from first to last; and never was it more fully translated into action than in all He did with regard to His final suffering and departure.
When that hour of mingled humiliation and glory, which compressed eternal interests within the compass of a few passing minutes; when that everlasting hour arrived, the holy and obedient Jesus yielded Himself at once into the power of His enemies. Thus, when Satan had entered into Judas Iscariot, Jesus said to the traitor, "What thou doest, do quickly." When Judas came to Him in the garden with men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, "Jesus, knowing all things that should come upon Him, went forth and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered Him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus said unto them, I am He." And when the impetuous Peter—the first to defend, the first to deny his Master—drew his sword and cut oft" the right ear of Malchus, the High Priest's servant, "then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He shall presently give Me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?" When Pilate would fain have released Him, and sought for some pretext for so doing in the replies of Jesus to his interrogatories, "Jesus gave him no answer." And at the last, when He saw that all was "finished,"—prophecy fulfilled, types realised, the preparations for His sacrificial Death complete, His Father's will wrought out,—He bowed His head, and gave up the ghost."
But until the arrival of that hour, His conduct was marked throughout by unexampled prudence. While He wrought His miracles before the multitude, and taught openly in the Temple, and in secret did nothing; while He boldly confuted and reproved the Pharisee, the Sadducee, and the Herodian, regardless of the enmity He thereby incurred; He carefully shunned the precipitation of His end. He had a mission of vast pregnancy and moment to discharge; and until this was done, He would not lay down that life which the Father had put into His power. Whenever danger became imminent, He withdrew Himself from the presence of those who sought to lay hands on Him and destroy Him. Thus, on the occasion immediately before us, when the infuriated Jews took up stones to cast at Him, "Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the Temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by."
On a previous occasion, when the Pharisees held a council how they might destroy Him,
Jesus “withdrew Himself from thence." On a subsequent occasion, similar to that of the text, when the Jews again sought to take Him, "he escaped out of their hand, and went away again beyond Jordan." When the Sanhedrim, after the official prophecy of the unconscious Caiaphas, took counsel together to put Him to death, "Jesus walked no more openly among the Jews; but went thence unto a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued with His disciples." Thus, throughout His whole earthly career, our Blessed Lord exercised a prudence of the highest order; enforcing by His own example the precepts He gave to His first disciples: "Be ye wise as serpents, and harmless as doves ;"—" When they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another ." And these precepts, supported by this supreme example, and adapted to the exigencies of Christians at the present day, apply also to us. "As men may not be too tenacious, so neither may they be too profuse and lavish of life and the comforts of it," says Dean Stanhope; "lest, besides their present hardships, they find at last an indiscreet zeal returned, with a 'Who hath required these things at your hands?' Love indeed is apt and desirous to give over-measure, where it can: but still this must not be the effect of passion alone. Prudence should temper and direct it."
"It is an office of prudence," says Bishop Taylor, "to serve God So that we may at the same time preserve our lives and our estates, our interest and reputation, for ourselves and our relations, so far as they can consist together. For Christian religion, carrying us to heaven, does it by the ways of a man; and by the body it serves the soul, as by the soul it serves God; and therefore it endeavours to secure the body and its interest, that it may continue the opportunities of a crown, and prolong the stage in which we are to run for the mighty prize of our salvation; and this is that part of prudence which is the defensative and guard of a Christian in the time of persecution: and it hath in it much of duty."
Thus far we have endeavoured to consider the conduct of our Blessed Lord, on the occasion under review, on its human side; as an exhibition of prudence and discretion. But it has a sublimer aspect than this; to which we now with reverence will turn.
2. Jesus “hid Himself," as God, in majesty; the majesty of displeasure. "He did not hide Himself," says St. Augustine, "in a corner of the Temple, as if He were afraid; or take refuge in a house, or run behind a wall, or a pillar; but, by His heavenly power making Himself invisible to His enemies, He went through the midst of them." Just before, He had said, "Before Abraham was I Am"; with evident reference to the Name revealed by the Lord to Moses, as recorded in the First Lesson for this morning's service; when He appeared to him in the burning but unconsumed bush, as he was keeping the flock of Jethro, the Priest of Midian, near the base of Mount Horeb. On that occasion, when Moses would have drawn nigh to see that great sight, the Lord forbad his nearer approach, and commanded him to unsandal his feet, because they were standing on holy ground. He, who required this reverence towards an inferior manifestation of Himself, would not permit the rude hand of violence to invade His incarnate glory. He "hid Himself" in the secret depths of His invisible Godhead.
There is, doubtless, a mystery in this; and we cannot fully understand why He, who submitted on so many occasions to endure the contradiction of sinners against Himself, refused on other occasions to undergo the indignities that wicked hands would have put upon Him. But a like mystery invested the whole of His earthly career. The darkest shades of humiliation were never permitted altogether to obscure His glory; while yet, that glory was so far hidden, that men despised Him and esteemed Him not. Great, however, as was the mystery of His commingling of glory and shame, the mystery of the manifestation of His glory alone was greater. He might have flashed forth devouring lightnings from the dark and surcharged cloud. He might have kindled into supernatural and overwhelming brightness the splendours of His Divine and resistless Presence. But He did none of these things. He manifested forth His glory by hiding Himself. When the Lord, in the days of old, would preserve righteous Lot and His prophet Elisha from the hand of violence, He smote their enemies with blindness; and so He might have done on this occasion: but, as the threatened indignity was greater, so was the punishment wherewith He visited it. "He hid Himself."
Awful are the exhibitions of Divine glory, when the Lord is raised up out of His holy habitation, and comes forth from His unseen depths to punish the ungodly. But these are as nothing when compared with the hidings of His face. When the Lord would denounce the severest judgments against Israel of old, He said to Moses, "Mine anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?" And when, on the other hand, He would confer upon His repentant people the greatest possible blessing, He said by the mouth of Ezekiel, "Neither will I hide My face from them any more: for I have poured out My Spirit upon the house of Israel."
The hidings of Jesus, in the days of His flesh, were yet more majestic and awful. He came into the world for the express purpose, among others, of manifesting the glory and the grace of God: so that to hide Himself was, as it were, to revoke His mission with regard to those from whom He thus withdrew. He abandoned them to the evil of their own hardened and unbelieving hearts, and left them to be filled with their own ways.
It is impossible to conceive anything more dreadful than the condition of the man from whom Jesus has hid Himself. Such a man sinks at once into a state of moral stupidity: he sins on without aim or purpose. Until Jesus hid Himself, the unbelieving Jews had an object against which to direct their malignant attacks; but when He could be no longer seen, their malice, though as virulent as ever, became wholly impotent and senseless. And so, when Jesus hides Himself from sinners of the present day,—who insult His majesty because it is concealed to the-eye of sense or mere reason (though not to the eye of faith), beneath mean and simple accidents,—He leaves them to perish as brute beasts. The force of argument and moral suasion having been tried upon them in vain, together with all other manifestations of the true and holy Jesus, He will no longer expose Himself to the rash temerity and blinded insolence of their invasions, but hides Himself, going through the midst of them, and so passes by.
The abstract contemplation of such a subject is too awful for man to dwell upon at any length; and we will therefore now consider it, (so hastening to a conclusion,) under its practical aspects and bearings.
But is it possible, men may ask, for persons at the present day to commit acts of insult and injury towards the Divine Jesus, akin to that of the blaspheming Jews when they took up stones to cast at Him? Alas, it is but too possible. "Certainly we cannot commit such open blasphemy; but it is another matter whether we cannot commit as great. For, often sins are greater, which are less startling; insults more bitter, which are not so loud; and evils deeper, which are more subtle." Although Christ is no longer on earth in bodily presence, He is here by His Spirit: and it is quite possible for men to repeat the offence of the blaspheming Jews by casting stones, so to speak, against either the Church, which is His Body; or the Sacraments, which are His Presence; or the Poor, who are His Brethren.
The Church is the Body of Christ, "the fullness of Him That filleth all in all:" and they who resist or blaspheme or persecute Her, do in effect resist and blaspheme and persecute Him. And such are not only, nor even chiefly, the openly wicked and profane; whose offences are of a different description: but those who deny the Divine authority of the Church, rejecting her principles for the opinions of men and the maxims of the world; those who deny her Apostolicity, treating her as a merely human and secular institution; those who invade her constitution, legislating for her on grounds of political expediency, and not according to the laws of Christ. "Verily, I say unto you, they have their reward." They refuse to acknowledge the Body of Christ in His corporate members; and He hides it from them. They are no longer permitted to behold the tokens of her presence. She becomes to them what they would have her be. In their eyes she has no form nor comeliness, although she is all-glorious within. But with these hidings of her beauty and this withdrawal of her presence, there comes not only an apparent abdication of her authority; leaving men to live as they list, according to the broad measures of the world, instead of the straight and narrow lines of eternity: but also the utter loss of her intercession and benediction. She no longer stands between the living and the dead. A silent curse spreads over the land she has abandoned to itself. The rulers have forsaken Christ, and Christ has forsaken them. The people would have it so, and their house is left unto them desolate.
"Be wise now, therefore, O ye kings:
Be learned, ye that judges of the earth.
Kiss the Son, lest He be angry,
And so ye perish from the right way,
If His wrath be kindled, yea but a little.
Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him."
Again, the Sacraments are the Presence of Christ. In the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, He is present by His Spirit, Who, in answer to the prayers of the congregation, is given by our Heavenly Father to infants, when baptized, that they may be born again and be made heirs of everlasting salvation. In the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, He is really and spiritually present, being taken and received by the faithful as their heavenly food and divine life.
Whoever, therefore, despises the Sacraments, despises Christ. Whoever denies their saving power, denies the Presence of the Saviour in them. Whoever in effect casts stones at these, as by cavils or contumely or neglect, does in reality thus cast stones at Christ. And then does the Son of God hide Himself from them in the majesty of displeasure; and Sacraments become to these persons what, in their rationalistic unbelief, they would have them be.
Baptism, when administered by schismatics and pretenders to Holy Orders, fails to regenerate; and their own theory, that Baptism admits only to an outward union with a nominal church, is, in their own case, verified. The Communion is reduced to a formal commemoration of an absent Saviour. In both cases, as regards their own mere outward show of Sacraments, they are right. They have taken up stones to cast at the spiritually-present Jesus; and He has hidden Himself, going through the midst of them, and so passing by.
Lastly: the Poor are the Brethren of Jesus. They are so even in respect of their mere poverty; although it must not be concealed that the poor man who is a wilful sinner is severed from this communion and fellowship. But he, who is at once poor in this world and poor in spirit, is united by the closest bonds to the lowly Son of Mary. This is strikingly shown in the parable of the Sheep and the Goats, wherein the Judge declares that whatsoever is done unto the least of the Hungry, the Thirsty, the Stranger, the Naked, the Sick, the Imprisoned,—being "the poor of this world," but " rich in faith and heirs of the Kingdom,"—is done unto Himself. Now, we all know how apt men are to "despise the poor.""There are kinds of distress founded on the passions, which, if not applauded, are at least admired in their excess, as implying a peculiar refinement of sensibility in the mind of the sufferer.
Embellished by taste, and wrought by the magic of genius into innumerable forms, they turn grief into a luxury, and draw from the eyes of millions delicious tears. But no muse ever ventured to adorn the distresses of poverty or the sorrows of hunger. Disgusting taste and delicacy, and presenting nothing pleasing to the imagination, they are mere misery in all its nakedness and deformity." And therefore the many "despise the Poor." But in so doing, they despise Christ; and what is their punishment in consequence? Jesus might rend aside the veil of His humanity, and reveal Himself as God. He might put off the sordid dress of poverty, and clothe Himself with light as with a garment. But He inflicts a severer punishment than this—He hides Himself. The Poor no longer visibly bear upon them "the marks of the Lord Jesus "; and secular legislation, at once blind and self-confident, sets itself to relieve their distress by increasing their degradation. It brands the Poor Man as a Pauper, and consigns him to contempt and shame. Jesus has hidden Himself in majestic displeasure: and men of the world little dream that He will reveal Himself again at the Last Day, and avenge the cause of the poor and the oppressed!
"Oh, how much are they to be pitied, in whatever sphere they move, who live to themselves, unmindful of the coming of their Lord. When He shall come, and shall not keep silence; when a fire shall devour before Him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about Him; every thing, it is true, will combine to fill them with consternation: yet, methinks, neither the voice of the Archangel, nor the trump of God, nor the dissolution of the elements, nor the face of the Judge itself, from which the heavens will flee away, will be so dismaying and terrible to these men as the sight of the poor members of Christ; whom, having spurned and neglected in the days of their humiliation, they will then behold with amazement united to their Lord, covered with His glory, and seated on His throne! How will they be astonished to see them surrounded with so much majesty! How will they cast down their eyes in their presence! How will they curse that gold, which will then eat their flesh as with fire, and that avarice, that indolence, that voluptuousness, which will entitle them to so much misery! You will then learn that the imitation of Christ is the only wisdom: you will then be convinced it is better to be endeared to the cottage than admired in the palace; when to have wiped the tears of the afflicted, and inherited the prayers of the widow and the fatherless, shall be found a richer patrimony than the favour of princes."
H. H.
↧
Bishop Bootkoski obfuscates - kicks Patricia Januzzi under a second bus!
Bishop Bootkoski is not being completely clear. Something is missing. Teachers are given one year contracts. Mrs. Januzzi's family has confirmed that she will not have a contract in September 2015. She is currently on "administrative leave." Technically speaking, Bishop Bootkoski is correct; "There has been no interruption in her pay or benefits." What he does not add is the word, "yet."
In Ontario from where I write, Catholic schools have elected Boards of Trustees and are funded from the provincial tax base. They are essentially "public" Catholic schools. Teacher unions are very strong and protective of their members. In other provinces of Canada and certainly in the United States this is not the case. Immaculata High School is essentially "private" in this case "parochial." It is in the Parish of the Immaculate Conception and is owned directly by Paul Bootkoski under the legal provision of a "corporation sole" recognised in the United States of America under Common Law. I've searched the school web page. There is no indication of a Board of Trustees or elected officials. Therefore, one can only conclude that it is part of the overall corporation sole of the Diocese of Metuchen.
This means that Bishop Bootkoski is personally responsible for the decision to not give Mrs. Januzzi a contract for September 2015. His treatment of Mrs. Januzzi is hardly that of a "Shepherd."
The issue is not only Mrs. Januzzi but Bishop Bootkoski's apologia!
"We are a compassionate Catholic community committed to treating our students, faculty and parishioners with respect. We have never wavered from our traditional Catholic teachings."
His Excellency is in fact, not treating Mrs. Januzzi with respect. He has allowed her to be put on "leave" and she will not be rehired in September. He has not defended her against publc calumny and insults. His letter is even more testament to the lack of respect he has shown for his employee of over thirty years. Those in Metuchen are more qualified than this writer to comment on whether the Bishop has ever "wavered from traditional Catholic teachings." In the case of Mrs. Januzzi, however, that does not appear to be true.
'The teacher’s comments were disturbing and do not reflect the Church’s teachings of acceptance. However, she has never been terminated, as some media outlets have reported. She has been put on administrative leave. There has been no interruption in her pay and benefits."
Mrs. Januzzi's comments appear to the right. This is the Facebook post that has caused all of this and it was on her own personal page. If she made a mistake, it was not having her settings to the most private available (a lesson for all). Those who vilified this woman have done a great injustice to her. It has been aided and abetted by her superiors at the school and the parish pastor, a Monsignor, who has in the past downplayed the filming of naked boys in the school's shower room. Now Bishop Bootkoski piles on this woman. He cannot run from the obvious. He states that Mrs. Januzzi's postion has not been "terminated." The Bishop is clearly being Jesuitical in his approach. It seems rather clear that she is being set up not to be "rehired!" This is evident by the Bishop's description of her comments that these comments make her unfit to be a Catholic teacher insinuating that she does not "respect" her brethren and that she has used "harsh and judgemental statements." Not only will she not be rehired by Immaculata High School in September 2015 as confirmed by her family, with this kind of public condemnation by her Bishop, he has essentially rendered her unemployable as a teacher. He has engaged in nothing less than character assassination. Where is his culpability in this?
The Bishop continues:
"Pope Francis reminds us that we are to accept all of our brethren. We must ensure that our educators steer away from harsh and judgmental statements that can alienate and divide us."
Where is the evidence that Patricia Januzzi ever disrespected a student? Any comments about her which I have read, even from those who disagree with her, indicate that she was an outstanding teacher and Catholic. What is "harsh and judgmental" about standing up for marriage between one man and one woman. Does Bishop Bootkowski believe that marriage should be otherwise? or that the Catholics of Metuchen have no right to an opinion or to express it? Perhaps the Bishop needs to read the Code of Canon Law, Can. 212.3 followed quickly by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the Unites States of America. The good Bishop may also wish to recall the words of Our Blessed Lord as recorded in the 10th chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew:
32 Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. 33 But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. 34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household.
It is wonderful when these people quote or refer to statements by Pope Francis when it suits their agenda. It is unfortunate that they have forgotten the Pope's desire for "Mercy," but that does not seem to count for Patricia Januzzi.
Coming to the word "agenda;" in the close of his letter, Bishop Bootkowski takes a swipe at those of us who have been raising the alarm at what has happened here:
"We regret that certain individuals and groups are using inaccurate media reports to push their own agendas."
Perhaps we need to give a little education to Bishop Bootkoski. A little history.
I agree with him and I regret that certain individuals and groups are pushing their own agenda.
The fact is, it is an "agenda" and Lloyd Marcus at The American Thinker states quite clearly:
"Homosexual activists attempt to humiliate and politically destroy anyone who dares even criticize their agenda. Meanwhile, the MSM (mainstream media) casts us who believe marriage should remain between one man and one woman as the aggressors, as hate-filled villains."
In Catholic Family News, John Vennari writes,
“The Overhauling of Straight America” by Marshal E. Kirk and Hunter Madsen was expanded into the 1989 book, After the Ball, How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s. It is a blueprint of media and psychology manipulation for widespread public acceptance of homosexuality. One of Kirk and Madsen’s key strategies is to vilify their opponents: “We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.”
In 1958, Willard Kleon Skousen a one-time FBI Special Agent, published The Naked Communist which highlighted the communist plan to take over America. These 45 points, most of which have already occurred, were read into the congressional record by Albert Herlong (D-FL). These particular ones stand out relating to this situation:
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all studentnewspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
If one wishes to go back further, one need look no further than the The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita or one can always refer to Bella Dodd, a one-time leader in the American Communist Party brought back to the faith by the Grace of God and Venerable Fulton J. Sheen.
Indeed Bishop Bootkoski, there is an agenda and Catholics can only hope that you'll be enlightened to determine from whence it comes.
For more on my observations of the situation, please refer to those filed at:
↧
↧
Peter, Paul and Vishnu, I mean Shiva...no Ganesh - whatever!
Truly, you just can't make this stuff up.
First it is the Bishop of Metuchen, Paul Bootkoski kicking a Catholic teacher under the bus. Now it is The Most Reverend Peter F. Christensen, Master of Divinity, Master of Applied Spirituality and Doctor of Divinity kicking a Catholic State Senator under the bus along with Patricia Januzzi.
Bishop Peter seems to have forgotten the 20th chapter of the Book of Exodus:
[1] And the Lord spoke all these words: [2] I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [3] Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. [4] Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. [5] Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:
Just like Bishop Bootkoski, Bishop Christensen blames Pope Francis.
I'm so glad that I have no letters after my name.
Fox, pour me another glass of Goats Do Roam ...
 |
| The Dasavatara |
The Catholic Church's leadership in Idaho state has declared that a state senator's denunciation of Hinduism runs counter to the teachings of the church and Pope Francis's support for inter-religious dialogue.
When Universal Society of Hinduism President Rajan Zed said the opening prayers for the state senate's March 3 session in Boise, Senator Sheryl Nuxoll boycotted the invocation because she said she believed the United States is a Christian nation and "Hindu is a false faith with false gods".
Her opinions "do not represent the opinions or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, (Boise) Bishop Peter Christensen or even our Holy Father, Pope Francis, who has been an outspoken supporter of ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue," said a statement from the Boise Diocese provided on Friday by communications director Michael Brown. "Sen. Nuxoll's comments reflect her own personal opinions."
Nuxoll, who is a Catholic, was one of three Republican senators to boycott Zed's prayer, although the Republican Senate President Pro-Tem, Brent Hill, had invited Zed to be the guest chaplain. Zed's prayer was non-denominational and Hill said, "It refers to 'deity supreme.'"
After the senate prayer, Zed met the Boisie Catholic Diocese's Vicar General for Clergy, Monsignor Joseph A. da Silva, and Chancellor Marcella Wilske. Zed said they they had "a dialogue on various interfaith issues."
Jewish and other religious leaders have demanded an apology from Nuxoll. "Being a public official who is expected to represent all citizens, it is highly inappropriate and insensitive for Ms. Nuxoll to unnecessarily label a major religion as 'false,' as there are about 3 million Hindus in USA, including some in Idaho," said a letter signed by 28 clergy members and others last week.
According to The Jewish Daily Forward, Rabbi Daniel Fink of Boise's Jewish Congregation Ahavatah Beth Israel organised the letter campaign through the Idaho Interfaith Equality Coalition.
Even before the letter was sent, Nuxoll had ruled out any apology and invoked Mother Teresa. "I said it was a religion with false gods. I'm not going to give an apology," the Spokesman-Review newspaper quoted her as saying earlier this month.
"I felt I had to abstain, because I'm not going to be praying to false gods. I'm a believer like Mother Teresa that everybody should be the best they can," she added, according to the newspaper.
She also reiterated her belief that the US Constitution is "based on Judeo-Christian principles".
"I'm in a floor session bound to follow the Constitution," the Spokesman-Review quoted her as saying. "It is a Christian nation based on Christian principles."
The US constitution is secular and prohibits the establishment of official religion.
According to the newspaper, Nuxoll said she received many emails "running me down", but also some supporting her. She singled out one email backing her "from a lady who said she had lived with the Hindus". Nuxoll said that the woman wrote "there was a great amount of infanticide and abortion."
 |
| Ganesha (centre) with Shiva (top left), Devi (top right), Vishnu (bottom left) and Surya (bottom right); each of them has a sect which considers them as the Supreme Being. |
↧
Holy Father: Why have you allowed this man to take possession of his Cathedra?
 |
| Pope Francis with Bishop Juan Barros |
Victims ignored
Bishop Juan Barros, formerly of the Military Ordinariate in Chile has been made Ordinary of the Diocese of Osorno. Juan Carlos Cruz Chellew, James Hamilton Sánchez and José Andrés Murillo Urrutia said on Crux that they were "accustomed to the blows we have received from the Chilean hierarchy, but never directly from the Holy Father. It is hard to believe that it was the Pope himself who said a few days ago: "families should know that the Church makes great efforts to protect their children, who have a right to address her with confidence, because it is as safe house."
The Pope knew
Since this appointment was announced in January, Chileans have been outraged. Crux further reports that "The Archbishop of Concepción, Fernando Chomalí, met with the Pope a few weeks ago and warned him that the Barros appointment was causing consternation in Chile, not only in the community of Osorno, but throughout the country. Pope Francis admitted to knowing the suffering of the victims of Karadima and the damage to the Chilean church. However — despite everything — the Pope, through the Nuncio in Chile, Ivo Scapolo, reconfirmed Barros without considering the facts and warnings of so many people, including priests and bishops. With pain we see that the faithful will have to accept and deal with Pope Francis’ decision. A pain and fear we know too well."
Yet, Pope Francis still proceeded in spite of the warning. This is a scandal to the people of Osorno; it is a scandal and an insult to the three victims assaulted by a homosexual pederast priest whilst the then Fr. Juan Barros, watched.
The world is watching
Crux has now been reporting on this since it broke last week at the Associated Press. Patheos has picked it up finally and the secular media from the Toronto Star to the BBC to Al Jazeera are running with the story.
The Pope must be accountable for this; not just to Almighty God, but to the smelly sheep in the periphery.
As I stated in an interview with "From Rome" - Let us not, as Catholics, give an exaggerated status to any pope along the lines of what our protestant friends think – an infallibility without respect for the Gospel, which he does not possess. The First Vatican Council defined it very clearly.
All the talk of mercy, thumbs up photographs and the washing of feet and the daily media spin from the manipulators in the Vatican Press Office won't fix this. The Pope himself is responsible for this and there is no spinning out of it.
It is a disgrace to Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church.
In their dictatorship of mercy and condemnation of the Law and those who try to live by it some appear to have forgotten who is in charge.
↧
Linda Gibbons and Mary Wagner: Two Victim Souls for the Unborn
Canada's two warriors for the life of the unborn have a story to tell. A story about the crime of murder and dismemberment of the millions of unborn babies in Canada and the indifference of Canadians to the holocaust taking place in our land. It is also a story of unjust persecution under archaic injunctions that trample upon the rights of Canadians to express themselves in opposition to the horror of abortion.
Mary Wagner is in a jail cell in Milton, Ontario. She is there and has followed the example of Linda Gibbons.
Barona at Toronto Catholic Witness has an exclusive interview with the woman he calls the "Archangel for Life."
Let us pray for these two witnesses for life and for Christ.
Monday, March 23, 2015
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Linda Gibbons speaks with Toronto Catholic Witness
"I lift up my eyes, to you who sit enthroned in heaven..."
This interview with Canada's "Archangel for Life", Linda Gibbons, took place the week of March 16th. I thank Linda deeply for her graciousness in taking the time to answer these questions, which, I hope, will lead readers into a deeper appreciation of Linda's Christian witness for those who have no voice, no face: the forgotten unborn, the babies.
This week, we celebrate the 20th anniversary of St. Pope John Paul II's great encyclical, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), a prophetic work, even more relevant today when we are are surrounded by an ever expanding "culture" that promotes and glorifies death. Please pray for Linda Gibbons.
 |
| Linda Gibbons, with dear friends |
Psalm 123 "A Song of Ascent"
This interview with Canada's "Archangel for Life", Linda Gibbons, took place the week of March 16th. I thank Linda deeply for her graciousness in taking the time to answer these questions, which, I hope, will lead readers into a deeper appreciation of Linda's Christian witness for those who have no voice, no face: the forgotten unborn, the babies.
This week, we celebrate the 20th anniversary of St. Pope John Paul II's great encyclical, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), a prophetic work, even more relevant today when we are are surrounded by an ever expanding "culture" that promotes and glorifies death. Please pray for Linda Gibbons.
↧
BREAKING: -- LINDA GIBBONS ARRESTED OUTSIDE MORGENTALER ABORTUARY
Linda Gibbons has been arrested!
At 11:34 this morning on the public sidewalk outside of the Morgenthaler abortuary, Linda Gibbons, a heroine in the defense of the unborn in Canada was arrested for violating the decades old "temporary injunction" barring protests, even silent ones, outside abortion mills.
Linda was carrying her usual sign "Why Mom, when I have so much love to give." She had been there since 9:00AM and was later visited by Sheriffs before the Toronto Police Force was sent to arrest her.
At this point, I refer you to Toronto Catholic Witness blog who last night posted an interview with Linda. Barona was there to witness her silent protest and arrest and has the full story including photographs.
Linda will now join Mary Wagner in prison.
We await the outpouring anger at this injustice and that of abortion in the main-stream and Catholic media
↧
↧
Out of the rot and confusion of Germany's bishops comes a voice of Truth
There can be no denying the literal evil coming out of the hierarchy and the Church in Germany. The power that these men wield because of their wealth and the influence which this gives them upon many around the world and in Rome is disturbing.
In a report on March 23 in the Catholic Herald, Cardinal Walter Kasper urged that "We should all pray" for the Holy Spirit's guidance over the Synod "because a battle is going on." Kasper made his remarks in English presenting his new book to be published by the Paulist Press, Pope Francis's Revolution of Tenderness and Love. I can't wait to stand in line to get this bestseller. The Cardinal went on to say that “Hopefully, the synod will be able to find a common answer, with a large majority." On the matter of doctrine, Kasper said that he hopes there "will not be a rupture with tradition, but a doctrine that is a development of tradition."
Does this man seriously think that God is going to answer prayers that will undermine doctrine or that doctrine is determined by a majority vote?
On the matter of doctrine that it be a "development of tradition" according to Kasper, where have we heard this kind of talk before?
I'd like to be able to attribute that quote properly; the problem is, I really don't know who said it first. As far as can tell, it first appeared in the September 25, 2013 edition of the National Catholic Reporter and was written by Richard Gaillardetz. On the other hand, it has been used a number of times in lectures given by Father Thomas J. Rosica CSB as can be found in this report at LifeSiteNews and the accompanying video without attribution to Gaillardetz.
There is no doubt that the thinking of Kasper is in line with the quote above by whomever said it first. Doctrine changes when that doctrine that is a "development of tradition" and it "changes when pastoral contexts shift and new insights emerge."
Kasper is a Protestant. His thinking is heretical. There can be no doubt about it any longer and those that give credence to this man in Rome, no matter who they are, are like unto him. When you lie down with pigs you end up covered in mud is an apt expression.
Germany's Religious viewpoint
Meanwhile, Niedziela in Poland is carrying a report from Radio Watykańskie that German men and women religious are demanding changes to the Church's teaching on sex, marriage and homosexuality. The statement of the twenty-two thousand nuns and religious calls for the church to change its approach to sexuality and in this matter expressed more confidence in the faithful than the Church. The Church must be open as is the Orthodox Church and should bless divorcees, allowing them to receive communion. The Church should also bless same-sex couples and communion should not be denied them. German monks are inclined to the opinion that many of these would aspire to the Christian way of life and a faithful partnership for life, but cannot accept the fact that the Church requires them to maintain sexual abstinence. "How homosexuals would be considered as beloved children of God, if the Catholic Church does not bless them in their quest for a fulfilling partnership," the authors ask rhetorically. They blame the Magisterium of the Church for widening the gap between the doctrine and the everyday life of the laity.
Cardinal Marx's schismatic comments
![]()
Not long ago, we had Cardinal Marx stating; "We are no subsidiaries of Rome, Each conference of bishops is responsible for pastoral care in its culture, and must, as its most proper task, preach the Gospel on our own. We cannot wait for a synod to tell us how we have to shape pastoral care for marriage and family here."
Cardinal Marx is simply a new Luther! Combined with Cardinal Kasper's comments that Africans "should not tell us too much what we have to do," it becomes quite clear to all that these Germans are planning a schism one way or another as I wrote about previously.
Well, not all Germans it seems, thanks to the LORD.
Cardinal Cordes reprimands Marx
Rorate Caeli blog is now joined by other news services reporting on a March 7, 2015 letter to Tagespost from Paul Josef Cardinal Cordes an 80 year-old Cardinal and former Curia official. Cardinal Cordes commented on Marx's "theological blurriness" and that, "as a social ethicist Cardinal Marx may know much about the dependency of branches of large corporation but in an ecclesiastical context, such statements should rather be rather left to the village pub."
![]()
The Cardinal went on to say that the Church in Germany is "unfit to work against growing secularism." Cardinal Cordes lamented that in Cardinal Marx's comments, the idea of communion – among bishops, and with the Bishop of Rome – was sorely lacking, “even though the bishops expressly promised 'unity with the College of Bishops under the Successor of Peter' during their episcopal consecration. The sentence: 'We cannot wait for a synod to tell us how we have to shape pastoral care for marriage and family here' is not imbued with a spirit of 'Communio'.”
As reported in the NCRegister, the Cardinal “Particularly deplorable are the statements during the press conference that the 'new solutions'– everyone knows what is meant – can be theologically justified,” Cardinal Cordes wrote. “Does he want to say that the dogma of the inseparability of marriage becomes intolerable because of the life situations of remarried people?
These "new solutions" proposed by Kasper and Marx align directly with the statement above on changing doctrine due to new "development" or "new insights."
Catholics, wake up!
We cannot sit by and allow these men to undermine the beauty of the Truth of Christ as expressed in the Magisterial teaching of the Church in some false form of mercy which we hear about daily.
There is indeed a "battle going on" and Kasper will not win it.
In a report on March 23 in the Catholic Herald, Cardinal Walter Kasper urged that "We should all pray" for the Holy Spirit's guidance over the Synod "because a battle is going on." Kasper made his remarks in English presenting his new book to be published by the Paulist Press, Pope Francis's Revolution of Tenderness and Love. I can't wait to stand in line to get this bestseller. The Cardinal went on to say that “Hopefully, the synod will be able to find a common answer, with a large majority." On the matter of doctrine, Kasper said that he hopes there "will not be a rupture with tradition, but a doctrine that is a development of tradition."
Does this man seriously think that God is going to answer prayers that will undermine doctrine or that doctrine is determined by a majority vote?
On the matter of doctrine that it be a "development of tradition" according to Kasper, where have we heard this kind of talk before?
“Will this Pope re-write controversial Church doctrines? No. But that isn't how doctrine changes. Doctrine changes when pastoral contexts shift and new insights emerge such that particularly doctrinal formulations no longer mediate the saving message of God's transforming love, Doctrine changes when the Church has leaders and teachers who are not afraid to take note of new contexts and emerging insights. It changes when the Church has pastors who do what Francis has been insisting: leave the securities of your chanceries, of your rectories, of your safe places, of your episcopal residences go set aside the small-minded rules that often keep you locked up and shielded from the world.”
I'd like to be able to attribute that quote properly; the problem is, I really don't know who said it first. As far as can tell, it first appeared in the September 25, 2013 edition of the National Catholic Reporter and was written by Richard Gaillardetz. On the other hand, it has been used a number of times in lectures given by Father Thomas J. Rosica CSB as can be found in this report at LifeSiteNews and the accompanying video without attribution to Gaillardetz.
There is no doubt that the thinking of Kasper is in line with the quote above by whomever said it first. Doctrine changes when that doctrine that is a "development of tradition" and it "changes when pastoral contexts shift and new insights emerge."
Kasper is a Protestant. His thinking is heretical. There can be no doubt about it any longer and those that give credence to this man in Rome, no matter who they are, are like unto him. When you lie down with pigs you end up covered in mud is an apt expression.
Germany's Religious viewpoint
Meanwhile, Niedziela in Poland is carrying a report from Radio Watykańskie that German men and women religious are demanding changes to the Church's teaching on sex, marriage and homosexuality. The statement of the twenty-two thousand nuns and religious calls for the church to change its approach to sexuality and in this matter expressed more confidence in the faithful than the Church. The Church must be open as is the Orthodox Church and should bless divorcees, allowing them to receive communion. The Church should also bless same-sex couples and communion should not be denied them. German monks are inclined to the opinion that many of these would aspire to the Christian way of life and a faithful partnership for life, but cannot accept the fact that the Church requires them to maintain sexual abstinence. "How homosexuals would be considered as beloved children of God, if the Catholic Church does not bless them in their quest for a fulfilling partnership," the authors ask rhetorically. They blame the Magisterium of the Church for widening the gap between the doctrine and the everyday life of the laity.
Cardinal Marx's schismatic comments
Not long ago, we had Cardinal Marx stating; "We are no subsidiaries of Rome, Each conference of bishops is responsible for pastoral care in its culture, and must, as its most proper task, preach the Gospel on our own. We cannot wait for a synod to tell us how we have to shape pastoral care for marriage and family here."
Cardinal Marx is simply a new Luther! Combined with Cardinal Kasper's comments that Africans "should not tell us too much what we have to do," it becomes quite clear to all that these Germans are planning a schism one way or another as I wrote about previously.
Well, not all Germans it seems, thanks to the LORD.
Cardinal Cordes reprimands Marx
Rorate Caeli blog is now joined by other news services reporting on a March 7, 2015 letter to Tagespost from Paul Josef Cardinal Cordes an 80 year-old Cardinal and former Curia official. Cardinal Cordes commented on Marx's "theological blurriness" and that, "as a social ethicist Cardinal Marx may know much about the dependency of branches of large corporation but in an ecclesiastical context, such statements should rather be rather left to the village pub."
As reported in the NCRegister, the Cardinal “Particularly deplorable are the statements during the press conference that the 'new solutions'– everyone knows what is meant – can be theologically justified,” Cardinal Cordes wrote. “Does he want to say that the dogma of the inseparability of marriage becomes intolerable because of the life situations of remarried people?
These "new solutions" proposed by Kasper and Marx align directly with the statement above on changing doctrine due to new "development" or "new insights."
Catholics, wake up!
We cannot sit by and allow these men to undermine the beauty of the Truth of Christ as expressed in the Magisterial teaching of the Church in some false form of mercy which we hear about daily.
There is indeed a "battle going on" and Kasper will not win it.
↧
Raymond Cardinal Burke: "Confusing is spreading in an alarming way"
In an exclusive interview on LifeSiteNews, Raymond Cardinal Burke spoke again of the "manipulation" that was taking place at the Synod on the Family and he warns that confusion is spreading amongst the faithful on the matters of divorce and homosexuality.
![Featured Image]()
He is also not afraid to call out those who have sown this confusion and that they have gone unpunished.
More and more over the next months will Catholics need to listen to the words of this churchman who speaks with clarity and truth.
God bless Raymond Cardinal Burke for his faithfulness and fatherly care for all of us.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-interview-cardinal-burke-says-confusion-spreading-among-catholics
He is also not afraid to call out those who have sown this confusion and that they have gone unpunished.
More and more over the next months will Catholics need to listen to the words of this churchman who speaks with clarity and truth.
God bless Raymond Cardinal Burke for his faithfulness and fatherly care for all of us.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-interview-cardinal-burke-says-confusion-spreading-among-catholics
↧
Cardinal Nichols chastises priests and bloggers and lays flowers at hindu god
One wonders what Cardinal Nichols is afraid of as he chastises the five-hundred priests in England who felt it necessary sign a letter restating their "unwavering fidelity to the traditional doctrines regarding marriage and the true meaning of human sexuality, founded on the Word of God and taught by the Church’s Magisterium for two millennia.” Father Alexander Lucie-Smith gives his reasons quite clearly on why he signed the letter. As a moral theologian and a parish priest witnessing what has been occurring he expressed his "worry about the future."
![Cardinal Vincent Nichols will participate in the Synod in October in Rome (PA)]()
Cardinal Nichols states that"Every priest in England and Wales has been asked to reflect on the Synod discussion. It is my understanding that this has been taken up in every diocese, and that channels of communication have been established." Perhaps, His Eminence's "understanding" is not correct and that the established "channels of communication" have been closed. Perhaps these priests have to their horror that they had no other choice but to declare publicly their faith. Did they conclude that they were not being listened to by their bishops? Did they determine that there was some kind of collusion with the likes of Kasper and Marx and Bonny and other to change the teaching of the Church and debase the Holy Eucharist by allowing the divorced and civilly remarried and those engaged in other sexual practices to receive.
This is the same Cardinal Nichols who said that "Pope Francis understands this (love) in practical terms. He has already identified two kinds of behaviour that destroy love in the Church. They are complaining and gossiping. He is a practical man. He knows that we live in a society in which complaining and gossip is a standard fare. They sell newspapers and attract us to blogs because we love hear complaints and to read gossip. But Pope Francis is clear: they should have no place in the Church."
![Archbishop Nichols at the Hindu temple]()
On another occasion, as preserved on the web page of Diocese of Westminster, The Most Rev Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster and President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, made an official visit to the BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir, Europe’s first traditional Hindu temple in Neasden, north London. Archbishop Nichols was greeted by the Mandir’s spiritual leader, Yogvivek Swami, ( Head Sadhu, BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha - UK & Europe) and the Trustees of the Mandir. He was welcomed in traditional Hindu style – with a red vermillion mark applied to the forehead and the tying of a sacred thread on the wrist, symbolising friendship and goodwill. Yogvivek Swami guided the Archbishop around the Mandir complex, including the sanctum sanctorum. He then moved to the deity of Shri Nilkanth Varni (Bhagwan Swaminarayan) where he joined Yogvivek Swami in praying for world peace and harmony.
Damian Thompson at the Telegraph reported that "After wagging an admonishing finger to the incoming Traditionalist Anglicans that they may not "pick and choose", Archbishop Nichols chooses to go to Europe's first Hindu temple to receive a pagan blessing.
Did Cardinal Nichols show real respect for the gentleman in saffron robes by preaching to him Jesus Christ and Him crucified and risen from the dead or did he allow our brother to be left in sin worshipping false gods?
Synod warning
Archbishop Nichols chastises his priest for being faithful, states that bloggers should be silent or put out of the Church, offers flowers to a pagan god and receives a so-called blessing from a pagan priest's smudge mark. Have Cardinal Nichols and Bishop Petersen of Boise studied together the Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita?
These priests and we simple lay Catholics are not alarmists. We witnessed last October and we see the same shenanigans being played out leading up to this year's Ordinary Synod on the Family. Damian Thomson has written today in the Spectator that Cardinal Nichols' attempt at silencing these men will "backfire." He has posted the names of the five-hundred priests so as to "keep an eye on what happens to them."
Cardinal Burke said yesterday that "confusion is spreading in an alarming way." It is spreading because of these kinds of comments and behaviour of Cardinal Nichols. Today at his Wednesday audience, the Pope said that there is a need for more prayer and not "gossip and chatter." If exposing to the light the comments and attitudes of these Cardinals is "gossip and chatter" then we have a very big problem on our hands.
Rather than chastise these priests, His Eminence should be applauding their faithfulness to Christ and championing the truth. Is this just the latest example of a clericalist bullydom first to the laity in Toronto, Patterson and Boise extending to priests in England?
Cardinal Nichols states that"Every priest in England and Wales has been asked to reflect on the Synod discussion. It is my understanding that this has been taken up in every diocese, and that channels of communication have been established." Perhaps, His Eminence's "understanding" is not correct and that the established "channels of communication" have been closed. Perhaps these priests have to their horror that they had no other choice but to declare publicly their faith. Did they conclude that they were not being listened to by their bishops? Did they determine that there was some kind of collusion with the likes of Kasper and Marx and Bonny and other to change the teaching of the Church and debase the Holy Eucharist by allowing the divorced and civilly remarried and those engaged in other sexual practices to receive. Bloggers bad, Hindus good
On another occasion, as preserved on the web page of Diocese of Westminster, The Most Rev Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster and President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, made an official visit to the BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir, Europe’s first traditional Hindu temple in Neasden, north London. Archbishop Nichols was greeted by the Mandir’s spiritual leader, Yogvivek Swami, ( Head Sadhu, BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha - UK & Europe) and the Trustees of the Mandir. He was welcomed in traditional Hindu style – with a red vermillion mark applied to the forehead and the tying of a sacred thread on the wrist, symbolising friendship and goodwill. Yogvivek Swami guided the Archbishop around the Mandir complex, including the sanctum sanctorum. He then moved to the deity of Shri Nilkanth Varni (Bhagwan Swaminarayan) where he joined Yogvivek Swami in praying for world peace and harmony.Damian Thompson at the Telegraph reported that "After wagging an admonishing finger to the incoming Traditionalist Anglicans that they may not "pick and choose", Archbishop Nichols chooses to go to Europe's first Hindu temple to receive a pagan blessing.
Did Cardinal Nichols show real respect for the gentleman in saffron robes by preaching to him Jesus Christ and Him crucified and risen from the dead or did he allow our brother to be left in sin worshipping false gods?
Synod warning
Archbishop Nichols chastises his priest for being faithful, states that bloggers should be silent or put out of the Church, offers flowers to a pagan god and receives a so-called blessing from a pagan priest's smudge mark. Have Cardinal Nichols and Bishop Petersen of Boise studied together the Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita?
These priests and we simple lay Catholics are not alarmists. We witnessed last October and we see the same shenanigans being played out leading up to this year's Ordinary Synod on the Family. Damian Thomson has written today in the Spectator that Cardinal Nichols' attempt at silencing these men will "backfire." He has posted the names of the five-hundred priests so as to "keep an eye on what happens to them."
Cardinal Burke said yesterday that "confusion is spreading in an alarming way." It is spreading because of these kinds of comments and behaviour of Cardinal Nichols. Today at his Wednesday audience, the Pope said that there is a need for more prayer and not "gossip and chatter." If exposing to the light the comments and attitudes of these Cardinals is "gossip and chatter" then we have a very big problem on our hands.
Rather than chastise these priests, His Eminence should be applauding their faithfulness to Christ and championing the truth. Is this just the latest example of a clericalist bullydom first to the laity in Toronto, Patterson and Boise extending to priests in England?
↧
No gossip and chatter
One day after the release of the interview with Cardinal Burke on LifeSiteNews, Pope Francis, on March 25 at the general audience in Rome said, "There is no need of this, not of chatter!" - in Italian he said "chiacchierare," translated by Vatican Radio as "gossip and chatter." Is the Holy Father concerned about Cardinal Burke's clarity? If so, then is at least equally concerned about Cardinal Kasper's confusion? Is he concerned about bloggers and Catholics who express their views in accord with Canon 212 §3.
Has the Pope come to the realisation that the reason for Cardinal Burke's clarity is Kasper's confusion and the tolerance of it from him, the Bishop of Rome? Cardinal Burke is correct, there is much confusing and it is alarming. It has been created by those who seem to have too much influence over this Pope.
Let us be clear, it is not those who believe in the Magisterial teaching of the Church who have created the confusion and this chiacchierare, it is those who would subvert the Magisterial teaching. The scandal is that it is happening right under the nose of the Bishop of Rome himself, the Pope.
Perhaps His Holiness was familiar with the interview of Cardinal Burke as when asked which saints we should be invoking for the family today, the first with whom Cardinal Burke responded was the anything but "irregular,"Holy Family.
So indeed, let us pray as the Pope asks but it is up to him as to whether or not there will be less chiacchierare.
Courtesy of Father Allen J. MacDonald of Southern Orders:
+ + +
I would like for this prayer, and the whole Synod journey, to be animated by the compassion of the Good Shepherd for His flock, especially for persons and families that, for different reasons, are “troubled and abandoned, like sheep without a shepherd” (Mt 9:36). So, sustained and animated by the grace of God, the Church can be ever more committed, and ever more united, in the witness of the truth of the love of God and of His mercy for the families of the world, excluding none, whether within or outside the flock.
I ask you, please, to not neglect your prayer. All of us – the Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, priests, religious, lay faithful – we are all called to pray for the Synod. There is need of this, not of chatter! (chiacchierare) I also invite those who feel far away, or who are not accustomed to do so, to pray. This prayer for the Synod on the Family is for the good of everyone.
Here is the prayer:
Jesus, Mary and Joseph,
In you we contemplate
The splendour of true love,
We turn to you with confidence.
Holy Family of Nazareth,
Make our families, also,
Places of communion and cenacles of prayer,
Authentic schools of the Gospel,
And little domestic Churches.
Holy Family of Nazareth
May our families never more experience
Violence, isolation, and division:
May anyone who was wounded or scandalized
Rapidly experience consolation and healing.
Holy Family of Nazareth,
May the upcoming Synod of Bishops
Re-awaken in all an awareness
Of the sacred character and inviolability of the family,
Its beauty in the project of God.
Jesus, Mary and Joseph,
Hear and answer our prayer. Amen.
↧
↧
Cardinal Müller : Delegated decisions on the family to bishops' conferences is an "anti-Catholic idea"
The French Magazine, Famille Chrétienne, is carrying an interview this morning with Gerhard Ludwig Cardinal Müller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
This is only an excerpt from the interview with the rest in French requiring a registration. However, in this short question and answer, the Prefect states quite clearly that those in Germany such as Cardinal Marx who take the attitude that they are "not a subsidiary of Rome" are engaging in an "absolutely anti-Catholic idea." Cardinal Müller continues with general comments about the role of Episcopal Conferences that dioceses are not subsidiaries of the secretariat of an episcopal conference and that President "is nothing more than a technical moderator," and certainly not a little pope!
It appears that Cardinal Marx is becoming more isolated and exposed for what is, when it comes to the Church in Germany, a schismatic mentality
The translation of the article is below with emphasis:
![FAMILE CHRETIENNE]()
Cardinal Müller: "The bishop is to be a martyr by the word"
26/03/2015 - Par Jean-Marie Dumont
![]()
This is only an excerpt from the interview with the rest in French requiring a registration. However, in this short question and answer, the Prefect states quite clearly that those in Germany such as Cardinal Marx who take the attitude that they are "not a subsidiary of Rome" are engaging in an "absolutely anti-Catholic idea." Cardinal Müller continues with general comments about the role of Episcopal Conferences that dioceses are not subsidiaries of the secretariat of an episcopal conference and that President "is nothing more than a technical moderator," and certainly not a little pope!
It appears that Cardinal Marx is becoming more isolated and exposed for what is, when it comes to the Church in Germany, a schismatic mentality
The translation of the article is below with emphasis:
Cardinal Müller: "The bishop is to be a martyr by the word"
26/03/2015 - Par Jean-Marie Dumont
In this exclusive interview, Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, answers questions raised in the Church at the Synod on the family.
In a book of interviews on family, recently published in Italy and the United States, you encourage Christians to "choose the prophetic courage of martyrdom." Why?
The Church is not a philanthropic organisation. To say that we respect the views of all, we want good to all, is not enough. Present the Gospel as a single therapeutic message is not very difficult, but does not meet the requirement of Jesus. "Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and if we speak all kinds of evil against you because of me," Jesus said. The first apostles, Church Fathers, the great bishops of the Church's history have so often sailed facing headwinds. How could it be otherwise for us?
Some doctrinal or disciplinary decisions on marriage and the family can they be delegated to the bishops' conferences?
This is an absolutely anti-Catholic ideathat does not respect the catholicity of the Church. Episcopal conferences have authority over certain issues, but not a magisterium next to the Magisterium, without the pope and without communion with the Bishops. This is an absolutely anti-Catholic idea.
Recently, a German bishop said the Episcopal Conference he leads was not a "subsidiary of Rome". What about you?
An episcopal conference is not a particular council, much less an ecumenical council. The president of an Episcopal Conference is nothing more than a technical moderator, and as such has no special teaching authority. To hear that a Bishops' Conference is not a "subsidiary of Rome" gives me the opportunity to recall that the dioceses are not subsidiaries of the secretariat of an episcopal conference or diocese whose Bishop presides over the Episcopal Conference. This attitude makes the risk of waking some polarisation between the local churches and the universal Church, exceeded in the councils Vatican I and Vatican II. The Church is not a set of national churches, including the presidents would vote to elect their leader at the universal level.
↧
Would Pope Leo XIII have approved of bloggers?
We've lately heard from Pope Francis about "chiacchierare" translated as gossipy chat and from the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Nichols chastising his priests for speaking to the press about their fidelity. Previously he and others have chastised bloggers and we have seen the example of the Bishops of Metuchen and Boise in their persecution and chastisement respectively, of faithful Catholic women.
Brother Alexis Bugnolo is a consecrated man of private vows observing the Rule of St. Francis and is resident in Rome. He is the Editor and Publisher of The Franciscan Archive and the blog, From Rome.
With Brother's permission, I have reposted this. Oh, if we had the time to mine the riches of these Encyclical's past which make up the Magisterial teaching of the Church.
I imagine that if Pope Leo XIII had bloggers back then, he would have approved.
![]()
14. But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: “Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.”(12) To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: “Have confidence; I have overcome the world.”(13) Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.
Brother Alexis Bugnolo is a consecrated man of private vows observing the Rule of St. Francis and is resident in Rome. He is the Editor and Publisher of The Franciscan Archive and the blog, From Rome.
With Brother's permission, I have reposted this. Oh, if we had the time to mine the riches of these Encyclical's past which make up the Magisterial teaching of the Church.
I imagine that if Pope Leo XIII had bloggers back then, he would have approved.
From his Encyclical Letter, Sapientiae Christianae, of January 10, 1890
14. But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: “Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.”(12) To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: “Have confidence; I have overcome the world.”(13) Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.15. The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. So soon as Catholic truth is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. Now, faith, as a virtue, is a great boon of divine grace and goodness; nevertheless, the objects themselves to which faith is to be applied are scarcely known in any other way than through the hearing. “How shall they believe Him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? Faith then cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.”(14) Since, then, faith is necessary for salvation, it follows that the word of Christ must tie preached. The office, indeed, of preaching, that is, of teaching, lies by divine right in the province of the pastors, namely, of the bishops whom “the Holy Spirit has placed to rule the Church of God.”(15) It belongs, above all, to the Roman Pontiff, vicar of Jesus Christ, established as head of the universal Church, teacher of all :hat pertains to morals and faith.
16. No one, however, must entertain the notion that private individuals are prevented from taking some active part in this duty of teaching, especially those on whom God has bestowed gifts of mind with the strong wish of rendering themselves useful. These, so often as circumstances demand, may take upon themselves, not, indeed, the office of the pastor, but the task of communicating to others what they have themselves received, becoming, as it were, living echoes of their masters in the faith. Such co-operation on the part of the laity has seemed to the Fathers of the Vatican Council so opportune and fruitful of good that they thought well to invite it.“All faithful Christians, but those chiefly who are in a prominent position, or engaged in teaching, we entreat, by the compassion of Jesus Christ, and enjoin by the authority of the same God and Saviour, that they bring aid to ward off and eliminate these errors from holy Church, and contribute their zealous help in spreading abroad the light of undefiled faith.”(16) Let each one, therefore, bear in mind that he both can and should, so far as may be, preach the Catholic faith by the authority of his example, and by open and constant profession of the obligations it imposes. In respect, consequently, to the duties that bind us to God and the Church, it should be borne earnestly in mind that in propagating Christian truth and warding off errors the zeal of the laity should, as far as possible, be brought actively into play.
_________________
12. Summa theologiae, IIa-IIae, qu. iii, art. 2, ad 2m.
13. John 16:33.
14. Rom. 10:14, 17.
15. Acts 20:28.
16. Constitution Dei Filius, at end.
↧
Cardinal Koch tells the German Bishops not to do as some did under the "Nazis"
Vatican cardinal tells German bishops: We can’t adapt the faith to the times like Christians did under the Nazis
ROME, March 26, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An influential Swiss cardinal at the Vatican has warned Germany’s bishops that the Church cannot merely adapt itself to the times as some Christians did in order to support the Nazis.
↧