Pewsitter News Pewsitter News en-us Wed, 01 Apr 2015 15:18:35 GMT Wed, 01 Apr 2015 15:18:35 GMT none <![CDATA[ Pope Francis Makes Holy Thursday About Dirty Feet ]]>
Pope Francis Makes Holy Thursday About Dirty Feet

By Frank Walker


This will show those rulemakers

This will show those rulemakers


Boniface at Unam Sanctam Catholicam has detailed the striking offense that is the Pope’s regular Holy Thursday Stunt.  Pope Francis is trying to make a new religion, but it’s not really new.  It’s just not Catholic.

Pope Francis has again made headlines by announcing he will spend Holy Thursday washing the feet of inmates at the Rebiba prison in Rome. This is the third time the Holy Father has chosen to perform the foot washing ceremony in such facilities, visiting the Casal del Marmo prison in 2013 and the Don Gnocchi center for the elderly and disabled in 2014.
Saying the Holy Thursday Mass in the prison in 2013 was one of the first gestures of Francis’ pontificate, which earned him the respect of many while provoking apprehension among traditional Catholics. This misgiving among traditionalists provoked (and continues to provoke) ire among those who “don’t see what the problem is” and can’t understand why this is such a “big deal.”
I would say this is one issue where the traditionalist objection is totally misunderstood – willfully, I believe. “Don’t like it when Peter goes around with tax collectors and sinners, huh?” “Yeah, Jesus was offensive to the Pharisees, too.” These are the sorts of shallow rebuttals our criticisms have been met with, as if there is really nothing deeper to traditionalist objections beyond the stupid old “tax collectors and sinners” trope.
The problem is this is Holy Thursday, one of the holiest days of the year. It’s about so much more than dirty feet.
First off, lets clear the air about one thing: there is no problem with the pope celebrating a Mass at a prison or other such facility. Benedict XVI celebrated a Mass at Casal del Marmo prison during Lent of 2007 – the same location Francis used in 2013. The issue is not the location of the Mass, or that the pope wants to celebrate with prisoners, elderly, indigent, whatever. Not an issue.
Benedict, however, did not celebrate this Mass on Holy Thursday, and that is a big difference. This brings me to my first objection: The traditional location of the Holy Thursday evening Mass is St. Peter’s basilica, which made the Holy Thursday Mass much more available to the faithful. St. Peter’s Basilica (according to its website) is capable of seating 15,000 people; if Mass is held in the square, it can accommodate 80,000.
Whatever one may want to say about Masses of that magnitude, it cannot be denied that a Mass in a basilica offers a much greater opportunity for participation of the faithful than a Mass in a small prison or nursing home. The Holy Thursday Mass, which inaugurates the sacred Triduum and which (until 1642) was a holy day of obligation is in a totally different category than, say, a daily Mass. This is why when Benedict XVI wanted to celebrate Mass in the Casal del Marmo, he did so in a daily Mass, not the Holy Thursday Mass, which as part of the sacred Triduum, is of a much more solemn and public nature than a mere daily Mass.

Remember, the pope is also Bishop of the diocese of Rome. This means that for the past three years, the faithful of that diocese have been deprived of access to the celebration of one of the most sacred Masses of the year by their bishop. I admit this is not a huge issue or a monumental scandal – but it is something.

My pastor is having an “Easterbration” in the town football stadium with games, face-painting and even Mass!  There’s going to be puppets.  The whole town is invited, but if you don’t want that there’s an alternate Mass at church with no choir. (A blessing.)  That’s what the Pope is doing to faithful Catholics and priests, depriving them of their right and treating them with contempt, like Obama treats Israelis.
Regarding the importance of this inaugural Mass of the Sacred Triduum, it is well to recall that its proper name is the “Mass of the Lord’s Supper.” The “theme” or focal point of this Mass has always been the double institution of the Eucharist and the priesthood by our Lord Jesus Christ at the Last Supper.
In his last Holy Thursday homily delivered in 2004, St. John Paul II preached on the centrality of the Eucharist and its connection to the priesthood in the context of Holy Thursday:

“While we fix our gaze on Christ who institutes the Eucharist, we have a renewed awareness of the importance of the priests in the Church and of their union with the Eucharistic sacrament. In the Letter that I wrote to priests for this holy day, I wished to repeat that the Sacrament of the altar is gift and mystery, and that the priesthood is gift and mystery, both having flowed from the Heart of Christ during the Last Supper.” (source)

This is why one of the readings from the Holy Thursday Mass has always been the institution of the Eucharist as described in 1 Cor. 11:23-32. This has been part of the readings for the day as far back as we have records. In Pope Francis’ Holy Thursday celebrations, there is little emphasis on these traditional themes. For example, Francis’ 2013 homily does not mention the Eucharist at all; the refrain was a very generic message of “Help one another”; Francis’ 2014 homily focused entirely on the foot washing ceremony and admonished Christians to “be servants to one another.” No mention of the priesthood at all, and only a passing comment on the Eucharist, which he strangely subordinates to “service”; service is the main theme of the Mass in Coena Domini, and the Eucharist is an afterthought to service. This is an inversion from the familiar formula that the Eucharist, in fact, is the source and summit of the faith.

It must be remembered that though foot washing in general is a sign of service (cf. 1 Tim. 5:10), the Holy Thursday foot washing in particular is much more than that. Christ did not just wash His disciples’ feet as a sign of service to mankind in general, but of the service the hierarchy renders to the clergy in particular. This is why most liturgical foot washing in the Church’s history has always focused on the bishop’s service to his clergy; priests, canons, deacons and subdeacons have been the recipients of foot washing; this was true of diocesan bishops as well as the pope. It is an ecclesiological ritual relating to the clergy and their superiors, not a general sign of service to mankind.

It is certainly not “wrong” to wash the feet of persons not among the clergy; obviously as the parish level, a priest does not have any clergy beneath him whose feet he can wash and the washing of laymen’s feet is the norm (still, in some parishes, the priest will not wash the feet of anybody willy-nilly; he will choose representatives of different parish apostolates – Knights of Columbus, the DRE, ushers, etc). As mentioned above, foot washing was a sign of general obeisance in the early church. But at a pontifical Holy Thursday Mass, we would expect a bishop or the pope especially to recognize this clerical aspect of the rite by performing the Mandatum on the clergy subject to him. This gets obscured when the focus of the rite is reduced to mere “service” without reference to the clergy.

The choice of Holy Thursday is appropriate to the Pope’s message however, because it strikes right at the heart of the Church and goes fundamentally to his own stark faith and twisted vision.  The message of humble service is not the main message of the Pope’s Holy Thursday show.  The main message is break Church laws and flout the Eucharist, Holy Mass, and the priesthood on behalf of the poor and the sinful.
If the Holy Thursday foot washing is supposed to signify the service of the hierarchy to the Church – and to the clergy in particular – then we can easily understand why it is totally inappropriate that non-Christians should be the recipients of the ceremony. In what fantasy land can a Muslim or atheist in any way represent the Church?
Finally, of course, we all know that the rubrics for Holy Thursday say the recipient of the foot washing must be a vir (Lat. “man”). In 2013, the decision of the Holy Father to wash the feet of women prompted some apologists to simply shrug and say, “Well, the Holy Father is the supreme interpreter of the Church’s liturgical law and canon law. He can change it how he sees fit.”
That’s true to an extent. But it seems lost on many that to say one has an authority to change a law is not the same thing as suggesting he can simply break the law. We all understand this. If the Holy Father does not like the current legislation, he has the power to change it. He can promulgate new rubrics or new norms if he so chooses. But for law to be law, this is accomplished by an act of law; i.e., the lawgiver changing the law by an legitimate exercise of his legislative power. The law is not changed by the lawgiver simply breaking the law.
Suppose the speed limit in your town was 30 mph. Suppose your small town Mayor decided he did not like that speed limit. Suppose, on the premise that he was the “supreme authority” in your small town, he just decided to start breaking the speed limit with impunity. How would you react? You would be indignant! You would say, “If the Mayor doesn’t like the speed limit, then change the law, but for heaven’s sake, don’t just break it!”
Since the rubrics for Holy Thursday have not changed, the fact remains that Pope Francis is simply violating the rubrics. You may say the law should change. You may applaud his inclusiveness. You may affirm that he has the power to change the law. But you cannot deny that he is breaking the law every time he washes the foot of a female on Holy Thursday. There’s no other way to explain it.
The writer closes this most excellent and necessary piece with a powerful reminder of the mass capitulation of faithful intelligentsia in the new FrancisEra.

Let us also remember that the conservative apologists who are now saying that the pope can do whatever he wants are the very same who, under John Paul II and Benedict XVI, loudly insisted that the letter of the law must be observed when it came to liberal priests washing women’s feet.

It is not because I or anyone else has a “problem” with the pope fraternizing with the poor, or prisoners, or whatever. It is not because we think women are inferior or any nonsense like that. The substance of the traditionalist critique of Pope Francis’ venues for Holy Thursday is that this is a violation of liturgical law and hence an abuse of power; that it obscures the ecclesiological symbolism of the Mandatum rite and constitutes a detraction from the Eucharistic and clerical focus of the Mass of the Lord’s Supper; and that it deprives the Catholics of the Diocese of Rome from the ability to publicly celebrate the beginning of the Triduum with their bishop, thus depriving them of special graces.

You may read all this and shrug and say, “Eh. You’re nitpicking.” Maybe you think that. Maybe you are right. God knows. But it is definitely not a matter of traditional Catholics somehow objecting to the poor, or women, or prisoners receiving papal attention. You may think the objections are not worthy of consideration; but at least acknowledge that there are legitimate objections that go far beyond the tired old “tax collectors and sinners” mantra. It was never about that anyway.

I would add that outside the terrific scandal to the world that these symbolic acts provide, they are likely offensive to Our Lord as well since they deprive him of the worship He is due, not just in Rome but everywhere, and they obscure the message of His Gospel during moments most meaningful to Him.

... ]]>
Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Register Fires Pat Archbold: EWTN Formally Joins FrancisChurch ]]>
Register Fires Pat Archbold: EWTN Formally Joins FrancisChurch

By Frank Walker


Some call this 'Christian Unity'
Some call this 'Christian Unity'


Pat Archbold has been fired from the National Catholic Register.

Ever since Francis became Pope the media world has become a frightening virtual reality. First the Register started apologizing for the Pope's anti-Catholic attacks. Then they started attacking Catholics themselves. Last month they joined two dissident rags in a liberal political move which backfired, of course, in their faces. Now this. They release their best and most powerful writer; perhaps the only one that didn't need the job and could still tell the truth.

I got to write for the Register for five years and now I don't anymore. It was never gonna be a lifetime appointment. Any money I receive from writing is essentially inconsequential to my family as I have always had another primary career. I got into writing because I love my faith and the Church. It is that simple. I always just wanted to write what I thought about what was happening in the culture and in the Church and I wanted to say it the way I wanted to say it.

The sad thing is that this is EWTN's most faithful outlet. Remember how amazing and miraculous that network once was?

For a while that was understood, accepted, and even appreciated by the Register. For the past 2 years, that has increasingly not been the case. That shouldn't be a surprise to many. There was no sense in me changing since my reasons and need for writing had not changed. But obviously some things changed, as we all know. I knew what I was doing and I understood well the current mood. I didn't change because I didn't want to. But it is their newspaper and they get to choose what they want to pay for and publish. That obviously was no longer my writing.

In a strange way, I am relieved. It feels more honest now. No more me jumping through hoops and worrying about every word or topic choice. And I am sure some folks who had to deal with me during an increasingly tense process are equally glad to be rid of me.

He did have to jump through the hoops for a couple years. The problem is he couldn't stop his message from getting out.

The Christian example here is in Archbold's consistency.  He didn't bend.  They did. "There was no sense in me changing since my reasons and need for writing had not changed." Pat was writing out of love for Christ and the Church, NOT for money, so he had no need or desire to compromise!

My question is, "Why is the entire planet, including all the Catholic press, being paid to do Francis-Hype?"  Is perhaps the entire planet up to something holy and that's why they care so much about the Church?


Read more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Saint Cesar Chavez? Planned Parenthood Agrees ]]>
Saint Cesar Chavez? Planned Parenthood Agrees

By Frank Walker


Patron Saint of Unions and Planned Parenthood
Patron Saint of Unions and Planned Parenthood?


You can't deny the fundamental fact that the evil Left loves Pope Francis.  Why not?  He promotes most of their goals - as did many of his new saint causes.  Was Cesar Chavez very religious?

SAN JOSE -- Family members of labor leader Cesar Chavez led a march in his honor Saturday through the neighborhood where he once lived, and some supporters also used the birthday commemoration to revive a movement to make Chavez a Catholic saint.

Was it a procession or a 'march'?  Isn't San Jose where they just got a new FrancisBishop?

"This is the beginning of a campaign to canonize Cesar Chavez," said Rudy Chavez Medina, a nephew of the legendary California activist. "When you look at Cesar's life -- and all the lives he touched -- that's a miracle."

Is that going to be the miracle?

Laying out a detailed case for Chavez's canonization was the Rev. Jon Pedigo, pastor of Our Lady of Guadalupe Church, whose proposal was met with surprise and elation from some veterans of the United Farm Workers movement.

The process of officially declaring someone a saint requires a long, complicated investigation by the Catholic Church, usually to prove that the person miraculously cured physical ailments. But Pedigo said it can begin with a popular movement.

It "can start anywhere in the world, in his birthplace in Yuma, Arizona, or the place where we believe his call came from, here in San Jose," Pedigo said. "It's a matter of where do people really want to organize around the question of sainthood."

Is this about finding devotion to a saint and evidence of miracles, or just organizing for social action?  Will this be the first 'Patron Saint of Union Organizing'?

The sainthood campaign brought new energy to the annual San Jose event celebrating the life of Chavez, who died at age 66 in 1993 and would have turned 88 on Tuesday. Monday is a state holiday in his honor.

After a service at the Guadalupe Church, about 100 people, led by the labor leader's siblings, nephews and nieces and a host of local politicians, began marching from McDonnell Hall, where Chavez gathered farmworkers in the 1950s.

"Here in East San Jose, one of our own community members raised the consciousness of our whole nation," said Mayor Sam Liccardo, sporting a white guayabera shirt for the occasion.

He's a consciousness-raising saint even the mayor can love.  Guess who else loves Chavez?

“Planned Parenthood shares César Chávez’s belief in fair treatment for everyone; we believe that all women and their families deserve the highest quality of affordable health care no matter who they are and where they live – no matter what. We know that health disparities remain a serious issue that is undeniably linked to poverty, lack of access, racism, sexism, and discrimination in all of its forms. As we continue to be inspired by César Chávez’s legacy, we know that these structural inequalities can only be changed through collective action – that’s why we are committed to working together with our partners to break down these barriers and to transform our world from one divided by disparities to a world united by health equity.

“The Affordable Care Act has provided millions of Latinos with access to critical services and allowed us to make significant strides toward better health care outcomes for all, but there is still much work to be done. We know that enrollment was only half the battle. Now that many Latinos have insurance for the first time, we are committed to making sure that they know what they can do with it, and of course there are still a significant number of Latinos who remain uninsured, many of whom are undocumented. We honor César Chávez’s memory by continuing to provide and advocate for services that allow people of all ages, races, and walks of life – regardless of immigration status – to reach their fullest potential.”

So, Planned Parenthood is filled with esteem for the labor-leader saint.  I guess a life of service can be a lot like 'advocating for services', and even though there isn't a word about Him in either of these testimonials, we all know Jesus was all about service!


... ]]>
Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Dom Helder Camara: New Emerging FrancisSaint Even More Like Pope Francis ]]>
Dom Helder Camara: New Emerging FrancisSaint Even More Like Pope Francis

By Frank Walker


They call me Communist because I'm all about social action!
They call me Communist because I'm all about social action!


FrancisChurch may seem like a completely new kind of Catholicism, but it's not new.  The more you learn about it, the more you can see it's all been done before.  In Kerknet Google Translation we read: before new 'martyr' Oscar Romero has even been beatified yet another 'saint of the people' has emerged from the Pope's Latin America; home of  the poor, the poor, the poor and the oppressed....oh and the marginalized.

Mgr. Fernando Antônio Saburido OSB, Archbishop of Olinda and Recife (Brazil), Rome has asked for permission to his archdiocese the beatification process for Dom Helder Camara, the legendary "bishop of the poor", to boot. Rome investigating the case. So wrote the French newspaper La Croix 'Monday.

Can you imagine if our Lord in His day went around bleating continuously about the poor and their evil oppressors?  Instead of dying on a cross he might have lived to be ninety like our new FrancisChurch saint.

Dom Helder Camara (1909-1999), the symbol of liberation theology in Latin America, the firm took on the poor. In 1964 he became Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, in one of the poorest regions of Brazil. He left the Archbishop's palace and went to live in a slum.

No Pope should live in the Pope's house and no archbishop in the archbishop's house!  What do you think I am, an archbishop?  I'm not one of those evil elitist Church-people you know.  The poor are at the center of MY Gospel.

Dom Helder Camara founded a seminary where the formation of the priest candidates in social action was as important as the theological formation.

Let me see.  Theology is about God, Truth, and the Catholic Faith. Social Action is about radical agitation, envy, guerilla  war, and Communist thuggery.  He's right!  They are equally important!

He opposed the then military dictatorship in his country when the military him as 'communist' and 'demagogue' labeled. "When I give food to the poor, they say I'm a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they say I'm a communist, "said Dom Helder Camara then.

Wait a minute, that's the Pope's line, yes?  Communism stole the Catholic flag.  It's just Christianity.  All I do is love the poor and people call me a Communist. I thought Pope Francis made that up?

Is there a slight chance that people called Oscar Romero, Dom Helder Camara, and Pope Francis Communists because they act like Communists, not because they love the poor?  Is it possible to love the poor without raving against the unjust system like a Communist? Can people who are neither poor themselves nor socialists actually love the poor?

No. It's not possible.  In that 1970's Latin American world of Pope Francis there was either the Church of the Poor or the greedy enablers of the repressive murderous 'military dictatorship' (many of whom respected the rule of law and were actually faithful Catholics).

In 1979, Pope John Paul II brought openly tribute to Dom Helder Camara, during his visit to Brazil, but in 1985 appointed Msgr. José Cardoso Sobrinho as his successor. And that immediately made a tabula rasa of everything Dom Helder Camara had built.

Once again John Paul II turns out to be one of them.  He must have been in the pocket of the U.S. money-machine backing all the Latin American oppressors.  Thank goodness the Church is finally free from their influence and we can go back to moving forward, ever forward even more toward the people!

The only issue here is that Camara can't be a 'martyr' because he wasn't shot.  Get ready for Dom Helder's miracle.




... ]]>
Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ New Church of Suicidal Loopholes ]]>
New Church of Suicidal Loopholes

By Frank Walker


Escaping Pain
Escaping Pain

Aleteia is running a priestly advice piece on suicide, and predictably it does everything humanly possible to make killing oneself seem anything but damnable.  It even presents a picture of a woman who seems to be submerged, as if drowning.  If only suicide were drowning!

A writer asks Fr. Mike Schmitz if those who commit suicide 'automatically' go to Hell.  Who asks questions like this?  Does anyone believe that Hell is automatic?  Isn't Christ our judge? Mercy is always possible for those who can truly repent but reiterating that incessantly undermines Church teaching. We have our Church to show us what we should expect, and what not to presume.

Catholics must take an absolute stand against every form of suicide. Suicide is “contrary to the love of God.” It is truly evil. Now, please understand me here. In saying that suicide is evil, I am not saying that the person who commits suicide is necessarily evil. But anyone can choose to do evil actions. There are some actions which are evil in and of themselves, regardless of motivation or circumstance. Of these, suicide is one.

Suicide is always bad, but people...people are not bad, OK.  This confusing modern mantra makes Catholics think they're all going to Heaven.  People can be called bad when they are vicious, meaning they have acquired many vices.  That's what a bad person is.  Everyone is redeemable, but some can truly be called bad until the point when they are not.

And for these people who are never really bad and who commit suicide, there are all kinds of extenuating circumstances.

If a person freely chose to kill himself, fully knowing that he was saying “no” to God, and he died unrepentant, all signs point to eternal separation from God. But here’s the deal: we don’t know a lot of that information. I don’t know if his will was truly free (the person may have suffered from “grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture”…these can lessen their responsibility (cf. CCC 2282). I also don’t know the person's degree of knowledge; did he know that he was not simply “escaping pain,” but was in fact choosing something contrary to God’s love? And lastly, none of us have any way of knowing if the person repented before death. There is an ancient saying in the Church, “We don’t know what happened between the bridge and the water.” This indicates that you and I have no clue if the person we love regretted the decision and turned back to God at the last minute. There are stories of many people who survived attempted suicides, who found themselves praying that God didn’t let them die even after they jumped, or swallowed the pills, or used other means.

Why is the bar so, so low today?  Committing suicide is absolutely one of the worst things a person can do and honestly, when did psychology ever begin to be a factor in someone's culpability?  Didn't they just invent it?

Another mitigation is this lack of knowledge.  People who kill themselves don't really know it's bad today, and people don't know what marriage is either, and they don't know all the sexual sins are wrong any more, and on and on.  Why do we even teach anyone the Faith?  If we left them all blissfully ignorant they could sin miserably their whole lives and then sail into Heaven!  You don't even have to be part of the Church so long as you're nice.

It's like we've developed a new doctrine of excuses.  Can we really expect to get to Heaven with a pocketful of explanations? No. but we can surely go to Hell preaching laxity, presumption, and hyper-mercy.



 Read more at The Stumbling Block.



... ]]>
Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Dom Helder Camara: New Emerging FrancisSaint Even More Like Pope Francis; New Church of Suicidal Loopholes ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker


Dom Helder Camara: New Emerging FrancisSaint Even More Like Pope Francis


New Church of Suicidal Loopholes





... ]]>
Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch: It's About Faith Not Doctrine! Love Not Law! ]]>
FrancisChurch: It's About Faith Not Doctrine! Love Not Law!

By Frank Walker

Feel the Joy
Feel the Joy


It's difficult to imagine the frightening zeal that must have possessed men like Martin Luther or the other false priests who led huge movements out of the Church. For those unfortunate shepherds their work was an obsession.  Pope Francis cannot stop hammering at those Pharisees and doctors of the law by whom, we must know by now, he means us, faithful pious Catholics.

Zenit's Junno Arocho Esteves reports on the Pope's March 26th homily in Casa Santa Marta.

To be joyful is a grace that only comes from faith and not from doctrine or law that is detached from love. This was the central theme of Pope Francis' homily at Casa Santa Marta this morning.

According to Vatican Radio, the Holy Father reflected on today's readings, both of which spoke on Abraham. In John's Gospels, Jesus tells the scribes and doctors of the law that "Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day; he saw it and was glad.”

The Pope said that the doctors of the law did not understand what Jesus meant because they did not understand the joy of hope, of promise and of the covenant.

"They did not know how to rejoice, because they lost the meaning of joy that only comes from faith," he said. "Our father Abraham was able to rejoice because he had faith: he was made just in faith.

Abraham was justified by faith. Not also works?

The Pope continues.

These lost their faith. They were doctors of the law, but without faith! But more so: they lost the law! Because the center of the law is love, love for God and for neighbor."

Of course Our Lord corrected the Pharisees because they were led by self-interest.  That's why they went around enforcing unjust oppressive rules, rules which have nothing to do with Jesus or the true teachings of the Catholic Church.

The Holy Father went on to say that the doctors of the law were so attached to doctrine that their often times their questions dealt in abstract circumstances.

"Should taxes be paid to Cesar, or should they not? This woman, who was married seven times, when she goes to Heaven will she be the wife of those seven? […]

Petty overbearing law-making more appropriate to the U.S. Congress is how our Pope sees the doctrines of the Church and the Holy Mass. Since love isn't at the center, these are only unjust laws which have nothing to do with faith. So the master of the false dichotomy presents the king of them all.  He pits doctrine against faith and he pits the law against love.

The problem is: the doctrines of the Church ARE faith and it's law IS love.  We aren't Pharisees because we don't reject Christ!

This was their world, an abstract world, a world without love, a world without faith, a world without hope, a world without trust, a world without God," he noted. "And this is why they could not rejoice!"

No hope, no faith, no trust, no God, no point in joy:  How much contempt can the Pope muster for men and women who love Church teaching?

The 78 year old Pontiff continued saying that it was sad to be a believer without joy. Without joy, he said, there is no faith, only "cold doctrine."

Now we're cold dead too.

He's always going on about warmth and closeness. Didn't his mother hug him?  It gives me the creeps.

Concluding his homily, Pope Francis said that the joy of faith and the Gospel is the touchstone of one's faith. Without it, one is not a "true believer."

So now Pope Francis has become a joy-sniffer who goes around pegging Pharisees with his joyometer.  Better check that pickle face, Catholic!



Read more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Cardinal Nichols to Real Catholics: Stay Out of the Press! ]]>
Cardinal Nichols to Real Catholics: Stay Out of the Press!

By Frank Walker


Don't cross Francis with that doctrine stuff in my territory
Don't cross Francis with that doctrine stuff in my territory


The Tenth Crusade never loses her steel-eyed assessment of the Pontificate for Thugs:

The synod is sinking and the rats are coming out of the woodwork.

Didn't Pope Francis initiative call for open and honest discussion of Kasper's heresy?

If you can distance yourself from the emotional baggage that comes with the empowerment of the thugs who sell heresy, this is fascinating to watch.

Pope picks heretic to teach his see heresy and tells us all to openly discuss the pros and cons of embracing it.

When Catholics who will never embrace heresy openly and honestly discuss the cons, Pope Francis army of mercy and justice tell us to STFU.

It's all about synodality and open, honest discussion (of heresy and sacrilege).

Make a mess! (Just don't get in my way.)

When 500 faithful priests from the UK signed a letter asking the Synod to defend the Faith, the leader of the English Bishops, Cardinal Nichols, told them publicly to be quiet.  The same day, Pope Francis warned the Church to pray for, not 'gossip' about the Synod.

I always knew what Francis meant by all that railing against gossip.  He means keep your mouth shut and never cross me or one of my pliant FrancisBishops.

Get this: After the Holy Father tells us to discuss the very public, well-orchestrated circus of deception and heresy at the synod, this Cardinal tell us not to conduct a debate about the synod through the press.

Priests should not conduct a debate about the October Family Synod through the press, Cardinal Nichols has said, following the publication of a letter signed by hundreds of priests, urging the synod to issue a ‘clear and firm proclamation’ upholding Church teaching on marriage.

They want exclusive rights to conduct publicity stunts.

UK Cardinal Nichols continues:

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,’ the statement said.

‘The pastoral experience and concern of all priests in these matters are of great importance and are welcomed by the Bishops. Pope Francis has asked for a period of spiritual discernment. This dialogue, between a priest and his bishop, is not best conducted through the press.’

The problem is simple and it's been going on for decades.  What do faithful clergy do when their hierarchy stand against the faith?  Answer: They must be silent, endure or be banished with their lives ruined, or they can unite, hold fast.

The faithful clergy need laypeople to defend them more than they ever have.  We can't go on like this, with evil men destroying the Church and crushing true Catholic clergy.  It can't continue forever. The Church is dying.  God sees the damage and He will ask us why?

Tenth Crusade sums up the Cardinal's threat:

Get it?

Any discussion was supposed to be privately discussed with the heretics trying to implement it.

Good one.

Next time we have a complaint, let's waste our time and call up the foxes they put in the henhouse.

There is something really creepy about communication in the administration of this papacy. In every conceivable way.

Right is wrong and wrong is right. Error is evangelized and truth is silenced.

It's the stink of sulfur.

We need to be careful because it is everywhere and demons specialize in capitalizing on naivete and stupidity.

But everywhere this agenda is being promoted, the liars and thugs storm to silence and destroy catechesis and truth.

We've all taken several bites of the apple now and it is rotten to the core.



Read more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ CDF to Cardinal Marx: You Are Nothing More Than A Technical Moderator ]]>
CDF to Cardinal Marx: You Are Nothing More Than A Technical Moderator

By Frank Walker

Laying down the law somewhere else
Laying down the law somewhere else

Some weeks after Gang of Nine Cardinal Reinhard Marx made his statement of German independence from Rome, the Vatican head of Doctrine has responded.

The idea that bishops’ conferences can take doctrinal decisions on marriage and the family is “absolutely anti-Catholic”, the Vatican’s doctrinal chief has said.

In an exclusive interview with the French Catholic magazine Famille Chrétienne, Cardinal Gerhard Müller said: “This is an absolutely anti-Catholic idea that does not respect the catholicity of the Church. Episcopal conferences have authority over certain issues, but not a magisterium alongside the Magisterium, without the Pope and without communion with the bishops.”

The prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also responded to recent remarks by Cardinal Reinhard Marx, the president of the German bishops’ conference.

Cardinal Marx argued that the German bishops were “not just a subsidiary of Rome” and needed to set their own policies on marriage and the family.

He said: “Each episcopal conference is responsible for the pastoral care in their culture and has to proclaim the Gospel in its own unique way. We cannot wait until a synod states something, as we have to carry out marriage and family ministry here.”

Marx is right that bishops' conferences do wield a lot of power, but they shouldn't.  They are another of many bad modern ideas and they have undermined the Church entirely.

According to a translation by Rorate Caeli, Cardinal Müller told Famille Chrétienne: “An episcopal conference is not a particular council, even less so an ecumenical council. The president of an episcopal conference is nothing more than a technical moderator, and he does not have any particular magisterial authority due to this title.

It's hard to imagine what Marx hoped to accomplish with his arrogance since it seemed to hurt the Pope's apparent initiative to enforce Mass sacrilege, throwing in the towel so to speak; except for the fact that it does telegraph what Germany will do, and many other countries following them, if the Synod fails to produce results.


Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Obamas to Host Pope Francis. They Have So Much To Talk About! ]]>
Obamas to Host Pope Francis. They Have So Much To Talk About!

By Frank Walker

For the poor, the marginalized, and the common good
For the poor, the marginalized, and the common good

In a frightening piece last December a noted Marxist sees a new Church coming that is indistinguishable from Communism.  Some months after the Pope Francis-brokered Obama Cuba betrayal, Cliff Kincaid predicted a Francis-Obama axis of socialists in the Americas.

That's why it's unsettling to see that Pope has added an event to his U.S. Trip in September.

The White House says President Barack Obama will host Pope Francis in Washington when he visits the United States this fall.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama and first lady Michelle Obama would welcome the pontiff as a guest at the White House on Sept. 23. It is Francis' first papal visit to the United States.

Francis is already scheduled to address the annual U.N. General Assembly of world leaders on Sept. 25. The pope has also agreed to address a joint meeting of Congress on Sept. 24, the first time the head of the world's Roman Catholics will address Congress.

Obama met Francis in the Vatican in March of last year. Earnest said discussions would range from poverty and economic opportunity to immigration and the environment.

This kind of high-level diplomacy is ugly.  Why, at the top of the world, is everyone all smiles and friendly, having dinner, honoring each other?  How many good Catholics would like to break bread with Mr. and Mrs. Obama?  I would hope none. I guess we just don't understand diplomacy.

Poverty, economics, illegal aliens, the earth, controlling weather - They have so much to talk about!

They have so much in common.



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch: It’s About Faith Not Doctrine! Love Not Law! Cardinal Nichols to Real Catholics: Stay Out of the Press! CDF to Cardinal Marx: You Are Nothing More Than A Technical Moderator; Obamas to Host Pope Francis. They Have So Much To Talk ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

FrancisChurch: It’s About Faith Not Doctrine! Love Not Law!


Cardinal Nichols to Real Catholics: Stay Out of the Press!


CDF to Cardinal Marx: You Are Nothing More Than A Technical Moderator


Obamas to Host Pope Francis. They Have So Much To Talk About!




... ]]>
Thu, 26 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Beatification of Oscar Romero is the Church Atoning for its Sins ]]>
Beatification of Oscar Romero is the Church Atoning for its Sins

By Frank Walker



I know what you're up to and I want it to stop.
I know what you're up to and I want it to stop.


The hard-left "Progressive" has a glowing story of beloved new 'martyr' Archbishop Oscar Romero, chastened by the Church for radical Liberation Theology and soon to be blessed in the new FrancisChurch.

While in the capital, leading the church, he gained incredible spiritual strength to defend the poor and the voiceless. Millions would listen to his homilies on radio.

The people who truly embraced Romero were the poor campesinos who attended his mass and those who had the privilege to get to know him when he would visit their villages. Romero came from a middle-class background but he purposely chose to live a humble life.

Every priest makes humble choices and many sacrifices, unless of course they rise into the new hierarchy.  Then they must make token visible gestures, like selling off residences and discretely living in apartment buildings, carrying old suitcases, wearing brown shoes, and driving Fords.

Romero was not afraid to die. He was a valiant man who did not accept bodyguards. He consciously chose to give his life for the poor.

But he was very afraid of the demons that were being unleashed upon the Salvadoran populace. He knew much blood would be spilled. He even risked his life by having a dialogue with the guerrilla leaders, asking them to avoid using violence. He tried everything in his power to stop the oncoming bloodbath.

What is a demon?  Is it an actual demon or someone who's not 'the poor' and kills?  Did you know 'having a dialogue' risked one's life?  I thought that was always a peace thing?

Before his assassination, Romero visited Pope John Paul II, who snubbed Romero. Romero was deliberately made to wait an inordinate amount of time and relegated to a long line to meet the pope. The pope chastised Romero and ordered him to stop speaking up for the rights of the poor and involving himself in political issues.

Romero returned heartbroken to El Salvador. But he still continued to denounce the regime’s human rights abuses and killings. He made up his mind that he would give his life for the persecuted Salvadoran people, even if the Vatican refused to acknowledge the atrocities.

It's important to remember that the Liberation Theology pro-Communist front hates the Catholic Church establishment and everything it represents.  Who did Pope John Paul think he was to correct Oscar Romero when all he did was love the poor and offer them his life!  Romero was heartbroken!

Who was right, the Pope who told Romero to stay out of politics, or the one who is canonizing him and calling him a martyr because he died for those politics?  It can't be both.  What kind of NewChurch is this?

Even if Romero did die because he cared about the oppression of the poor, is that a martyr, or is it just a so-called good deed doer?  St. Stephen died for Christ.  Romero died supposedly at the hands of those 'demons' in the government.

Ironically, the same church that turned its back on Romero is all set to venerate him. The Catholic Church formally beatified Romero on May 23 in San Salvador, one step short of sainthood.

He fed the poor, clothed them, and he spoke up for them, knowing that he would possibly be killed. In fact, the miracle is that Romero has been now recognized as an international hero by the Catholic Church, when before he was demonized by many of his fellow clergy. Finally, the church is atoning for its sins toward him.

Everything is a miracle: feeding the poor, clothing the poor, speaking about them a lot - all miracles, and the biggest miracle is that the notorious Catholic Church is calling Romero a hero and ready to canonize him?!

In the new 'ever forward' FrancisChurch, it's Oscar Romero who is a saint and the Catholic Church who is the sinner.  "We must atone," the Progressive magazine rants, and we are.


See more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Evangelium Vitae at 20: Three Popes on 'Life' Means More Leftist Policy? ]]>
Evangelium Vitae at 20: Three Popes on 'Life' Means Still More Leftist Policy?

By Frank Walker


Leftist Policy Just As Important As Baby Girls
Leftist Policy Just As Important As Baby Girls


At Catholic Vote, on the twentieth anniversary of John Paul II's Evangelium Vitae, it's time to make everything about life.

Tomorrow, on the Feast of the Annunciation, we mark also the 20th anniversary of the promulgation of St. John Paul II’s Evangelium Vitae. In that encyclical, the Polish pope insisted that “everyone has an important role to play” in proclaiming the Gospel of Life:

Together with the family, teachers and educators have a particularly valuable contribution to make. Much will depend on them if young people, trained in true freedom, are to be able to preserve for themselves and make known to others new, authentic ideals of life, and if they are to grow in respect for and service to every other person, in the family and in society.

This is what it means to build a culture of life in the broadest sense, the implications of which reach far beyond opposition to grave evils like abortion or euthanasia: human freedom must be directed toward truth, toward “authentic ideals” of life in the family and in society itself.

I'm so confused.  Is this about life and death or about freedom, truth, ideals, family and society?

The culture of life, in which the dignity and worth of every human person is protected and cherished, is the only sure foundation upon which to build an authentic civilization of love. The full dignity and worth of the human person is revealed in the light of the Incarnation: we were made by God, in the image of God, for communion with God.

Dignity and worth?  Authentic civilization?  Love? God?  Are all these things really the same as condemning abortion and euthanasia, tied together in a some great karma in the sky?

Continuing with three popes on Life, CV's Stephen White quotes Pope Benedict next, where he talks about the worth of every human being and how the dictatorship of relativism leads to murder.

Pope Benedict XVI understood this very clearly. When we lose sight of the truth about the human person, we lose both a proper sense of the worth of every human life, but we also lose the proper understanding of what it means to be person. A person is not just an isolated individual; a person always exists in relation to other persons, and finds fulfillment in the giving and receiving of love.

Obscure the truth of the human person and what remains is, in then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s famous words, “a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.” The dictatorship of relativism arises when we become untethered from the truth about who we are and what we are destined for. In this state, we are not free; quite the opposite. We are left with only ourselves, cut off from the common ground of truth, with no ability to recognize the true dignity of others. The culture of death and the dictatorship of relativism are thus intertwined; indeed, they are two facets of the very same problem.

Benedict was clear.  But next we get Francis, the third Pope on 'life.'

Pope Francis picks up on this theme, too, linking it definitively to his great theme of solicitude for the poor. Shortly after he was elected pope, Francis spoke to various ambassadors and diplomats. He spoke of the significance of his chosen name, Francis, for understanding the Church’s closeness to the poor. Then the Holy Father continued:

But there is another form of poverty! It is the spiritual poverty of our time, which afflicts the so-called richer countries particularly seriously. It is what my much-loved predecessor, Benedict XVI, called the “tyranny of relativism”, which makes everyone his own criterion and endangers the coexistence of peoples. And that brings me to a second reason for my name. Francis of Assisi tells us we should work to build peace. But there is no true peace without truth! There cannot be true peace if everyone is his own criterion, if everyone can always claim exclusively his own rights, without at the same time caring for the good of others, of everyone, on the basis of the nature that unites every human being on this earth.

To summarize: Rich people suffer from spiritual poverty. The dictatorship of relativism endangers co-existence. I picked the name Francis because he said we should work for peace. There's no peace without truth and there's no truth with relativism, where everyone claims their own rights without caring for others.

There's a line running through things but this is a reach.

Here we see the common thread which runs from the culture of death, through the dictatorship of relativism, straight to what Pope Francis has dubbed, the culture of waste:

This “culture of waste” tends to become a common mentality that infects everyone. Human life, the person, are no longer seen as a primary value to be respected and safeguarded, especially if they are poor or disabled, if they are not yet useful — like the unborn child — or are no longer of any use — like the elderly person.

Pope Francis goes on to tie this “culture of waste” to a lack of respect for material goods and nature itself. As I’ve highlighted before, when we lose sight of our proper relationship with the creator—our origin and end—our relationship with all of creation suffers.

Finally, and for this reasons, what Pope Francis calls the culture of waste, is intimately connected to that materialism—as common in consumerist societies as in socialist ones, according to John Paul II—that reduces man to the sum of his economic choices and ignores the fullness of his freedom and, indeed, the fullness of his humanity. In Centesimus Annus, John Paul II connects our disordered relationship to the material world back to the dangers of thinking about man in primarily economic terms:

When… man is seen more as a producer or consumer of goods than as a subject who produces and consumes in order to live, then economic freedom loses its necessary relationship to the human person and ends up by alienating and oppressing him.

So here we are again.  Attacks on life and the Dictatorship of Relativism have caused us not to care for others, to treat each other like throw away material, to waste each other, to hurt nature.  Because of our careless 'consumerism' we're as materialistic as the cruel socialists or ruthless 'capitalists' JPII lamented.

Two of these three popes, John Paul II and Francis, are both mistaken to fault capitalism for being as materialistic as socialism since the 'capitalism' they deride is not one of too much freedom and too little government control.  The 'capitalism' they fault is our current western economies, where small groups of powerful men own the means of production or 'capital', and most people must come to them or to the government for work.  That is materialistic, but it's not a need for even more regulations and state controls.  It's a need for less regulation and more freedom.

More regulation and more control just means more socialism, yes?

Either way, none of these things have anything to do with abortion or euthanasia, unless you're talking about evils foisted on people by rulers with too much power and no love for God or the Faith.


See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Go To Hell if You Don't Help the Poor! ]]>
Go To Hell if You Don't Help the Poor!

By Frank Walker

Fire and Brimstone for Poverty Policy?
Fire and Brimstone for Poverty Policy?


At Aleteia Tom Hoopes reveals Philly Abp. Chaput's assertion that neglecting the poor is a mortal sin which will condemn us to Hell.

What about the Jubilee Year of Mercy?

“I’ve said many times over many years that if we ignore the poor, we will go to hell: literally,” Archbishop Charles Chaput said, most recently, here.

I love that. I am well aware that, just as perfect contrition is better than imperfect contrition, it is better to serve the poor out of love for God and neighbor than out of fear of reprisal.

But I also know that, to get over spiritual and moral inertia, sometimes we need a little push.

So if you are like me, and avoiding hell is a motivator for you, remember that is how we will be judged, and take the steps you need to get right with God.

Hoopes cites Jesus' story of Lazarus and the Rich Man.

For Jesus, it is impossible to love him and not serve the poor. It is there in the Last Judgement in Matthew 25:31-46; it is there in the story of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31. Anyone who thinks they are doing so is fooling themselves.

Certainly it is good to love the poor and to help them.  The story of Lazarus condemns sloth, greed, and lack of charity; sins of omission which can be temptations to those leading cushy lives.  When I hear this story I think of limousine liberals; Hollywood stars who advocate for trendy causes and government programs, but do little good.

But this new mantra emerging in the Time of Mercy, where it doesn't matter how much faith you have, how many Masses or Sacraments you seek, if you don't help the poor then you're damned; is ugly.

The Mass and Sacraments should never been posed against good works as if they are only both good together.  The Mass is always good and beneficial and lack of charity is never good.  Why this dichotomy?  Are we supposed to think that the Sacraments don't work in our hearts and souls?  Where is your faith?

Next are we going to learn again how climate change is racist and hurts the poor, and how we're going to Hell if we don't think like Al Gore? If Lazarus is lying full of sores in the street, you won't get to Heaven giving him Obamacare.


See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Beatification of Oscar Romero is the Church Atoning for its Sins; Evangelium Vitae at 20: Three Popes on ‘Life’ Means Still More Leftist Policy? Go To Hell if You Don't Help the Poor! Bp. Barros' Defense Sounds Like Trouble ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker


Beatification of Oscar Romero is the Church Atoning for its Sins


Evangelium Vitae at 20: Three Popes on 'Life' Means Still More Leftist Policy?


Go To Hell if You Don't Help the Poor!


Chilean Protests: Bishop Juan Barros' Defense Sounds Like Trouble



... ]]>
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Chilean Protests: Bishop Juan Barros' Defense Not Convincing ]]>
Chilean Protests: Bishop Juan Barros' Defense Not Convincing

By Frank Walker


Message to Francis: No mitres for men like this
Message to Francis: No mitres for men like this


CNA does some small damage control on Pope Francis' new Chilean bishop whom thousands reject.

.- A group of protesters attempted to stop the installation of Bishop Juan Barros Madrid as the new bishop of Osorno in southern Chile, pushing the bishop and throwing objects at him during the March 21 Mass.

The protestors accuse Bishop Barros of covering up sexual abuse committed by Fr. Fernando Karadima. The bishop has repeatedly denied it. The story was picked up this weekend by international news media.

Despite somewhat violent protests in the middle of his installation, the new bishop defends his ignorance.

Bishop Juan Barros and three other bishops close to Karadima supported the decision of the Holy See in April of 2011 and denied having known about his double life. They declared in a statement that “with great sorrow we have accepted the sentence declaring him guilty of serious offences condemned by the Church. Like so many, we learned about this situation and its diverse and multiple effects with deep astonishment and pain.”

In a letter addressed to the faithful of the Osorno diocese days before his installation, Bishop Barros reiterated that “I never had any knowledge of any accusation concerning Father Karadima when I was the Secretary for Cardinal Juan Francisco Fresno and I never had any knowledge nor did I even imagine such grave abuses as this priest committed against his victims. I neither approved nor participated in those actions.”

This is a generic denial.  I wonder if the angry locals have a different story?

“I am telling you, before God who is listening to us, it did not cross my mind that these things were going on. I would not have accepted it for any reason, and I am not a friend of Fernando Karadima,” he stated.

He added that before the Vatican convicted him in 2011, “I was already becoming distant from him. Of course I had been close, but I was already becoming distant from him, not because I knew about these questions of the accusations but because he became ill tempered.  I never knew about these very tragic things. The pain of the victims hurts me enormously, I pray for those that carry this pain with them today.”

He's not my friend? We had been close, but I was already becoming distant around the time of the occurrences because he was getting mean?

How does this sound?  Odd?  Yes.

Pope Francis already has a track record of ignoring the protests of faithful Catholics and their bishops and priests.  I wonder what sort of people these protesters are?



See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ False Bishops Do The Thugocracy's Dirty Work ]]>
False Bishops Do The Thugocracy's Dirty Work

By Frank Walker


Our Church commands its death by 'ecumencide'


At Restore D.C. Catholicism, there are no righteous arrows spared for cowardly double-tongued bishops who betray good Catholics in their care.

Many of us have heard of Patricia Jannuzzi, a theology teacher at Immaculata High School in Somerville NJ.  She had posted on her private Facebook page, defending true marriage and exposing the gay agenda for what it is - part of a push to extinguish western civilization.  Lepanto Institute saved her post, because the school demanded that she take it down before informing her that her contract would not be renewed.  As you read the post, do you find in there anything that is at variance with Church teaching?  Neither do I.  So why did her school fire her?

A former student of hers stumbled across it.  He was miffed to read it, as he himself is gay.  He also is the nephew of Hollywood left-wing Susan Sarandon.  So auntie got all the minions together and they started to blast the school - much like a similar bunch did to the Archdiocese of Washington three years ago when Father Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion to a flaming lesbian.  And like the Archdiocese of Washington, they abandoned their Catholic principles and displayed all the spinal fortitude of jellyfish.  The ease with which they cast aside their allegiance to the Teaching of Jesus Christ cause me to believe if such allegiance was really present; they were way too quick to evict from their midst a truly Catholic teacher who proclaimed true Catholic morality.

Too quick?  Forever would be too quick to punish a woman for simply expressing a love for truth, children, morality, and the Faith.

I'd suggest that we too make our displeasure known to the school and to do so repeatedly.  I will say one thing for the gay cartel.  They are tenacious and ready to drop everything and act for their beliefs, such as they are.  We on the other hand tend to be too demure, reserved, deferential in the face of those who need to hear the truth from us and even to be rebuked by us.  Here is the contact information for the school.  Please utilize it, but there is also one more step.

The school's site posted a horrid statement by the local bishop, Bishop Paul Bootkoski of the Diocese of Metuchen.  I'll link to it as it appears on that diocesan site.  It is one along the apostolic line of Judas.  One line of his is that "the teacher's comments are disturbing and do not reflect the Church's teachings of acceptance".  I can only say that this is heresy.  The Church has never taught the acceptance of sinful behavior.  Ms. Jannuzzi most certainly did articulate the Church's teaching regarding sodomy.  Either the bishop is blissfully ignorant of basic moral teaching or some sugar daddies are threatening to cut off funds - or Sarandon sycophants are calling and saying mean things to hurt his feelings!  Well, like Lepanto and others, we must all contact Bishop Bootkoski ourselves and set the record straight.

It's heresy, and the bishop is concerned over funding or afraid of the publicity.

So that's one bishop who betrayed a faithful Catholic.  Now onto another.  On March 3rd in the state of Idaho, a Catholic state senator, Sheryl Nuxoll, boycotted an opening prayer at a senate session that was conducted by a Hindu.  She correctly stated that hinduism is "a false faith with false gods".  She wasn't the only one, by the way; there were two others.  Rather than support her, or at least keep silence, Bishop Peter Christensen of the Diocese of Boise rushed to rebuke her Catholic witness, falsely claiming that Nuxoll did not "represent the opinions or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church."  Oh, really?  News flash!  Hinduism is idolotry!  Nuxoll is correct.  As you can detect in Christenen's screed, his thinking is infected with the syndrome known as "ecumenicide".  Here's contact information for that diocese; please call this treatment of Nuxoll into question.

No one should be forced to endure cursed calls to false gods and to have these curses laid upon them, their work, and the people in their trust.  If a bishop can't understand the difference between prayers and curses what really is he, some state enforcer in a polyester costume?

It is said: If we can't pray to every religion we can't pray to any of them!  If we pull out of the parade over gay floats, then no-one will benefit from out Catholic presence! If we write things publicly against gay marriage we're not really being Catholic?  That's a lie.

Lies, compromises, and capitulation - it all just adds up to quitting, losing, and helping others crush the Faith.

No more false bishops!  They need to get the "Chilean Treatment."


... ]]>
Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Lepanto's Hichborn to N.J. Teacher's Bishop: Please Find Something Catholic or True in Your Condemnation? ]]>
Lepanto's Hichborn to N.J. Teacher's Bishop: Please Find Something Catholic or True in Your Condemnation?

By Frank Walker

In an open letter to New Jersey Bishop Paul Bootkoski,Lepanto Institute's Michael Hichborn wonders what exactly the bishop found wrong with these facebook comments made by a teacher in his diocese:


Jannuzzi fbHichborn asks:

Your Excellency, I can’t speak for any other group, but the only “agenda” at the Lepanto Institute is to stand in defense of this teacher’s fidelity to Catholic teaching; a fidelity you imply is absent from her facebook post. You said, “The teacher’s comments were disturbing and do not reflect the Church’s teachings of acceptance.” There are several things that are unclear about this statement, which we hope you will clarify.

  1. What was disturbing about Mrs. Jannuzzi’s comments? Aside from the grammatical and typographical errors in her online comments, Mrs. Jannuzzi’s facebook post says in its essence that there is a homosexual agenda, this agenda is aimed at the slow extinction of western civilization, and that children and humanity need healthy families consisting of a mother and a father.
    1. Was her comment about the existence of a homosexual agenda what disturbed you? If so, you should be disturbed by the reality of it, not because she said it. We know there is a homosexual agenda because in 1989, the book, “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s,” lays out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame. A quick glance back shows how the plan was executed to perfection, and the end result is that same-sex “marriage” is the greatest fight of this generation.
    2. Was her comment regarding the slow extinction of western civilization disturbing? Considering the fact that no less than five cities (Sodom, Gomorrah, and three others) were completely incinerated for one of the four sins which cry to Heaven for vengeance, it seems that her only misstatement was the use of the word “slow.”
    3. It’s hardly conceivable that you would be disturbed by her closing statement that children and humanity need healthy families consisting of a mother and a father. So please explain to the faithful in precise and unambiguous terms what was disturbing about Mrs. Jannuzzi’s facebook post.
  2. What did Mrs. Jannuzzi say that did not reflect Catholic teaching? If there is something which Mrs. Jannuzzi said that is not in line with Catholic teaching, then the faithful need to be taught by Your Excellency what she said that was in error, and what the teaching of the Church is.
  3. What is the Catholic teaching on Acceptance? I searched all through the Catechism of the Catholic Church and I can’t find a single reference to a teaching on “acceptance.” Would Your Excellency be so kind as to explain to the faithful what the Magisterial teaching on “acceptance” is so that we may be sure of living in union with the teachings of Holy Mother Church?

The good Bishop Bootkoski told the press that the teacher was on leave and not fired, but Hichborn notes in his letter that her children say her contract was not renewed.  He seems to have lied.

He closes with:

Your Excellency, this situation is greatly distressing to the faithful. It is clear that the world is engaging in an all-out assault on the Church’s moral teachings and that our freedom to openly practice our faith is in grave danger. Please reexamine and reconsider the injustice being done to a faithful Catholic teacher in your employ.

God bless you, Your Excellency.

It's unfortunate that we are placed in a position to have to be so gentle and respectful toward such men, is it not?  Who has done this to us and what have we done to enable them?


... ]]>
Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Bishop Who Booted Catholic Teacher Patricia Jannuzzi To Receive Education Award From His Priest ]]>
Bishop Who Booted Catholic Teacher Patricia Jannuzzi To Receive Education Award From One Of His Priests

By Frank Walker

Champion of Catholic Education
Champion of Catholic Education


What kind of employees give awards to their own bosses?

Bishop Paul G. Bootkoski will receive the St. John Neumann Award at the 2015 Catholic School Education Dinner April 14 at the Hyatt Regency in New Brunswick.

The award, which is named for the "Father of the Parochial School System," is given to an individual who has demonstrated extraordinary leadership, commitment and dedication to promoting Catholic school education in the Diocese of Metuchen.

"Bishop Bootkoski has made Catholic schools a priority in the diocese and continues to be a strong proponent," said Msgr. Michael J. Corona, executive director of the diocesan Department of Education. "Our bishop is deserving of this honor, which also is an expression of our gratitude for his ongoing support for the teachers, administrators, and most importantly the children attending our Catholic schools."

Bootkoski is the Bishop who publicly condemned and fired a tenured teacher for honestly defending marriage on Facebook.  He said she broke Catholic principles by doing so, so now she can't teach in a Catholic school - not tolerant of gay marriage enough.

The proceeds from the Catholic School Education Dinner benefit the Foundation for Catholic Education Scholarship Fund, which provides tuition assistance for low-income families whose children attend diocesan Catholic schools.

In 2002, during his first year as the bishop of Metuchen, Bishop Bootkoski dedicated the diocese's first Catholic elementary school in Hunterdon County, Immaculate Conception School, Annandale. The school continues to thrive and in 2013 earned a prestigious Blue Ribbon award from United States Department of Education.

The awarded Bishop doesn't exhibit the tiniest smidgen of the Catholic Faith or even loyalty, kindness, or decency - but, credit where credit is due, at least he makes the U.S. Department of Education happy.



... ]]>
Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Go, My Son And Stomp Out Those Chilean Pharisees! ]]>
Go, My Son And Stomp Out Those Chilean Pharisees!

By Frank Walker


Don't let all those rigid vicious lawmakers get you down!


The Eponymous Flower laments:

There was once a time when Catholics would reject an unworthy ordinary by force.

Hundreds of demonstrators dressed in black barged into a cathedral in a city in southern Chile on Saturday and interrupted the installation ceremony for the city’s new Roman Catholic bishop, Juan Barros, whom they accuse of complicity in a notorious case of clerical sexual abuse, blocking his passage and shouting, “Barros, get out of the city!”

The scene inside the Cathedral San Mateo de Osorno was chaotic, with television images showing clashes between Barros opponents, carrying black balloons, and Barros supporters, carrying white ones. Radio reports said several protesters tried to climb onto the altar where Bishop Barros was standing. After the ceremony, he left the cathedral through a side door escorted by police special forces. Outside, about 3,000 people, including local politicians and members of Congress, held signs and chanted demands that he resign.

How does the Pope defend this bishop's appointment in the face of such scandal and outrage?  Is there no statement, no indication of any change?  Isn't this the People's Pope, close to the poor, the outcast, the suffering, and the little guy?

Weeks of protests, candlelight vigils and letters to Pope Francis were not enough to persuade him to rescind his decision in January to appoint Bishop Barros to lead the Diocese of Osorno, 570 miles south of the capital, Santiago. Bishop Barros was a close associate of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, a prominent Santiago priest whom the Vatican found guilty of sexual abuse in 2011. Father Karadima, now 84, was ordered to retire to a “life of prayer and penitence.”

How many such bishops do we suffer with every day around the world and make no peep of protest? Does the FrancisChurch care what kind of depravity and oppression they foist on us in the name of 'going forward, ever forward?'

Will this Bishop Barros be a force for good in his diocese or a destroyer of it?  Who am I to judge?


... ]]>
Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ False Bishops Do The Thugocracy's Dirty Work; Hichborn to N.J. Teacher's Bishop: Find Something Catholic or True in Your Condemnation? Bishop Who Booted Jannuzzi To Receive Education Award From His Priest; Go, My Son And Stomp Out Those Chile ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

False Bishops Do The Thugocracy's Dirty Work


Hichborn to N.J. Teacher's Bishop: Please Find Something Catholic or True in Your Condemnation?


Bishop Who Booted Patricia Jannuzzi To Receive Education Award From One Of His Priests


Go, My Son And Stomp Out Those Chilean Pharisees!



... ]]>
Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Do Communists Think Pope Francis is a Communist? ]]>
Do Communists Think Pope Francis is a Communist?

By Frank Walker


The Peoples' Pope
The Peoples' Pope


Why is it considered unsophisticated and hysterical to write about Communism these days when totalitarian statism has never been more accepted?  Why is it so difficult to see the effects of it's influence, of it's backers and their patient efforts, even inside the Church?

Communists see traditional Catholicism and the Ancient Mass as products of an oppressive elite?  Why not?  They see everything else that way.  Communists think of the new vernacular Mass as the "people's" Mass.  So does Pope Francis, the same Pope who sees the difference between Catholicism and Communism as only one of semantics.

Take Communism and add some God and you've got the Catholic Church according to Francis; you know, a Church where the 'poor are the center of the Gospel' and all that, where if you don't help the poor on the peripheries it doesn't matter what 'religious observances' you follow.

Just as Communists praise Francis today, I suspect that Communists were quite happy with the Paul VI Mass.  Why?  What do they care?  It is because Communists are atheists who cannot realize their goals without thwarting the graces of the Church, causing widespread rejection of God, and a depraved rootless people.

Pope Francis is entirely wrong when he links Communism to Catholicism, but he's not wrong when he links his own concept of the Church to it.  FrancisChurch, moving "forward" from Paul VI, is entirely compatible with Communism because it enables it quite well.

At Breitbart, Austin Ruse follows up on what Communists, and Reagan Era Communist-fighting men see in the New Pope of the People.

A largely overlooked column by human rights advocate Armando Valadares raises questions about the initiative of Pope Francis toward the “island-prison” of Cuba.

In early January, Valladares, who spent 22 years in Castro’s prisons and went on to write a highly influential book about it, says the recent opening to Cuba by the West is part of an “Obama-Francis axis” that he calls a “spiritual-political axis which… will now provide the repressive apparatus of the Cuban regime with rivers of money and favorable publicity.”

He says Pope Francis and President Obama are merely replacing the Soviet Union, then Venezuela, and finally Brazil as Castro’s financial enablers.

Two days after the simultaneous December 19th announcement by Rome, Washington, and Havana of the diplomatic rapprochement, Valladares reported a Cuban Coast Guard boat “began ramming a boat fleeing Cuba with 32 people on board, including seven women and two children, to sink the frail craft.” Valladares called it “a brutal action by a regime that feels back up by powerful allies. A criminal event so seriously damning for the Castro regime would deserve a worldwide outcry of repudiation but was hardly noticed…”

He said the event wasn’t even notice by “churchmen who should imitate the Good Shepard by being ready to give their lives for their sheep.”

Valladares, who served as U.S. Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Commission under Presidents Reagan and Bush, charges that the “most serious and tragic aspect of this agreement” between the US and Cuba, “falls upon Pope Francis, its most eminent architect and mediator.”

But, he says, “This is not the first time that Francis takes measures that objectively favor the political and ecclesiastical left in Latin America… For example, he personally attended the World Meeting of Popular Movements held in Rome from October 27 to 29. It gathered 100 revolutionary world leaders, including well-known Latin American professional agitators.” Valladeres called the meeting a kind of “beatification of these Marxist-inspired revolutionary figures…”

Valladares also points to Francis’s overturning the suspension of the Nicaraguan priest Miquel D’Escoto who had been the Foreign Minister of the revolutionary Sandanista regime, “a leading pro-Castro figure in liberation theology.”

Where Valladares might be described as a man of the right, a man of the farthest left sees the same thing in Francis and approves.

Despite the continual refrain that now 'martyr' Oscar Romero was not a Liberation Theologist, just 'used' by them; Romero is their hero, and the Pope has backed his cause despite years of it's being blocked.  (Note the similarities between the populist 'art' surrounding Romero and the material produced by the Pope's Vatican artist, Chinese propagandist, Shen Jiawei.)

Richard Greeman, a writer for the Marxist website New Politics, wonders if “Catholicism is the new communism.” He describes his years, after the Second Vatican Council, working in Latin America, participating in the rise of “liberation theology.” He says, “Liberation theology Catholics were consistently more revolutionary than Leftists of all stripes.”

Read the rest here.  The ties between Communism and the modern radical revolution in the Church must be revisited, not shamefully hidden, in the new Francis Era, if only for the fact that a disabled Church is key to the success of statism.

Ruse closes with a chilling reality that we must squarely face.

Greeman asks, “How did such an openly radical priest manage to get elected.” Valladares may be asking the same question.



See more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Sacrilegious Communion: Pope Francis Won't Get Any More Clear Than This ]]>
Sacrilegious Communion: Pope Francis Won't Get Any More Clear Than This

By Frank Walker

How long must I keep doing this!
How long must I keep doing this!


Fr. Z links to a video from the Pope's recent homily. In it Pope Francis laments couples who want to return to the Church and go to Mass but , due to their 'mistakes', must 'stay right there' and not go anywhere.  The Pope blames the rule-makers, the 'doctors of the law' who destroy.

It seems to me the Pope is, characteristically, speaking both figuratively and directly at the same time.  (He seems to do this so that everyone understands him except for those who don't want to.)  If I interpret him correctly, this is the first time he's made it so clear that he thinks people in open mortal sin should go to Holy Communion, quite a frightening thing for a Pope to indicate.  Fr. Z seems to agree:

Hmmm… it seems to me that there is something missing.  Of course these are only off-the-cuff remarks that have no magisterial weight whatsoever and no preacher can be expected in a short time to hit every possible point.   But it seems to me that he has set up a straw man: who the heck are these “doctors of the law” whom he has been disparaging with some frequency?  I think he means those who argue that people who are divorced and civilly remarried should not be admitted to Holy Communion because they are objectively living in a state that is inconsistent with our understanding of the Eucharist.

It's time to stop pretending the situation isn't stark.  Cardinal Burke seems to have gotten the message a while ago.  Catholics must be prepared to resist.



See more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Jubilee Year 101: Mercy is Social Justice and Social Justice is Mercy ]]>
Jubilee Year 101: Mercy is Social Justice and Social Justice is Mercy

By Frank Walker


Gold Coin
There are two sides to this coin I owe you.


Much is being made of the Pope's unorthodox, untimely, and frivolous use of the Jubilee Year to continue to 're-educate' the world on 'true mercy.' Thankfully there have also been some warnings against a radical misunderstanding of God's mercy which, if those running things have their way, can lead to widespread presumption and sacrilege.

Fr. Longenecker at Aleteia discusses the Year of Mercy and what it may mean.  Be prepared not to be over-simplistic.

The tradition of a Jubilee year dates back to the Old Testament. Every fifty years a jubilee was celebrated to mark the universal forgiveness of sins and pardon for all. Debts were forgiven and slaves were set free. The Catholic tradition of Jubilee years begins in the year 1300 when Pope Bonfiace VIII established a celebration in which sins would be fully forgiven for those who prayerfully and faithfully visited Rome to pray in the basilicas associated with the apostles.

At first pilgrims had only to visit the Basilica of St. Peter, but later the basilicas of St. Paul Outside the Walls, St. John Lateran and St. Mary Major were added. The Jubilee year was first intended to be only once a century, but because of popularity it began to take place every fifty years, then every thirty three years, then extraordinary jubilees were added for special events. Thus in Pope John Paul II’s pontificate there was the usual thirty three year jubilee in 1983 and an extraordinary “great jubilee” for the celebration of the millennium in 2000.

Then, in the "Time of Mercy", 15 years later, we had another.

In order to fully appreciate the Jubilee of Mercy we have to fully understand what Pope Francis means by “mercy.” The most common understanding of mercy is being excused for a crime. A criminal stands before a judge and knowing his guilt and realizing that he deserves punishment, he pleads for mercy and a lighter sentence. While this understanding of mercy is not wrong, it is also not complete. Mercy is more than simply letting someone off the hook and not punishing them as severely as they deserve.

So mercy is even more than forgiving those who owe us debts.

In fact mercy and justice must be seen as two sides to the same coin. Justice is fulfilled, not denied when true mercy is exercised. This is because the justice which the law demands is always rightly balanced by the mercy which the human heart demands. Justice is completed by mercy and mercy is fulfilled by justice. In the Christian understanding, our redemption is completed when mercy and justice are both fulfilled by Christ’s death on the cross. There punishment for sin is finished and mercy and redemption are won through Christ’s victory.

Can this possibly make sense?  Mercy isn't "completed by justice".  If the heart demands something, does that mean we owe it?  Wouldn't that be justice then to pay it?  And Jesus did not "finish punishment for sin."  He just gave us a opportunity to receive His mercy through our repentance and His saving grace.  Punishment isn't finished.  It's still available.

Why must these important terms be so conflated and commingled?  I think perhaps it's so next we can be convinced that mercy is justice and vice versa, so that in the end what we have is something wrong.

I know one group of people who would definitely agree with Fr. Longenecker though: our Bishops.  The American Bishops, who hide behind Prayers of the Faithful, and routinely support Leftist policy in the name of justice; also think mercy is justice.  In fact the entire faux social justice campaign is founded on an idea of justice that is really more akin to mercy, especially if by mercy you mean giving people things they have no right to and acting like you're relieving them of a debt.

The common idea of Catholic social justice may be something like mercy, but it's nothing like just.



See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ We Know Where FrancisChurch Is Headed. What Do We Do Now? ]]>
We Know Where FrancisChurch Is Headed. What Do We Do Now?

By Frank Walker

Here, for sacrilege and to your condemnation...for mercy's sake


At the Remnant Hilary White ask the important question, "What do we do now?"

More people are asking, what are we going to do when Pope Francis or the national bishops’ conference or the local bishop, orders all the priests to formally and publicly declare that they are willing to desecrate the Holy Eucharist? We can dismiss the objection that “this is already being done all over world, so what difference will it make?” Of course it is, and everyone knows that it was by the Church’s leadership making a habit of turning a blind eye to this horrifying abuse that we now find ourselves in this dreadful situation.

But the proposal at hand is qualitatively different. If Kasper and his followers (and his leaders) have their way, the abuse will become a universal norm. A decree, will be issued from the highest authorities that will require all priests everywhere to agree to betray Christ in this manner in a systematic, programmatic way, to formally assent to it as a precondition of their continuing to act as priests. Priests, all priests everywhere, will be required to at least be willing to desecrate the Holy Eucharist, to commit the grave sin of sacrilege.

At what point do we stop and say, "That's enough.  My obedience to the heretical hierarchy is not required here.  It's resistance that the Lord wants from me."

I suppose a lot of people out there have refused to really think unflinchingly, to reason logically, where the Vatican II revolution was going to go, and are now shocked that it has gone where we Traditionalists had always said it would go: to disaster. Global catastrophe. But we seem to be very close to that ultimate conclusion.

“Schism” used to be a word one heard only either in history books or on the websites of the wackier sedevacantists. But now, and in an astonishingly short time, we are seeing some very prominent people using the “S-word” right out loud. So I don’t feel too bad voicing the same fear now that we appear to have moved into Phase II of a clearly deliberately planned and expertly executed revolution.

Why is it that if you see a hand or a plan in some major development, you're paranoid; a conspiracy theorist?  Is it so irrational that the world's movements have leaders, that the strong herd the weak, or that singular and unnatural things like gay marriage or euthanasia don't just pop-up worldwide all at the same time for no reason?

Everything has to have been a normal evolution I suppose, a forward motion?  I don't agree.  When the leadership of the Catholic Church for the first time in history, begins to share more goals with the powers of the world than they do with their own saints and teachings, working hand in hand either consciously or foolishly; you must assume that they are being leveraged, compromised somehow from the outside.

White sees this latest swing as a fatal blow.  Where will the Church be when this comes to pass?

Once they have overturned the actual words of Christ Himself as recorded plainly in the Gospel, all bets are off, and absolutely anything becomes a target. All the teachings of the Church will automatically, logically and inescapably, be rendered merely deterministic “rules” to be discarded at will. As many others are saying, the entire edifice of the Catholic religion is at stake, starting with the twin pillars of the Eucharist and the priesthood.

In the end, the Church Militant, united in grace, is the only real Church.  The more closely the visible Church approximates that, the more pure and living it will be.  Outside the Faith due to sin or heresy there is no true Church, so we don't need to consider it so.  If most of the hierarchy is doctrinally heretical or manifested in practice, they're not Catholic.

We must find a way to let the true Church Militant fight and grow, and let the morbid Church die.



See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Sacrilegious Communion: Pope Francis Won’t Get Any More Clear Than This; Jubilee Year 101: Mercy is Social Justice and Social Justice is Mercy; Do Communists Think Pope Francis is a Communist? We Know Where FrancisChurch Is Headed. What Do We ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Do Communists Think Pope Francis is a Communist?


Sacrilegious Communion: Pope Francis Won’t Get Any More Clear Than This


Jubilee Year 101: Mercy is Social Justice and Social Justice is Mercy


We Know Where FrancisChurch Is Headed. What Do We Do Now?



... ]]>
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ New York Times, Bishops Sing Jeb Bush's Catholic Praises ]]>
New York Times, Bishops Sing Jeb Bush's Catholic Praises

By Frank Walker

bush catholic
"Peace Be With You" from the New York Times

Why is the New York Times so interested in Jeb Bush's Catholicism?  It's creepy.

He arrived a few minutes early — no entourage, just his wife and daughter — and, sweating through a polo shirt in the hot morning sun, settled quietly into the 14th row at the Church of the Little Flower.

A bit of a murmur, and the occasional “Morning, Governor,” passed through the Spanish Renaissance-style church, with its manicured grounds and towering palms, as worshipers recognized their most famous neighbor, Jeb Bush. He held hands with the other worshipers during the Lord’s Prayer, sang along to “I Am the Bread of Life” and knelt after receiving communion.

“It gives me a serenity, and allows me to think clearer,” Mr. Bush said as he exited the tile-roof church here on a recent Sunday, exchanging greetings and, with the ease of a longtime politician, acquiescing to the occasional photo. “It’s made me a better person.”

Does this sound Catholic to you yet, or is this Zen?

Twenty years after Mr. Bush converted to Catholicism, the religion of his wife, following a difficult and unsuccessful political campaign that had put a strain on his marriage, his faith has become a central element of the way he shapes his life and frames his views on public policy. And now, as he explores a bid for the presidency, his religion has become a focal point of early appeals to evangelical activists, who are particularly important in a Republican primary that is often dominated by religious voters.

Many of his priorities during his two terms as governor of Florida aligned with those of the Catholic Church — including his extraordinary, and unsuccessful, effort to force a hospital to keep Terri Schiavo on life support, as well as less well-known, and also unsuccessful, efforts to appoint a guardian for the fetus of a developmentally disabled rape victim and to prevent a 13-year-old girl from having an abortion. He even, during his first year in office in 1999, signed a law creating a “Choose Life” license plate.

He differed from his church, significantly and openly, over capital punishment; the state executed 21 prisoners on his watch, the most under any Florida governor since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. But he has won praise from Catholic officials for his welcoming tone toward immigrants and his relatively centrist positions on education — two issues in which he is at odds with the right wing of his party.

Now I'm confused.  Is he Catholic or is he Republican or is he a Conservative or is he a Democrat?  At least he made the bishops' happy most of the time?

 “As a public leader, one’s faith should guide you,” Mr. Bush said in Italy in 2009, explaining his attitude about the relationship between religion and politics at a conference associated with Communion and Liberation, a conservative Catholic lay movement.

For a 'conservative' Catholic movement, Pope Francis sure seems to honor Communion and Liberation's leading lights, especially those that help them "rediscover a no-moralizing way of being Christians."

“In the United States, many people think you need to keep your faith, put it in a security box, if you’re an elected official — put it in a safety deposit box until you finish your service as a public servant and then you can go get it back,” he added. “I never felt that was appropriate.”

For a man who likes to wear his faith on his sleeve, so to speak, he sure seems to agree with the Catholic Bishops a lot on politics.  What's so Catholic about that?  What's conservative about it?  What's even Republican about it?

Don't worry though.  At least he might seem a bit more Catholic than Pope Francis.  He knows when to go to Holy Communion.

D. Michael McCarron, who at the time was the executive director of the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops, recalled seeing Mr. Bush with his wife during a Mass in Tallahassee in the late 1980s, when Mr. Bush was Florida’s secretary of commerce. “At the time he was not a Catholic, and I was struck by the fact that he would not take communion, which is appropriate, and I just observed him kneeling and praying,” Mr. McCarron said.

Look at that!  He still became Catholic anyway after being unmercifully rejected and denied by lawmakers who destroy.

“I love the sacraments of the Catholic Church, the timeless nature of the message of the Catholic Church, the fact that the Catholic Church believes in, and acts on, absolute truth as its foundational principle and doesn’t move with the tides of modern times, as my former religion did,” he said in the speech in Italy in 2009. (Asked by email recently what his concerns were, he said only: “I loved the absolute nature of the Catholic Church. It resonated with me.”)

That was then.  This is now.  It's a whole new Catholic world apparently.  Will Jeb stick or move?

As Florida Governor Bush heard from the bishops occasionally, but they had much in common.  He even crossed notorious St. Petersburg Bishop Robert Lynch, if only just a bit.

“I appreciate the Catholic Conference’s sincere commitment to advancing public policy that complies with the teachings of our Lord,” the governor wrote in an email to Bishop Robert N. Lynch of St. Petersburg. “I hope you know that I try to do the same. When we seldom disagree, it makes me very, very uncomfortable. Having said that, I will continue to do what I think is right.”

For the most part however, Jeb Bush seems to be a presidential candidate the U.S. Bishops can stand behind.  For that matter, perhaps so can the Times.  I'd watch my back, Mr. Bush.

Those disputes notwithstanding, Mr. Bush has received praise from Catholic leaders. Last year, he visited New York to help raise money for Catholic schools, attended Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral and won plaudits from Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, who interviewed Mr. Bush on his radio program and then talked about him on “Face the Nation” on CBS

“I like Jeb Bush a lot,” Cardinal Dolan said in the television appearance. “I especially appreciate the priority he gives to education and immigration.”

There's a ringing endorsement!



See more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Zero-Tolerance Sacrifice in Cardinal O ]]>
Zero-Tolerance Sacrifice in Cardinal O... ]]> Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[ Don't Let's Be Beguiled In The Year Of Mercy ]]>
Don't Let's Be Beguiled In The Year Of Mercy

By Frank Walker


francis and tagle fingers

At Aleteia, in light of announced the Jubilee Year of Mercy, Fr. Robert McTeigue offers some necessary instruction. By all means we must avoid a "facile, beguiling, and impoverished view of mercy and justice."

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

To dismiss the demands of justice with a casual, “Never mind!” is not an exercise of mercy but is instead a dismissal of the moral order. To act as if mercy is a cancellation of the demands of justice is to act as if good and evil do not matter. But God is not glorified and man is not dignified by an erasure of the moral order. If the obligation to do good and avoid evil is not an ineradicable absolute, then God’s character and wisdom cannot be discerned in His creation. At the same time, that man is made in the image and likeness of God is made irrelevant. But surely no sane person could intend to bleach out the moral order with such a thoughtless propagation of such a casual and meaningless view of mercy as amoral and justice as dispensable. So, let’s try to recover the proper friendship between mercy and justice.

I agree with Father.  No sane person could intend such a thing.  So, let's try and recover that 'proper friendship' in the new Time of Mercy and in the Year of Mercy.

In fact, let's make it a crusade.

Read more....


See more at The Stumbling Block.

... ]]>
Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Zero-Tolerance Sacrifice in Cardinal O'Malley's Boston ]]>
Zero-Tolerance Sacrifice in Cardinal O'Malley's Boston

By Frank Walker

According to The Media Report, an injustice has been done to the administration and staff of a working-class Boston area Catholic school.  Apparently there's been a group firing just because a tenured custodian went to the bathroom before a child walked in afterwards.  This sounds like a brand new low in punishing innocent Catholic employees.

Has anyone noticed that we are living in the totalitarian state they used to warn us about in school and science fiction?

In a way it was inevitable: After years of media hysteria over the issue of sex abuse in the Catholic Church, Church officials have now decided on a policy of "shoot first, ask questions later" when it comes to even the scantest allegations of impropriety.

In January of this year, in an astonishing act of injustice, Boston's Cardinal Seán O'Malley forced the resignations of three individuals from a Catholic school in Revere, despite the fact that no one broke any law or did anything wrong.

If it were not clear already, it should be clear now: "Zero tolerance" has now fully morphed into paranoia and cruelty.

A 64-year old custodian went to the restroom just outside his office which he'd been using for 17 years.  No boys were in there at the time.  The school apparently has an unfortunate rule against adults and children using the same restroom.  (There was a time when people understood an adult monitoring a school restroom was a good thing.)

If it wasn't for such rules and the cruel excuses for making them, mothers like the one in this story wouldn't be frightened into lodging complaints.

Like many urban Catholic schools, Immaculate Conception School in Revere (on the working-class outskirts of Boston) lacks adequate space, so it had been a "common practice for a number of years" in the school for adults to use the student restroom so long as there was not a student already in there.

Well, at some point at the end of last year, a mother called the school to report that her kindergarten-aged son felt "uncomfortable" walking into the restroom and seeing the school's 64-year-old custodian using a urinal. (The restroom was just steps away opposite the janitor's office.) [Addendum, 3/18/15: The Revere Advocate reported in late January that the janitor used the bathroom in question "for upwards of 17 years without incident."]

At no time did anyone ever report or even suggest that anyone had committed any behavior in the least bit sexual or criminal. Never.

In other words, the boy walked into the restroom and saw what anyone would see if he walked into any public men's restroom – such as at the theater or Boston's Fenway Park.

Probably in an effort to comply with insanely strict diocesan policy, the school eventually contacted police.  When Cardinal O'Malley was notified, he fired the principal, a parish priest, and a teacher.

The school was at a loss at how to respond to the mother's phone call, but at some point, someone came up with the idea that the concern should somehow be reported to law enforcement. Big mistake.

Overreacting, Cardinal O'Malley and the Archdiocese of Boston immediately forced the resignations of three employees of the parish and its school: Father George Szal, the popular parish priest; Alison Kelly, the school's principal; and an unnamed second-grade teacher.

The Cardinal's reason for forcibly removing the trio was that the group had somehow failed to report the issue to law enforcement and the archdiocese "in a timely manner." Shockingly, the archdiocese reportedly gave the three "an ultimatum – resign or be fired."

Yet even after both local police and the local district attorney investigated the case and discovered that nothing even remotely criminal had occurred, Cardinal O'Malley still would not reverse his impetuous decision. The lives of four innocent people (the trio plus the custodian) would remain tarnished.

It doesn't add up.  Aren't there enough real scandals in the Boston Church that require action?  Is this an attempt to make some zero-tolerance quota?  Why sacrifice the innocent?

Out of control Boston school up to no good
Out of control Boston school up to no good


....or the faithful.



See more at The Stumbling Block







... ]]>
Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Spanish Priest Charged With Exorcism ]]>
Spanish Priest Charged With Exorcism

By Frank Walker


Obviously off her meds
Obviously off her meds

A Spanish priest is in hot water over an exorcism.  He's even charged with 'gender violence.'  It looks like a family battle between  medication and prayers.

A judge in Burgos has called for the arrest of exorcist, Jesús Hernández Sahagún, along with the girl’s priest after she went through 13 exorcisms while still a minor.

Sahagún, the official exorcist of Valladolid, is facing charges of gender violence, causing injury and mistreatment according to local newspaper, Diario de Burgos, and has been asked to make a statement on the events.

The events date back to 2012, when the girl began to suffer from anorexia. According to El País, her religious parents became convinced she was possessed by the devil and decided to have their child exorcised.

She was tied up and had crucifixes positioned over her head, according to El País.

The girl subsequently attempted suicide and an investigation was launched after her aunts and uncles filed a complaint.

If someone commits suicide and it can be proven you hurt their feelings you're practically guilty of murder these days, so I guess it's attempted murder if they try and fail.  Is it illegal to give an underage girl an exorcism?  Is this a sex crime or something?

If they tied her up in a psych ward it would be fine, but if the priest/family restrains her from hurting herself it's a crime, especially if he positions a crucifix over her head?

In a statement the girl’s parents told the court that the exorcist was aware that the young girl was in medical treatment at the time and had full access to her clinical records.

The priest reportedly assured the parents that the exorcism would not interfere with their daughter’s medical treatment, but voiced disapproval of the number of medicines the girl had been prescribed.

In an interview with El Mundo in December 2014, Hernández Sahagún defended the 13 exorcisms, explaining the girl was "possessed by the devil". He also told the Spanish newspaper that he had performed 200 exorcisms over the past four and a half years.

He disapproved of the amount of medication!  Who does this witch-doctor think he is?  Of course she was appropriately medicated.

In December 2014, the archbishop of Burgos issued a statement saying "the young woman’s suicide attempt was not a result of the exorcisms practiced on her."

He also defended exorcisms as "a religious practice maintained as part of the Church’s tradition, as a right available to all the faithful."

In July 2014, Pope Francis made exorcisms official Catholic practice, with the Vatican hailing them as "a form of charity".

There are currently around 15 priests in Spain with Church authorization to conduct exorcisms and in 2013 a specialist exorcism squad was chosen in Madrid to tackle the "unprecented rise in demonic possession"

Exorcists are trained to carefully rule out mental illness, but when will doctors and lawyers be trained to rule out demons?



See more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Zero-Tolerance Sacrifice in Cardinal O’Malley’s Boston; Don’t Let’s Be Beguiled In The Year Of Mercy; New York Times, Bishops Sing Jeb Bush's Catholic Praises; Spanish Priest Charged With Exorcism ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Don’t Let’s Be Beguiled In The Year Of Mercy


New York Times, Bishops Sing Jeb Bush's Catholic Praises


Zero-Tolerance Sacrifice in Cardinal O’Malley’s Boston


Spanish Priest Charged With Exorcism



... ]]>
Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Al Gore Evangelized at the Periphery ]]>
Al Gore Evangelized at the Periphery

By Frank Walker


Al Gore was in the news again Friday at the South by Southwest Conference pushing the cause for which he's become synonymous: mankind is killing the weather.

"We need to put a price on carbon to accelerate these market trends,” Gore said, referring to a proposed federal cap-and-trade system that would penalize companies that exceeded their carbon-emission limits. “And in order to do that, we need to put a price on denial in politics."

The Climate Change movement is only about one thing; force.  It's a worldwide protection racket and the new FrancisVatican is 100% in compliance.  What's more edifying than the most trusted name in religion selling an Al Gore-sized scam?

I'll never forget the 2000 election.  Gore got all pumped up with muscles, then leaned all over George Bush during the debates, huffing and puffing and making quite the oaf of himself.  He couldn't stand at the podium and be silent like a gentleman while his opponent responded.  He didn't have it in him.

Next he threw a nationwide fit over the inability to inject quite enough fraud into the election to grab it.

Gore, who has made climate change an overriding theme since he lost to George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election, made no mention of his political future. He took several questions from Twitter after his talk. None asked whether he was considering another run for the White House.

He said he hoped his third SXSW appearance would help promote the fight against climate change and to help put pressure on those who say it’s not a problem.

“We have this denial industry cranked up constantly,” Gore said. “In addition to 99 percent of the scientists and all the professional scientific organizations, now Mother Nature is weighing in.”

It's really quite astounding how ever more preposterous things become doctrine in our television era.  Gay people are parents, gender is chosen, ISIS isn't Islamic, climate change causes a crisis of inequality...and now it also causes terrorism.

He led a presentation on major weather events that he said could be attributed to human activity. He linked troubles in the Middle East at least partially to climate change, saying that drought drove more than a million Syrian refugees into cities already crowded with refugees from the Iraq war.

At one point, Gore’s presentation showed a slide of Pope Francis. “How about this Pope?” Gore said.

Cardinal Peter Turkson, a Vatican official who helped draft the Pope’s anticipated encyclical on the environment, said recently that the planet was getting warmer and that Christians needed to address the problem. Gore said he looks forward to release of the Pope’s document, expected in June or July.

“I’m not a Catholic,” Gore said, “but I could be persuaded to become one.”

Great.  That must be the New Evangelization.  Talk about hitting a periphery!

Now let's see if it can get him to bend and kneel for something that's not money.



See more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ USCCB Abp. Kurtz to Non-Existant Concerned Over Synod: Don't Worry. We've Got It All Under Control ]]>
USCCB Abp. Kurtz to Non-Existant Concerned Over Synod: Don't Worry. We've Got It All Under Control

By Frank Walker


In London recently "Philippine Francis" Cardinal Tagle taught us all about the new kind of FrancisMercy and how it must be applied throughout the entire Church and the world.  This FrancisMercy is much, much different than the bad, bad old Catholic mercy which harmed so many people psychologically now we've learned and therefore apologize.

FrancisMercy says, "I'm ok, you're ok."  FrancisMercy says, "Welcome, welcome." It says Communion is a healing food for sinners, not a some union with God and his Holy Church.  Go out to the peripheries, get the sinners and of course the poor, give everyone Holy Communion.

Then what will we have, a Church full of mortal sinners and sacrilege?  How does that help anyone?  How is it merciful?

Current head of the USCCB, Louisville's Archbishop Kurtz, after heaping a few thanks, praises, and platitudes on Pope Francis and his upcoming synodal round of trouble, answered some questions for the National Catholic Register.


As one of four delegates to the upcoming ordinary synod, what message will you carry to Rome?

The dimension that I would bring is the unity and integrity of how we worship, how we believe and how we provide pastoral care. It will be very important that there is not a gap between the way we worship, believe and provide pastoral care.

Some lay Catholics are anxious as they watch this synodal process. They fear that something grave could happen, and they don’t seem to be satisfied with the answers that are being given. How have you tried to address such concerns in your own archdiocese?

I can’t say that I am hearing a great deal of anxiety. I sense that, in general, people are eager to reach out to those in need.

Of course, they also want assurance that we will not depart from the time-honored teachings of the Church. There is a rightful concern that we remain true to the teaching of the Church, and that is an attitude I will take to the synod.

People have raised two other issues. First, they want to hear encouragement for faithful witness to fidelity in marriage and family, both in daily life and in specific programs, such as marriage preparation.

Everyone needs to be inspired to the good.

Second, as we look at challenges of married life, we cannot forget the sacrifices spouses make. People mentioned families in which a child might have a disability or there is an unexpected illness. We need to make sure we are reaching out with pastoral care to people who live out their vows under great stress. This is a form of accompaniment.

Message:  If you have anxiety about the Synod I don't hear you.  If you are worried the Church will formally break with it's teaching don't worry, I will bring a 'good attitude' about that.  We must always encourage and inspire to do right, but then again......

Next, after touching upon the Pope's new streamlined annulment push, Abp. Kurtz answers some more direct questions pertaining to last year's debacle.


What concerns have Catholic raised in public forums about the synods?

Many have talked about the pastoral need for patience from the Church and that it can be difficult for people, day to day, to live a good and faithful life. The Church, in addition to upholding our teaching, needs to offer patience.

A number of people also said they appreciated the opportunity to be listened to.

One common point is the fact that many people had directly experienced the suffering of a failed marriage or knew someone who had. They were sympathetic to the need to reach out to people.

Message:  We must demonstrate that we can apply 'gradualism' and create a Church environment where people with scandalous lives can be welcome, honored, and respected while we wait for them to do right. Meanwhile we can all learn from their wayward example and benefit from their leadership.


Media reports on the synods have suggested that the Church may change its teaching on same-sex “marriage” and related issues. What concerns have people expressed to you about this subject?

There is a great sense of compassion for people [with same-sex attraction]. They also want to be true to the teachings of the Church that are in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And they want to make sure these teachings are put into practice; first, that every individual, regardless of orientation, be treated with dignity.

Second, many are also aware [of political] advocacy [on this issue] and want to make sure the Church’s definition of marriage as a union of one man and one woman is cherished and maintained.

Message: We have tremendous compassion for people attracted to the same sex.  It's so much much worse for them.  They just don't get treated with dignity.  Nevertheless, though their advocates continuously force ever-wider acceptance of their perversions upon children, employers, and families; we must pretend to uphold marriage somehow while we bend to their demands.


Some members of episcopal conferences abroad have signaled that they want to provide Communion for Catholics who have divorced and civilly remarried but have not received annulments. What principles must be applied to evaluate such proposals so that there isn’t a break in the unity of doctrine, worship and pastoral practice?

The overall question is: How do we accompany people who are in irregular situations — separation and divorce, failed marriages and have sought to marry outside the Church? In those cases, it will be the task of the synod to look at many opportunities to provide pastoral care.

The delegates to the synod will have to evaluate each one of the proposals based on theological guidance [regarding its] effect on the theology of the Eucharist and on our need to be in grace as we approach the sacrament.

Message:  Even though there are only two ways to accompany people in 'irregular situations'; i.e., either they move your way or you move theirs; we're going to have to take a case-by-case look at this.  We will put each sinful situation in a case file, and while that case is being evaluated, we'll move their way and they can receive Holy Communion!

This case-by-case mantra is emerging all over the place.

Finally, we can feel safe knowing that, as a last resort in 'cases' of Communion for adulterers, Archbishop Kurtz and the other Synod Fathers will be sure to punt this one to the assembled 'theologians.'


See more at The Stumbling Block.

... ]]>
Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Pontifical Household Announces Pope Not Having Official Meeting With Gay Group Today ]]>
Pontifical Household Announces Pope Not Having Official Meeting With Gay Group Today

By Frank Walker


rainbow pope2

The Pontifical Household announced that the Pope isn't having a meeting with a 'c'atholic pro-Gay group today after Mass to screen a video.

Vatican City, Mar 16, 2015 / 05:35 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A Vatican official says there will be no papal endorsement for an LGBT activist video whose backers want it to reach Pope Francis.

Father Gil Martinez, C.S.P., a member of the development team for the video “LGBT Catholics: Owning our Faith,” intended to present the video to Pope Francis in a private audience after morning Mass on March 17, according to the website of the St. Philip Neri Parish and Northwest Paulist Center in the Portland, Ore.

The video contains the personal reflections from self-identified LGBT Catholics, several of whom reject Church teaching.

An official with the Holy See Press Office told CNA March 16 that the Prefecture of the Pontifical Household had not announced any public events for Pope Francis on March 17. This means that “no public or official meetings are scheduled.”

“The Pope can, however, meet whomever he wants, but this cannot mean in any sense an official endorsement, since every audience is intended to be kept private,” the official said. Such meetings are made public “only if some of the people involved speak out about it.”

Well, we can anticipate that someone just might speak out then.  It happens quite a bit these days.

The press release for the video said it is dedicated to “achieving the full acceptance of LGBT persons in the Catholic Church.” It said that the video evokes “the need for change” and will “reach thousands, including Pope Francis, many bishops and other prominent Vatican clergy.”

The St. Philip Neri Parish website said that Fr. Mark-David Janus, C.S.P., would also present Cardinal Walter Kasper’s newest book from Paulist Press, “Pope Francis’ Revolution of Tenderness and Love.”

The “Owning our Faith” video is produced and directed by Michael Tomae, a parishioner of New York City’s St. Paul the Apostle Church. Fr. Martinez is pastor of the parish, which shares a mailing address with the “Owning our Faith” project. Tomae is part of the parish’s Out@StPaul LGBT ministry, which is promoting the video on its website.

The “Owning our Faith” video includes interviewees who reject Catholic teaching on sexual morality and marriage.

Matt Putorti, a lawyer from New York City, criticized Catholic teaching in the video, claiming that the Church is telling gay people that “they need to be celibate” and “cannot live fully.”

Putorti said it is “inherently” discriminatory to say, “You can be gay, but you can't live that life.”

Interviewee Matt Vidal, a lawyer from New York City in a same-sex civil marriage, said that leaving the Church would mean that “it's never going to change.”

“So we have to continue living here, being an example and encouraging other people to be that example because that's what's going to change the Church.”

Another interviewee, Matteo Williamson, co-chairs the transgender caucus of the dissenting Catholic group Dignity USA, which aims to change Catholic teaching on homosexuality.

The “Owning Our Faith” website recommends a list of parishes on the website of New Ways Ministry, another Catholic dissenting group. In 2011, the U.S. Catholic bishops reiterated that the organization is not allowed to identify as Catholic and said that it puts forward positions that do not conform to Catholic teaching.

'c'atholic group, Dignity USA just invited the vile, pornographic, and decidedly undignified Dan Savage as a speaker.  Why are these groups having non-meetings with Pope Francis to promote gay sex?



See more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Mass. Knights Back Off Pro-Gay St. Patrick Parade: Blast Catholic Group, Free Media. ]]>
Mass. Knights Back Off Pro-Gay St. Patrick Parade: Blast Catholic Group, Free Media.

By Frank Walker

Exposed for their collaboration with anti-Catholic and immoral groups in the Boston St. Patrick's parade, the Knights of Columbus have backed down, but not without a complaint against those who exposed them.

The Massachusetts Knights of Columbus withdrew from the St. Patrick’s Day Parade in Boston on Sunday, saying that their motives for participating in the parade - which this year included a gay activist group - have been misrepresented.

The Knights asked people to pray during the march in honor of St. Patrick, who was famous for bringing Christianity to pagan Ireland.

A statement released by the Knights said that they had intended to march in the parade “as a Catholic witness, to honor this great Catholic saint, and in gratitude for the contributions of Irish Americans to our country.”

The organization said that it had wanted to run a float with both pro-life signs and other posters encouraging participation in charitable activities.

However, a source close to the situation told CNA that the Knights were ambushed by a campaign that smeared their motives and created confusion.

C.J. Doyle, executive director of Boston’s “Catholic Action League,” alleged that the Knights were acting “treacherously” and that their actions were actually “helping (the activist group) spread their message.”

Doyle said that the Knights were colluding to give cover to the parade’s organizers and Boston’s mayor for the parade’s inclusion of a homosexual advocacy group. He pointed to the fact that the mayor’s hometown of Dorchester was also the town in which the Massachusetts leader of the Knights of Columbus resided.

But CNA’s source said that the allegations were false and that the Knights had not been contacted about the situation or asked for clarification.

It's an unnamed source's word against Doyle.  The establishment can send out slurs anonymously?

“The fact is that Doyle and his group created a scandal,” the source said. “The Knights were marching in defense of the faith, and did not want to leave the parade because they wanted someone in the parade to continue to stand for Church teaching. They believed that pulling out of this parade would abandon it entirely to non-Catholic elements, and that this would not be helpful to the evangelization of the people of Boston.”

That's the whole point.  Leave the parade to the non-Catholics.  Let them have their 'victory' and stop giving scandal by collaborating.

“But in the end, Doyle and his group generated so much misinformation and so many attacks that the good the Knights were trying to do was literally overwhelmed by his claims.”

Doyle had encouraged his followers to contact the Knights and complain, and according to one source, many did, with profanity-laced phone calls and social media posts.

I guess we'll just have to take Mr. Anonymous's word for that, but I don't believe it.

“The lack of charity by these people who called themselves Catholics was stunning,” someone who knew several of the Knights receiving the calls told CNA. “And it didn't help that groups like MassResistance and the Michael Voris' Church Militant picked these allegations and ran them uncritically.”

That's right.  We lack charity.  You know what else?  We're un-merciful too.  I guess Michael Voris didn't check enough anonymous sources before 'running' with the bogus story?

Every day we see more and more, it's 'c'atholics against Catholics in the new FrancisChurch.



See more at The Stumbling Block




See more at The Stumbling Block

... ]]>
Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Al Gore Evangelized at the Periphery; Pope Not Having Official Meeting With Gay Group Today ; Knights Back Off Pro-Gay St. Patrick Parade: Blast Catholics, Free Media; USCCB Abp. Kurtz to Non-Existant Concerned: Don’t Worry. Synod Under Contr ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker


Al Gore Evangelized at the Periphery


Pontifical Household Announces Pope Not Having Official Meeting With Gay Group Today


Mass. Knights Back Off Pro-Gay St. Patrick Parade: Blast Catholic Group, Free Media


USCCB Abp. Kurtz to Non-Existant Concerned Over Synod: Dont Worry. We’ve Got It All Under Control





... ]]>
Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ If Patrick, whom the archdiocese of New York is privileged to invoke as its patron, could witness what has become of his feast in the streets of our city, he might think that the Druids were having their revenge. ]]>
Fr. Rutler: If Patrick, whom the archdiocese of New York is privileged to invoke as its patron, could witness what has become of his feast in the streets of our city, he might think that the Druids were having their revenge.

By Frank Walker

Fr. George Rutler teaches about great St. Patrick in his notes, "From the Pastor".

Maewyn Succat did not have an easy time embracing the Faith. Although his father Calpurnius was a deacon, Maewyn indulged a spirited youthful rebellion against what he had been taught, and it was only after being kidnapped by superstitious people called Druids that he realized the difference that Christianity makes in the souls of men and the character of cultures. This was in the fifth century, and Maewyn, probably born in the Cumbria part of England near the Scottish lands, was roughly contemporary with the bishop Augustine in North Africa who watched the decay of the Roman Empire. Maewyn eventually became a bishop in Rome where Pope Celestine I re-named him Patricius, the “Father of His People.” His people were to be in the land of Eire where he had suffered in virtual slavery.   

Patrick was neither the first nor the only one to bring the Gospel there. Foundations were also laid by such missioners as Palladius, Ciarán of Saighir, Auxilius, Secundinus and Iserinus. One reason Patrick was sent to Ireland was to stem the spread of the Nestorian heresy, which misrepresented the “hypostatic union” of Christ as true God and true Man. A couple of centuries later, Nestorians in the East would influence Mohammed’s misunderstanding of Christ. Patrick was not subtle when it came to the truth: “That which I have set out in Latin is not my words but the words of God and of apostles and prophets, who of course have never lied. He who believes shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be damned. God has spoken.”   

If Patrick, whom the archdiocese of New York is privileged to invoke as its patron, could witness what has become of his feast in the streets of our city, he might think that the Druids were having their revenge. He certainly would decry the notion that his feast was merely a celebration of an ethnic identity which was not his, or of a conviviality not rooted in Christian moral reason. This Saint Patrick’s Day, Maewyn/Patricius would bond more instinctively with the beheaded and crucified martyrs in the Middle East and Nigeria (whose official patron is Patrick) now spilling their blood for Christ, than with some revelers on Fifth Avenue who pantomime his name while spilling beer. There is a difference between martyrs and leprechauns.   

This is not to dampen good spirits and rightful celebration, risky though they are in these Forty Days when the shadow of the Cross looms larger daily. But it is a reminder of the cost of discipleship in a cynical culture, and of the heavy cost of succumbing to the threats of the morally bewildered who, with adolescent petulance, would intimidate the Church that carried the Gospel across the Irish Sea. Patrick said when he braved the dark pagan groves: “If I be worthy, I live for my God to teach the heathen, even though they may despise me.”          



... ]]>
Sun, 15 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Is This Mercy? Pope Francis Shows How To Flout Rules Again On Holy Thursday ]]>
Is This Mercy? Pope Francis Shows How To Flout Rules Again On Holy Thursday

By Frank Walker

jesus peters feet

During Holy Week Pope Francis will once again demonstrate to the world's priests and bishops how not to follow the rules of Catholic Mass.

Catholic Herald Reports:

Pope Francis will visit a prison in Rome to wash the feet of inmates of Maundy Thursday, the Vatican has announced.

The Pope will visit Rebibbia prison on April where he will meet inmates, and follow Jesus in washing their feet.

FOX News adds:

The Vatican said Wednesday that inmates from the Rebibbia prison and a nearby women's facility will participate in the Holy Thursday service, which is meant to show Francis' willingness to serve others as Jesus did.

Francis' decision in 2013 to wash the feet of women and Muslim inmates at a juvenile detention center helped define his rule-breaking papacy just two weeks after his election. It riled traditionalist Catholics, who pointed to the Vatican's own regulations that the ritual be performed only on men since Jesus' 12 apostles were men.

Is it a fitting honor to Holy Thursday to compare Jesus and his Apostles on the night before he died to an assortment of male and female prisoners of various religions?  The Pope seems to feel he's acting like St. Francis, but if St. Francis were Pope he wouldn't have done such things. Washing the feet of women prisoners is good to do, perhaps for a non-celibate man, but it's not Mass yet. Can't Pope Francis do that another time?

At 5.30 PM that evening, the Holy Father will celebrate the Mass of the Lord’s Supper at the prison, carrying out the act for which he has become famous.


Last year on Maundy Thursday Francis washed the feet of elderly and infirm people. The year before he washed the feet of 12 young people, including Muslims and young women, at a juvenile prison.

I remember.  They looked as bewildered as one might expect. I wonder if many of these people ever feel like props?

Years ago I had a friend who would steal things from the common area of her school dormitory.  When I asked her about it she just complained about the strict college rules, but I knew she was just acting like a thief.

It's one thing to use authority to remove strict rules in the name of freedom, respect.  It's another to openly break good, necessary rules and deprive others of their rights.  In the forward-looking FrancisChurch there are many such 'rules' that should be disregarded.

Is this mercy, or is it just thievery?


See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Madonna: A Catholic Church Fan? ]]>
Madonna: A Catholic Church Fan in the Francis Era?

By Frank Walker



As reported in the Vatican's La Stampa, Madonna has made an overture to Pope Francis.  Am I the only one who finds this chilling?

“God bless Pope Francis. We’ve got to meet. A plate of pasta, a bottle of good wine. Do I have a chance?” This is what world-famous American pop star Madonna had to say in her interview with journalist Luca Dondoni for Italian radio station RTL 102.5, just as her new album is released.

Answering a question about the relationship the singer has with religion (some of the songs in her new album have strong religious connotations), Madonna said: “They are a bit to do with my relationship with God  and/or sexuality or playing with the idea of God and religion or sexuality; these are all themes that are present in my songs – as you know. It’s also the reason I have been excommunicated by the Catholic Church not once, not twice but three times… I don’t know…do you think the Pope would invite me?”

Sex, religion, religion, sex, a plate of pasta....I have these themes.

Do professional anti-Catholics like Madonna, so accomplished at driving the world into sin and contempt for God, honor Pope Francis because of his personality, or does it have something to do with what he seems to do to/for the Church?  Will Madonna start loving Catholicism now, or is she only reveling in it's demise?

When the interviewer remarked: “I think that if you and this Pope meet, he’ll give you a hug,” the queen of pop replied: “fantastic, introduce me to him”.

You don't have to say too much before you get an order.

See more at The Stumbling Block.

... ]]>
Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Francis' Friend Oscar: New Stories of False Hope in the Time of Mercy ]]>
Francis' Friend Oscar: New Stories of False Hope in the Time of Mercy

By Frank Walker

francis and oscar

Why does this kind of thing just keep happening and happening?

A childhood friend of Pope Francis has claimed that he intends to overturn the centuries-old ban on Catholic priests from getting married and that he told a divorcee 'living in sin' that she could receive Holy Communion.

The Pope considers the law on priestly celibacy 'archaic' and 'not part of the doctrine of the Church', according to the confidante.

The friend also claimed the Argentinian-born pope also vowed to reform another Catholic rule which bars divorced people in new relationships from taking the Holy Communion, MailOnline can reveal.

According to Oscar Crespo, Pope Francis said that changing the Catholic law which bars civil divorcees from taking a full part in church life is the 'number one priority' of his papacy.

Do you think Pope Francis will get on the phone with old friend Oscar now and ask him not to tell such lies about him?  I don't.

Mr Crespo said that the Pope, 78, also sent a message to a divorced woman 'living in sin' with a new partner assuring her that she was free to confess and receive the Eucharist.

The Catholic church doesn't recognise divorce, considering that anyone who remarries or starts a sexual relationship with another person other than the one they first married is committing adultery.

Taking Holy Communion while in a state of sin is considered an even graver sin.

Can you believe a secular paper just got something right about Catholicism?

Argentinian teacher Claudia Garcia Larumbe had sent a message to the Pope via Mr Crespo asking if she really was excluded from confessing or taking communion after moving in with her new partner.

After Mr Crespo reminded the Pope that church law 'forbids' divorcees in new relationships from partaking in the holy sacraments, Francis said: 'Just tell her the Pope said that she can'.

Eh! Is the Pope Catholic? Eh!  What planet is this?

Ms Larumbe, 39, told MailOnline she was 'speechless and emotional' after receiving the Holy Father's personal dispensation to partake in the key Catholic sacraments.

I get all emotional too now that I know the Pope, like God himself, can change any Church doctrine he wants.  How wonderful, she must think, to have a pope today that can help people like me go to Heaven!

The revelations will bring fresh hope to millions of civilly divorced churchgoers, as well as thousands of clergymen who are increasingly uncomfortable about their lifetime celibacy vows.

Increasingly uncomfortable?  That's a stretch.  Can you think of a better time in history NOT to get married?

If unmarried people who live together cared about going to Holy Communion they would separate.  The only reason some might care about Communion would be if they believed they could go to Heaven now when before they couldn't; but very few couples must be like that.  If it was wrong before it can't be right now.  Do they really think Pope Francis can change right and wrong?  If they were right all along, what do they care what the Church says?

Remarried people really assume they can go to Heaven regardless.  They are just happy the Church may agree now with what they already thought.  It's a hope, a false hope, and it's being spread one way or another by Pope Francis himself.


See more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ LA Times Sees A Francis The Catholic Press Won't ]]>
LA Times Sees A Francis The Catholic Press Won't

By Frank Walker


The LA Times Reports:

Benedict famously made it easier for priests around the world to celebrate the “extraordinary form” of the Mass -- that is, the Latin liturgy celebrated throughout the Catholic world before the changes set in motion by the Second Vatican Council. Francis long has been viewed with suspicion by devotees of the old Mass -- and for good reason.

Take the comments attributed to him by Archbishop Jan Graubner of the Czech Republic. According to Graubner, Francis described affection for the old Latin Mass as a “fashion.”

“It is just necessary to show some patience and kindness to people who are addicted to a certain fashion,” the pope reportedly said. “But I consider greatly important to go deep into things, because if we do not go deep, no liturgical form, this or that one, can save us.”

The Pope is so cruel, and has such contempt for faithful Catholics.  Also, it's infuriating how 'deep' liberals always are.  What in the world is down there so deep?

Last week, Francis seemed to double down on his dismissal of Latin Mass traditionalists. On March 7, he celebrated Mass at the Roman church where Pope Paul VI exactly 50 years before had celebrated Mass in Italian for the first time.

On leaving the church, according to the Catholic News Service, Francis said: "Let us give thanks to the Lord for what he has done in his church in these 50 years of liturgical reform. It was really a courageous move by the church to get closer to the people of God so that they could understand well what it does, and this is important for us: to follow Mass like this.”

For many Catholic traditionalists -- not all of them elderly -- these were shocking words. It’s not just that they find the old Latin Mass more aesthetically edifying than vernacular versions. The old Mass is a proxy for a cluster of theological precepts that have been eroded since Vatican II, notably the ideas that the Mass is primarily a repetition of Christ’s death on the cross (rather than a communal meal) and that the Mass is primarily the action of the priest rather than of the congregation.

The Roman Catholic Church is now experiencing the sort of polarization in public worship that long has been common in Anglican churches, in which some "high church" parishes feature elaborate ceremony while “low church” congregations favor a stripped-down, simpler rite.

This is true.  It's like someone put a hipster Anglican at the helm.

Separate vocabularies also have grown up: Traditionalist Catholics will say that a priest “offers Mass”; liberal Catholics call the priest the “presider” at what they are more likely to call the "Eucharist." The implication of the latter terminology is that the priest is the chairman of an essentially corporate act of worship. (Traditionalist Catholics see this as creeping Protestantism.)

Pope Benedict, who grew up in the Baroque Catholicism of Bavaria, left little doubt about which side he was on. Francis, although he embraces some aspects of pre-Vatican II Catholicism (such as veneration of the Virgin Mary), is pretty clearly a modernizer when it comes to liturgical reform. No wonder some traditionalist Catholics still consider Benedict the real pope.

Despite this last slur at 'traditionalists', it's amazing what a clear-eyed secular writer can see when they look at our Church. Vatican II is everything new. The Virgin Mary didn't quite carry over.  Catholics with a true and consistent faith have little in common with FrancisChurch.



See more at The Stumbling Block.

... ]]>
Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Francis' Friend Oscar: New Stories of False Hope in the Time of Mercy; Pope Francis Shows How To Flout Rules Again On Holy Thursday; Madonna: A Catholic Church Fan in the Francis Era? LA Times Sees A Francis The Catholic Press Won’t ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Francis' Friend Oscar: New Stories of False Hope in the Time of Mercy


Is This Mercy? Pope Francis Shows How To Flout Rules Again On Holy Thursday


Madonna: A Catholic Church Fan in the Francis Era?


LA Times Sees A Francis The Catholic Press Won’t




... ]]>
Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Pontifical Council For Culture: What They Don't Know About Women is A Lot ]]>
Pontifical Council For Culture: What They Don't Know About Women is A Lot

By Frank Walker

venus tied

The Catholic faith has nothing whatsoever to do with feminism and Our Lady was no women's libber. The Pontifical Council for Culture's new outreach to women is awkward to say that least.   What they produce is telling since it's decidedly unmanly, appealing neither to men nor women.

The Vatican has removed the controversial Venus Restored (1936) by Surrealist artist Man Ray from the website of its Pontifical Council for Culture. The image, a plaster cast of a nude torso - with no head or face, no arms and no legs - tightly bound with rope, was intended to draw attention to its annual plenary assembly on Women’s Culture: Equality and Difference. It succeeded more than expected.

The assembly took place last month, between February 4th and 7th.

The image provoked international outrage from Catholic women’s groups in particular, who saw it as reflecting what Bishop Bridget Mary Meehan of the Association of Roman Catholic Women Priests says is “the Vatican’s patriarchal, dysfunctional view that holds women in spiritual bondage”.

This response is the true essence of our Church in the age of FrancisMercy.  Moving 'Forward' as Pope Francis famously counseled on the anniversary of the Paul VI Vernacular Mass, is simply capitulation and submission.  In the end it brings neither respect nor mercy from the enemies of the Faith.


See more at The Stumbling Block


... ]]>
Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 GMT