Thursday, September 21, 2017

Reach Out To Poor Bishop McElroy!

Last week we saw how faithful Catholic activists were instrumental in keeping Father James Martin from polluting several Catholic locations with his heretical bile.  Martin has taken to social media pages bemoaning the fact that some of us truly care about our faith and have the backbones to stand up to him.  Others have joined Martin in bashing us.  One publication went so far as to call us "Catholic Cyber Militia".  I'm sure they thought of that as an insult, but I think I'll wear that one with just a smidgen of pride!  :-)

Another who has waxed hysterical about us is Bishop Robert McElroy of the Diocese of San Diego.  We've heard of him before now, haven't we?  Anyway, he's decided that our concerns are "verbal violence" and "cancer"; see here and here.

The Church Militant link, at the bottom, gives the phone number to the bishop's office.  Please call and let them know what you think.  To the readers who have the misfortune to call him their bishop, you can assist him in a special way.  Since he seems to think that anything that proceeds from us is "cancer", why, he must have the same misgivings about your donation dollars, right?  Now you can assure him that no longer will you be foisting upon him your diseased lucre.  Heavens!  We wouldn't want him to catch conservative cooties from your contaminated contributions!  Assure him that no longer will have have to worry about any monetary contagions from you.  I'm sure he'll be most grateful.  On a serious note, the language of money does seem to be one of the few to which they actually pay some attention.  Let's not be afraid to speak it.  Onward, Catholic Cyber Militia!!

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

Warped Treatment Of Priests

My blogging colleague at Les Femmes has written of the treatment meted out to a good priest that she knows.  Her post is here.  Father Aitcheson, prior to his conversion to the Faith, was a member of the Ku Klux Klan.  He repented of his sin of racism well before he entered seminary.  Maria Santos Bier, a writer for the Washington Post, got wind of this and wrote a hit piece for the Post on Father.  Of course the "compost" would lap it up in a heartbeat, for they got to tar a hated Catholic priest as a racist.  Mary Ann correctly points out that Bier committed a mortal sin of detraction.  For those confused about detraction, it is defined in Catholic moral theology as "the unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer".

So while good priests see their vocations seriously compromised owing to long-repented faults, flaming dissident priests are celebrated precisely because of their poisonous heresies.

Father James Martin has been in the news in Catholic media circles.  Rightly ejected from Catholic speaking venues because of his promotion of sodomy, he has taken to whining and pouting all over social media.  In the course of so doing, he continues to spew forth heresy.  Consider this facebook post of his.  It's a long screed, and the heresy appears in the very last sentence: "And the Holy Spirit knows what She is doing".  Yes, you read that correctly.  He refers to the Third Person in the Trinity in the feminine.  In both Scripture and Tradition, all Three Persons of the Trinity have always been referred to in the masculine.  Given Martin's sordid history of promoting sexual perversion, we know he was taking another jab at Christ's teachings, blaspheming the Holy Spirit in the process.

Father Martin is the sort of priest who is celebrated by the Washington Compost and other rags - because both Martin and the progressives hate Catholic morality.  Mary Ann's piece suggests that Bier might be carrying on in the tradition of the traitorous Brutus; so is Father Martin.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

New Pro Life Movement = Seamless Garment Regurgitation

Michael Hichborn, formerly of American Life League, runs a site called Lepantoinstitute.org.  It is a well-run site that is quite informative and faithful to Catholic teaching.  Recently he ran an article regarding the attempts by John Carr to insinuate himself into the pro-life movement.  Recall that while he was at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Carr oversaw the office that was in charge of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.  He did absolutely nothing to address the scandals regarding that collection.

The main focus of this article is not John Carr.  We are looking at the attempts of others to couple the pro-life movement with the now-discredited “seamless garment” theory that was championed by the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin.  In his article, Hichborn made mention of a series of articles found in the summer edition of Human Life Review.  Here is the site for your perusal   Many of the authors understand the perils of the seamless garment theory under its many disguises.  Among them, Ann Hendershott, Kevin Williamson and Kristin Hawkins see the danger of diluting our focus on ending baby-killing.  On the other hand, there are people like Aimee Murphy, director of Rehumanize International.  I previously did some research on this group and found them to be at serious variance with Catholic moral teaching.   Their “new media coordinator” supports homosexual conduct and may herself be embroiled in that sin.  Murphy herself evinced racism as she supported the violent “Black Lives Matter” on her facebook page.

But the seamless garment poses an even greater threat to the authentic pro-life cause than mere dilution.  In many, if not most, cases, its adherents ascribe to “seamless garment” tenets moral authority that belongs only to those matters to which the Church has placed special emphasis: abortion, contraception, euthanasia, homosexual conduct, abuse of embryos.  Even worse, some “seamless garment” adherents will go so far as to transgress against the Church’s teachings on the aforementioned intrinsic evils in order to promote the progressive positions on lesser matters (such as immigration or capital punishment).  We’ll now expound on these threats.

Some of the articles made mention of a group that dubs itself the “The New Pro-life Movement” – rather pretentious, that!  Its site is thenewprolifemovement.com .   Right on its homepage we see a problem.   John Cavanaugh-O’Keefe was a highly-respected pro-life leader approximately 25 years ago.  He helped spearhead the clinic rescue aspect of the movement.  Recently, some seamless garment pet causes – in his case, amnesty for illegal immigrants – clouded his perspective to the extent that he supported the unapologetically pro-abortion Hillary Clinton during the last presidential election.  I won’t go into the evils of that or this article would take up the entire magazine.  Look at the “contributors” page.  One of the other contributors is Rebecca Bratten Weiss.  Rather than go into another lengthy explanation, I refer you to this piece by LifeSiteNews. 

Let’s look at its “organizations we support” page.  We see listed “Obria Medical Clinics”.  Going to that site, we see their page on abortion.  While they don’t speak glowingly of abortion, they think that it could be “the right choice” for someone.  What???   They seem to be fine with contraception.  Another supported organization is “All Our Lives”.  Not only is it “informed” by the “consistent life ethic”, but also “the reproductive justice movement”.  They advocate for gay rights.

This “new pro-life movement” organization is not unique in having serious moral problems.  We’ve always known that those enamored with the “seamless garment” have flirted either with mortal sins themselves or have allied themselves with others embroiled in those sins.  An example of that was brought to my attention during the controversies over DACA.  A friend of mine, perhaps in an attempt to justify amnesty for Illegal aliens, posted an article about a priest in Georgia, Fr. Rey Pineda, who is himself anillegal alien.  To bring his “plight” to national attention, he relayed his story to Senator Dick Durbin, who then took it to the Senate floor last November.  Of course Durbin did this while advocating for illegal amnesty.  Dick Durbin’s name recently came up during Senate judicial hearings, when he and Senator Dianne Feinstein grilled judicial nominee Amy Coney Barrett regarding her Catholic faith, mocking her in the process.  So on the one hand, Dick Durbin (a “Catholic” who has always been pro-abortion) takes up Fr. Pineda’s case for his own end, but on the other hand he openly takes aim at a judicial nominee for living out her Catholic faith.  Pineda, a priest, lent moral credibility to a politician who displays anti-Catholic bigotry in order to facilitate his own sinful disregard for his host nation’s laws.  This is just another instance of moral compromise when Catholics get entangled in the seamless garment embrace of progressive causes.

The gains that the pro-life movement has made in recent years have been due in large measure to the movement’s laser-like focus on defending innocent life and the sanctity of marriage.  We are soon coming up on the centennial anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun that culminated Our Lady of Fatima’s appearances to the three children.  During these apparitions, she warned the children that the leading cause of souls going to hell was sins of the flesh.  Let us focus on eradicating these sins and not allow other matters disguising themselves as “social justice issues” to distract us and even seduce us to sin.

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Catholic Activists Save Theological College From Father Martin

Two months ago I posted that Jesuit heretic Father James Martin was scheduled to be the keynote speaker at a symposium being conducted by Washington Theological College.  In that post, you'll see that commenter "kiwiinamerica" lamented that Martin would probably never be disinvited.  At the time, his/her doubts were well-founded.  He/she can now rejoice for now Martin is disinvited, thanks be to God.

Left-wing rags are wailing and bemoaning Martin's well-deserved comeuppance.  Take a look at this whiny pout from the Not-At-All-Catholic Reporter.  They interviewed Martin, who puts the blame on "far-right church websites such as Church Militant, LifeSiteNews and the blog run by Father Zuhlsdorf".  Of course those sites also include many other blogs run by faithful Catholics - such as this one.  I'll have more to say on this point later in the post.

Church Militant has some more details.  Not only was Martin dumped from the Theological College event, but he was also axed as a speaker for a gala to be held by the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre.  In that situation, their leadership faced backlash from outraged knights.  Martin himself snivels and pouts about the cancellations on his facebook and twitter pages.

Despite the "poor widdle me" tripe that Martin exudes on his pages, the record tells the story of his attempt to normalize the mortal sin of sodomy.  In this clip he actually calls for "reverence" of sinful situations.  Note that his gay friend, who thinks he's "married" to his accomplice in sin, is the chair of the theology department at Fordham University.  Both he and Martin, unless they repent and confess their sins, will be accountable for leading many young souls down a path to perdition.  For clarification on that point, I now link to a piece by Msgr Charles Pope that summarizes Christ's teachings on homosexual conduct.

When I wrote my piece two months ago, I too didn't think there was much chance that Martin would be disinvited from the symposium, seeing how he enjoys the favor of both Pope Francis and Cardinal Wuerl.  In retrospect I believe there were several factors, and some lessons we can learn in combating similar threats to Church integrity that will present themselves in the future.  I'll list them in "bullet" format.
  • Prayer for God's protection  Nothing of this sort can happen without God's grace.  We must continue to pray.  Frequent the sacraments and pray the Rosary daily.  Mention these threats by name when you pray.
  • Social media  Martin himself alluded to that as he blamed "far right sites" for stopping his appearances.  Please watch not only the sites he mentioned but smaller sites as well.  Often it is the smaller sites that will carry news pertaining to their localities; these also deserve the attention of faithful Catholics local to those areas.  The mainstream media (including diocesan publications and faux-katholic liberal rags) are not reliable sources of information.  Of course when you see topics such as these, pass them along your own social sites and email lists.
  • Action It is critical that when we are notified of these situations, that we not only pray but we must act as well.  Such action will include:
    • Phone calls  Martin specifically blamed phone calls to Theological College as a primary cause for his ejection from the symposium.  If you called to protest his planned appearance, you share the credit just as much as any one of us bloggers.
    • Boycotts I'd suspect that many callers to CU made plain that if Martin did appear, that they'd never contribute anymore to them.  Sometimes money talks louder than Catholic duty, so let's not be reticent about using that language.
    • Protests/pickets One of my facebook friends, when she learned of the cancellation, remarked that she now "had the day off".  She was planning to protest the appearance.  Even the possibility of a protest is a strong deterrent to misbehavior.
Make no mistake about this.  The Theological College did not cancel Martin because they suddenly remembered that they were Catholics.  Far from it.  Take a look at their announcement below; they make plain why they earned the nickname "theological closet".  They cancelled because we behaved like the Church Militant (not the site) that we are.  Let's take heart from this and remember, for these situations will crop up again - although they might crop up with less frequency now.


Friday, September 15, 2017

Pro-Lifers Conduct Red Rose Rescues At Three Baby-Murder Centers

In three cities in the U.S. today - namely, Alexandria VA, Detroit MI, and Albuquerque NM, pro-life activists went into local death mills and offered red roses to mothers who were about to have their babies murdered.  When confronted by police, they refused to leave and were arrested.  I believe all have been released.  Moreover, three babies were saved.

I link now to the LifeSiteNews article detailing the Red Rose Rescue effort.  Please watch the video; the bottom video is the account of activity at the Alexandria mill; I've worked besides several of the people in various pro-life activism efforts.  Below is a video posted by Monica Miglorino Miller, who was at the Detroit rescue.  I echo her call at the end, that we would all rededicate ourselves to acting to bring about a Culture of Life.

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

Seamless Garment Adherents Are The Real Pharisees

As faithful Catholics know, the pope has a lamentable habit of insulting us precisely because we are faithful Catholics.  Not at all surprisingly, one big slur he hurls at us is that we are "pharisees" because we acknowledge that God's laws are as immutable as He is, and that they are to be obeyed by everyone in their entirety.  Of course that is not the essence of being a "pharisee".  What does that term mean?

I link to Mark 7:1-13.  The key phrase is in verse 13: "making void the word of God by your own tradition, which you have given forth".  I believe that sums up what it means to engage in pharisetical behavior: to create man-made precepts and to ascribe to them the status equal to that of God's own laws.

"Seamless garment" adherents do precisely that.  They regard their progressive causes - most notably illegal immigration amnesty, climate-change junk-science, and the abolition of the death penalty - with the same level of concern as they might regaard contraception, homosexual behavior, abortion.  Did I say "same level"?  In most cases the progressive causes are deemed worthy of more attention and effort than those matters that are truly intrinsic evils.  Moreover, I believe I've amply stated the case why these so-called "seamless garment" advocacies may well be sins in and of themselves: see here, here, here.

Within the past few days we've seen the progressive-controlled USCCB go ballistic because one of their pet causes is being dealt some well-needed blows and because Steve Bannon spoke truth to the liberal-pandering of the nation's bishops.  We have also seen hysterical cries for "climate-change" deniers to be jailed simply for disagreeing with progressive tyrants.  Toronto Catholic Witness advises us of a Franciscan friar who a) advocates criminalization of "climate change deniers" and b) advocating for gay rights.  By the way, as TCW makes plain, this friar is the quintessential pharisee: trashing God's moral teachings and substituting junk-science precepts.  He is not alone.  Many join him in earning that title; faithful Catholics who love Our Lord and His Traditions are not among that number.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Bannon's Truthful Rebuke Stings The Bishops In Their...

Did you think that last word was going to be "consciences"?  Don't be silly!  That last word is really "coffers".  Steve Bannon might not have realized it, but he spoke the only language that the US bishops seem to heed: the language of $ka-ching$.  A video of Bannon's interview is found here.  When queried by Charlie Rose about Cardinal Dolan's displeasure with President Trump's actions on DACA, Bannon correctly responds that the USCCB's stance on DACA is not doctrine - progressive pretenses notwithstanding (I hold that it is the USCCB that stands in sin owing to its facilitation of illegal immigration).  Moreover, Bannon is correct that the bishops have an economic interest in illegal immigration.  However, he seems to limit that interest to the filling of church pews.  In reality, it goes much further for the Church hierarchy receives federal grants for the "processing" of aliens, and the amounts of those grants is proportional to the number of immigrants.

Cardinal Dolan, when he heard of Bannon's interview, got his knickers in a royal knot.  Breitbart has the low-down on that.  Dolan quoted Bannon as saying that the only reason they (bishops) care about illegals is for economic reasons.  You can see it in the first few paragraphs of the linked piece.   The title states that "Dolan bears false witness".  Well yes, but I think it's more than that.  I think Cardinal Dolan uttered a quintessential Freudian slip.  I've no bones opining that $$$ is a prime motivating factor in their shilling for illegal immigration.

Yesterday the pope got in on the act.  Of course the blather happened on a plane (mathematical equation alert!  plane+pope+reporters=insults+heresies+blasphemies).  He went so far as to cast doubt on the president's pro-life beliefs because of his termination of DACA.  Whatever happened to "who am I to judge?"  Does that apply only to those flaunting mortal sins of sodomy?  But I digress.

The pope said of Trump, "he presents himself as a pro-life man. If he is a good pro-lifer, he should understand that the family is the cradle of life and you must defend its unity."  A goodly number of pro-life leaders replied to that statement as they came to Trump's defense.  I might add one more key thing.  If the pope is pro-life, he will do all he can to protect and promote the encyclical Humanae Vitae.  He can start by dismantling that commission that was assembled to "study", that is, weaken this key encyclical.  Humanae Vitae must stand.  Contraception, an intrinsic evil, must be seen for what it is: a satanic instrument of death and destruction.  The pope casting doubts on the president's pro-life credentials?  Never did I think I'd see the day when I trust the White House more than the Vatican, but now that has come to pass.

Saturday, September 9, 2017

Magnum Principium - A Liturgical Disaster

Magnum Principium is the name of the Motu Propitio released by Pope Francis today.  It will take effect October 1, 2017.  Rorate Caeli has an excellent analysis so I don't need to reinvent that wheel.  In essence though, this papal directive will ascribe to local bishops' conferences the authority to amend liturgical texts and actions based on local proclivities.  Now just think of the wide range of differences that exist with the conferences' varying interpretations of Amoralis Lamentia; also consider that in the case of AL, the interpretations that most widely diverge from Sacred Tradition are the ones validated by this pope.

One Peter Five has an analysis, too.  In that one, this MP is contrasted to Quo Primum by Pope St. Pius V.  The latter was written to unify the liturgies of all the Church into one text and format.

I can only surmise that this Motu Propitio is just the latest deliberated step in the progressives' ultimate goal to undermine the papacy.  Recall that Our Lord called Peter "the rock on which I'll build my church".  If the rock should crack that would seriously compromise the integrity of the Church.  Our Lord promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the church, but He never promised that the church would be unscathed.  In fact, while the Church would survive (in one fashion or another) it could be so battered as to be unable to attend to millions of souls.

Another troubling aspect of potential liturgy-tampering may be found in the phrase "lex orandi lex credendi lex vivandi".  In other words, as you pray you believe, and as you believe you live.

UPDATE - Another phrase to describe the anticipated results of this motu is Liturgical Anarchy.

ADW Choir Sings Backup For Gay Performer

From time to time I do not receive my copy of the Catholic Standard in the mail, and I strongly suspect that's by design.  As soon as I pick up a copy from a church lobby I see the reason why my delivery was sabotogued.  That happened today; it only took about 20 seconds to deduce the reason.  First some background.

Barry Manilow is a singer who has been popular since the 1970s.  Recently he announced that not only was he gay, but he considers himself "married" to his accomplice in sodomy.

On page 9 of the Standard's print copy, and here online, we read that the choir from Saint Columba Church in Oxon Hill sang backup for Manilow when he performed at MGM National Harbor Theater on July 24 & 25.  Apparently when he goes to his different venues to perform, he invites local choirs to sing with him.

Several choir members gave reasons why they thought this idea was so wonderful: "bring awareness of the church", "something out there bigger than they are".  In striking hands with someone who is in fact living in objective mortal sin, they render moot all the lofty ideals that they enunciated.  Would it not have been better for them to decline the invitation politely by stating that their partnership with him would have signaled to the world tacit approval of his deviant lifestyle?  Might not preference for Christ's moral teachings over fleeting fame have been more of a powerful witness to the Church?

Instead this choir disgraced themselves for a mere moment of fame.  The Standard is likewise to be ashamed of itself (once again) for crowing giddily about this moral compromise of this choir.  I cannot imagine either this choir nor the Standard taking such stances had it been a white supremist outfit asking for the choir's singing abilities at some event of their's.  They would have been indignant at the idea, and rightly so.  So why the compromise in regards to Manilow?

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Support Of Illegal Immigration Is Inherently Sinful

If a parent steals something and gives it to his/her child, is the child penalized when he/she is compelled to return the stolen goods or make other reparation?  Common sense - and Catholic moral theology answer "no", for the child should never have come into the possession of the goods in the first place.  Let's add another dimension.  Say the child receives the contraband as a minor, then becomes aware of the theft when he reaches the age of majority.  Is he/she required to make restitution?  Again, the answer is yes, for he/she may not knowingly accept benefit from the commission of sin.  Should they do so, they themselves become guilty of cooperation with the sin of their parents.  I link now to a post that I created several months ago; therein is a video that explains the nine ways in which a person can become an accessory to the sin of another, thus incurring guilt for his own sin.  Bear all this in mind as you read the account below.

We all know that President Trump has decided to undo the patently unconstitutional stunt initiated by the Messiah Most Miserable known as DACA (Deferred Action for Child Arrivals).   Compare the screed spewed from the USCCB to the statements issued by both the White House and the Department of Homeland Security.  While those impacted are children of illegal immigrants, it is important to note that they are now adults as opposed to non-emancipated minors.  They are now responsible for their own lives.  If they haven't taken measures to correct their own immigration status, they have no one to blame for the consequences but themselves.

I became aware of this account of a "dreamer priest", Father Rey Pineda, through a facebook friend of mine.  As I read this account, I detected no trace of him trying to rectify his status.  He went to school in Georgia and then discerned a vocation; "he felt God was calling him to be a priest but his spiritual path was blocked.  He was a dreamer".  Excuse me, but isn't part of priestly preparation to remove moral impediments from one's life?  He knew he was here in disobedience to legitimate national laws: laws that have basis in Section 2241 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  Now recall the video that I mentioned in the first paragraph, and count the ways that Father Pineda actively cooperates with the sin that his parents committed:
  • Consent - That is evident in the absence of any steps to correct his status.
  • Defense of evil done  No where does he express regret for the flouting of U.S. law.
  • Partaking as a "dreamer".  If his seminary formation was facilitated by the dream act, then his priestly formation would be an ironic act of cooperating with sin.  I hope that's not the case
Other ways that he might be cooperating with the sin of evading US immigration laws would be counsel, provocation, praise.  We cannot say "silence" is a chosen means of such cooperation, for he is quite strident in his crowing about his sin.

So his deportation would be a loss to his flock?  Really?  Who would really seek him out in the confessional, knowing he doesn't give a whit about legitimate civic law?  We Catholics are called to obedience to such laws and not only when convenient.  The sacrament itself would be efficacious since it doesn't depend on the worthiness of the minister, but his counsel might be suspect.

One troubling aspect about the hierarchy's embrace of progressive positions is that church authorities too often strike hands with politicians who foment the Culture of Death.  Father Pineda did precisely that by his partnering rabidly pro-abortion Dick Durbin.  Thanks to Pineda's own celebration of his sin, he lent to Durbin a credibility that the latter simply doesn't deserve.  By the way - this is the same Dick Durbin who questioned the Catholic faith of an Appeals Court Nominee.  Got that?  Durbin is very supportive of the Catholic faith of a potential puppet, but takes a dim view of the Catholic faith of a Trump nominee.  That's whom Pineda - this shill for illegal immigration - helped to legitimize.

Let's get back to DACA and illegal immigration in general.  If you haven't yet, please read the linked press releases of the USCCB, White House, and DHS.  If you noticed the USCCB waxing hysterical, you are quite correct.  I won't rehash it all, but the USCCB and Catholic Charities are funded by the feds.  Part of that funding has to do with the number of immigrants - including illegal - that they process.  The amount of funding is based on headcount!  Yes!  If the number of illegal immigrants in this country declines, so too does the amount of funding that the Church hierarchy receives.  Maybe the USCCB's overly-vaunted concern for "the strangers we must welcome" is not completely altruistic.

DACA as promulgated by Obama was patently unconstitutional.  Congress needs to act on this matter, and act first and foremost for the citizens whom they represent - who voted for them and who pay their salaries.