Excellent Op Ed

For whatever reason, Francis seems to think that the past few decades have been marked by a dogmatic rigidity that is as merciless as it is obsessed with the fine details of law, causing countless innocent or near innocent Catholics to flee a Church that they perceive to be cold and heartless. That perspective is, to put it nicely, dubious and problematic. The impression often given, unfortunately, is that any emphasis on objective moral standards regarding actions and relationships is bound to quickly degenerate into a harsh and uncharitable condemnation

BOOM.

and I love this:

But here's the rub: lack of clarity and cohesion in language indicates a lack of clarity and cohesion in thought. Lack of clarity and cohesion on a nearly weekly basis is, frankly, troublesome.

and this:

Sure, gaffes are highlighted and emphasized to a ridiculous degree in this day and age, what with the internet and social media and such, but most sane folks can understand and handle an occasion "gaffe". Yet when "gaffes" become a pattern, and the pattern becomes the norm, we are no longer talking about gaffes, are we?

and this:

We live in a unique time, when the words of the Holy Father are available within minutes or hours of being uttered. The amount of words being uttered is quite large; the amount of confusion within various interviews and "off-the-cuff" remarks is significant. The usual suspects use said confusion, ambiguities, and questionable statements for their own ends. In order to defend and clarify Church teaching, one sometimes has to point out that Francis is either ambiguous or unclear about this or that. And, occasionally, he appears to be completely wrong. So, what to do?

The pope's main work is to defend and define when necessarily, while upholding the teachings of the Church. My job, as a lay Catholic, is to be true to the teachings of Christ and of his Church, and if a pope isn't clear about, say, the nature of marriage, or certain moral teachings, I have a right and responsibility to respectfully point it out. I refuse to be an ultramontanist. The other problem, compounding maters further, is that John Paul II and Benedict XVI were not only quite brilliant, they were remarkably clear and consistent. Francis is often neither. Fine—but we're used to some clarity and consistently. And, at some level, we should be getting it.

And I will say, while many of us are not 'calling for' the Pope's 'resignation', we would be relieved and welcome his retirement.

Mother Angelica was not pushed out.

Of course not.

The fact that theologically-inept converts swarmed the place immediately after her departure is purely coincidental.

Shilling for proaborts and attacking faithful Catholics was the fulfillment of her dream.

Seriously.

Do we have rubber balls at the end of our noses?

I'm sure this set the Pope off!

Yikes, this is a can of worms!

Some new material for homilies focueds on the no good bums and sourpusses inflexible to heresy.

Brace yourself for some good mileage out of that!

I know many, including our Fr. Z, were hoping that SSPX would come into full communion under the reign of Pope Francis.

I was not one of them. LOL.

The issue has always been SSPX took the position that the Church erred on teaching when the "Vatican II" wingnuts did what the Pope is trying to do on every other level and apostolate under the Chair of Peter.

Of course the Pope will assent to a statement saying Church teaching is in error. He has repeatedly said off-record there is no such thing as subjective Truth. I don't have to explain reasons why the CDF would not assent and will never assent to such a statement.

I held out very little hope that a reigning Pope:

a) inviting priests (and laity) to practice contradiction of Church teaching
b) assembling the worst heretics in the See of Peter to be his personal spokesperson on moral theology
c) contradicting Church teaching himself
d) imposing diabolical disorientation in the family, Church and world

...would be the set of circumstances SSPX have been waiting for!

How could they?

Conversely, I cannot imagine the Holy Father sending the welcome wagon to the peanut gallery he knows will publicly expose his errors.

It's not a good marriage. No pun intended!

Pope Francis is apologizing. Line up.

I was going to have a lot of fun with this but when I read the transcript, I thought to myself 'this is better than the usual mess - we are making progress!'

He's got some flight of thought going on, but at least he referenced the Catechism and made clear Church teaching doesn't require an apology but if people offended gays, then they should receive an apology -- right along with a generic list of wounded souls, and how about gays try some forgiveness for a change.

Don'g get me wrong, there's a screwball sentence or two (and not insignificant, like theology is a useless measurement tool but offenses against the political handbook are out of line) but overall, it's a little better.

He even lost his temper when women deacons were suggested.

“They said: 'The Church opens the door to deaconesses.' Really? I am a bit angry because this is not telling the truth of things.”

This I can live with!

Fr. Z comments here.


I love our Bear's headline!
and Julie's is really fun too!


I'm sure we could all come up with a list to keep him apologizing right up to retirement. If we hadnt moved on and forgotten!

I was thinking about the plane rides. Why cant we plant some solid journalists to jury-rig him into affirming Church teaching?

Pope Francis incredulous remark that priests who concern themselves with sickness of the soul are 'animals'.

From Monsignor Pope:

I would like to make, as a parish priest in trenches, a few remarks concerning the Pope’s recent statements in Rome at a gathering of priests and seminarians. Others have admirably remarked on his troubling remarks on marriage and cohabitation. I will not add to those. But I would like to focus on two other reported remarks the Pope made about priests to the effect that some of us are cruel, are putting our noses into people’s moral life and possibly that he even called some of us animals.

Permit me to state my utter bewilderment at such a notion. As a priest, and especially as a confessor and spiritual director this is my duty! It is true that I am not to unnecessarily pry into the private lives of parishioners. But surely there is a requirement that as a confessor and a pastor I have some sense of the moral life of those to whom I minister.

Yes indeed.

Since putting noses into people's moral life is the role of the royal priesthood, such a statement reveals gross an advanced spiritual depravity, doesn't it.

But it is beyond lamentable that the Pope, as initially reported, should have called priests (or any human being for that matter) “animals.” Such a word should never have come out of his mouth, and I would hope for an apology for this offensive characterization, not merely a Vatican “clarification.” I certainly have some differences with brother priests, I would call my differences with dissenting priests significant. But this does not permit me to call them animals, and the Pope, who seems to have done so, has no business doing it either. Admittedly the recorded comments are hard to follow, but the cleansed Vatican transcript is more in the mode of “Let’s pretend this was never said as recorded” rather than a clear denial—“The Pope wants to say he not consider priest animals, even though he thinks some are too hard-lined on this matter.”

As I've mentioned before, though my youngest was born four years after my marriage, when I sought the Sacrament of Baptism, the pastor did not recognize me and asked if I was practicing my faith. When my answers made clear to him that I had wandered from the Church and Sanctifying Grace, he expressed his reservation to Baptize my daughter. He reminded me of the promises made when parents seek Baptism and straightforward asked if it was my intention to live up to the promises.

These questions opened up the door to my conversion of the heart.

Even in my own rebellion with teaching on contraception, I made a promise to God which I intended to keep and in the fulfillment of the promise to teach my own child the truth convincingly, I rediscovered it myself.

The Holy Father's latest glimpse into the practice of his vocation is actually diagnostic.

These same questions are mandatory when seeking the Sacrament of Marriage to ascertain whether the parties know what they are doing at the time they are doing it.

These are the mandatory questions asked by the priest to determine whether the Sacrament of Marriage would be valid.

If we are to believe the Holy Father's latest 'pastoral' witness, when the uncatechized souls present themselves before him, he thinks the opportunity and process to catechize the soul is, astoundingly, spiritual malpractice. It's as screwed up as it gets. He leaves them in their ignorance and proceeded to perform an invalid Sacrament.

When he sees 'the majority' of Sacramental marriages all around him to be invalid, he need look no further than the mirror for the cause.

What gets to practicing Catholics is, he's trying to institute the perpetuation of simulating the Sacrament of marriage as the pastoral norm.

I pray that never again will we hear reported such a rude and unnecessary remark from this pope or any pope. No human person should be called an animal by a pope or any anyone, for that matter. Metaphors and similes have their place in human discourse, but to univocally call a fellow human being and animal is out of line.

But let’s consider the post hoc assessment of the remark wherein some prefer to say he apparently intended to say that some priests treat children (or possibly their unwed mothers) as “animals.”

Well, count me as less than relieved by this explanation. Again let me note that delaying a baptism merely due to the parents being unwed is rare in my experience (and hence a strawman argument). But it remains highly disrespectful to say that priests who delay baptism (usually for a number of reasons) are treating others as animals and are cruel.

Thus even the “spun” remarks are unhelpful at best and divisive at worst.

Please, Holy Father: Enough of these ad hoc, off-the-cuff, impromptu sessions, whether at thirty thousand feet or at ground level. Much harm through confusion has been caused by these latest remarks on marriage, cohabitation, baptism, confession, and pastoral practice. Simply cleaning the record in the official transcript is not enough; this is an era of instant reportage and lots of recording devices, tweets, and Instagrams.

I have little hope the Holy Father will practice reticence of the constant pounding of heresy and insanity from his papacy and hand-picked lackeys which echo his theology in the public square.

There's something more than sour-pussed belligerence that is delivering diabolical disorientation ad nauseum. I don't think rational sound faithful families, priests, bishops and Cardinals explaining the consequences will have any bearing on slowing him from full-throttle.

Much prayer and fasting!

Tips for Praying Out Loud

Six Tips for Praying Out Loud.

My very, very, very favorite: Singing prayer when I'm walking with headphones. The best!

If there are any Christian Hospital Administrators in Illinois with testicles, this would be the time to use them.

An Illinois bill mandating Christian Hospitals to promote killing babies is sitting on the governor's desk waiting for signature.

Are you people serious?

What are you all waiting for him to sign the bill?

You can't do it.

You're all done.

You absolutely, 100%, cannot put a hospital full of healthcare workers into the position of killing people for their paycheck. It's too much of a temptation.

Jockey the governer into the position of a unanimous shut down of Christian Hospitals the nanosecond he puts his signature on the bill.

Inform him he'll be sent a daily roster of admitted patients and surgical schedules and ask him to come up with the plan on what hospitals he'd like you to drop them off.

Pray for the virtue of fortitude and do what you have to do.

Are we all supposed to get married again?

I'm just throwing this out there:

If none of us are married, shouldn't we all call our parish and say "Pope Francis said I'm not married and I'd like to book a Wedding please".

Why are they letting us all go on living in a perpetual state of mortal sin?

I know they are tripping all over themselves trying figure out how to apologize to gays for 2000 years of teaching prohibitions on the sin of adultery, but don't you find it curious they haven't apologized for letting us all go on thinking we were married and telling us what to do next?

What's the Crisis in the "Francis Effect"?

I call your attention to this post at 1P5 about Catholic thinkers remarks on the latest from Pope Francis.

Steve references both Peters and Dougherty's articles and points out the general observation in Christendom that that the reign of Pope Francis is damaging Church teaching on marriage and more importantly the Sacrament of Marriage has been put into crisis.

This observation is irrefutable but I want to keep pointing out that the crisis is much more complex and catastrophic.

What Pope Francis is saying and doing is altering the moral compass in the intellects of the people we love.

It's a crisis of the soul and salvation in the family.

The tool is Church teaching but spiritual abuse is being practiced upon people.

At the beginning of his pontificate, Pope Francis kept his theology and intentions a mystery.

He deployed the same tired tactics. Appointing heretics. Pretending he had nothing to do with outcome. Failing to stop the nonsense when Catholics reported consequences to family members. Putting energy into firing salvos towards those who practice of living every day in a state of Grace. Moral theology was muddled and corrections were never issued. Inventing himself as the cool cat whose come to help us all out by giving the nudge and wink to adultery, contraception and sacramental chaos. Demoralizing Church teaching to make the 'church appealing'.

Laying out the same traps the heretics have been laying before our families for decades but always keeping it arms length to give the appearance it is possible he has nothing to do with it.

We will never know intentions, but we can make a judgment that the outcome of using heretics and apostates to catechize the flock and mocking those who teach the practice of our religion deprives them of right judgment.

If you want people drive drunk, you hire teachers that tell them it's hip and ok while caricaturing people who don't as antiquated sourpussed sticks in the mud.

When you're in the highest position on earth to calibrate judgment, there's a purpose behind those you put into position and hand them tools.

There's a consistent pattern to appointments and tools in this pontificate.

His theology is now out in the open and we feel deceived.

It's a crisis of honesty and trust.

Yes, he has imposed chaos by suggesting adultery is more salvific than the Sacrament of Marriage. But, I think we are doing a disservice to Christ to caricature the situation as a doctrinal war.

We are in the middle of the grand larceny of salvation of the people we love and care about and for generations to come.

That is the crisis.

I don't wish the man ill-will. I leave his fate in the Hands of God.

What I'm not going to do is sit in the peanut gallery and observe him in silence.

I'm too much in debt to Christ to return that kind of cowardice and too much in love with the people around me.

You know things are bad when Phil Lawler writes about the damage Pope Francis is doing.

During an address to a diocesan congress in Rome yesterday, Pope Francis was quoted as saying:

that some priests are “animals,”
that pastors should not be “putting our noses into the moral life of other people,” and
that the “great majority” of Catholic marriages today are invalid.

All of these shocking statements were attributed to the Holy Father by reliable journalists: experienced reporters who take pains to get things right, and usually do. Below I’ll address the important question of whether or not the quotes were accurate. But first let’s assess the damage done by the statements as they were reported.

In the 1st quote the Pope appears intemperate and uncharitable. He may disagree with priests who refuse to baptize the children of unwed mothers, but name-calling is ugly, and certainly beneath the dignity of the Petrine office.

In the 2nd quote the Holy Father seems thoroughly illogical, and/or dismissive of the entire Catholic moral tradition. Confessors and spiritual directors always “put their noses” into the moral lives of their people; good pastors and preachers do, too, albeit somewhat less directly. If the Church does not wish to be involved in our moral lives, why have any moral teaching at all?

With the 3rd quote, the Pope throws into question the validity of millions of marriages, and insults the Christian married couples who are working to fulfill their vocations. More than that—as Edward Peters explains—he suggests that there has been some fundamental change in human nature, since by nature any rational person is capable of entering into a valid (if not necessarily sacramental) marriage.

Who does this leave operating the spin machines?

George Weigel and Robbie George?

This article was on the top of my Pope Francis news feed. While the author sounds like a wounded and alienated soul, he's got some pretty astute observations.

This was a pretty big blunder. Maybe he'll give it a rest for a few days. LOL.

More from Ed Peters on the Disturbing Trajectory of Pope Francis Statements

The pope’s most recent statements on marriage were not slips akin to getting the date of a meeting wrong, they are not hearsay shared by a prelate known for a flexible attitude toward accuracy or stories shared by relatives from Argentina, and they are not hints of his views left ambiguous by some obvious omission. Instead these latest assertions were calmly offered by the pope before a large and sympathetic audience, with expert advisors readily at hand, in an extended manner, all of which factors point, I think, in a consistent if disturbing direction.

When you really start thinking the consequences of his theology through, we may need six months of fast.

LOL.

Fr. Rutler on Moral Corruption

As usual, it slays the dragons and there is little mystery about to whom it refers.

FROM THE PASTOR

June 19, 2016

by Fr. George W. Rutler

Saint Anthony, whose feast we recently celebrated, was an Augustinian canon in Portugal who joined the new Franciscan order in 1220, having been moved by the martyrdom of five Franciscans who had been beheaded by Muslims in Morocco. The year before, during the Fifth Crusade, Saint Francis of Assisi narrowly escaped execution when he preached the Gospel to Egyptian Muslims who had killed about five thousand Christians a few days before in Damietta. Anthony went to Morocco but became gravely ill, worked his way home via Sicily, and spent the rest of his 36 years preaching a combination of loving patience and mercy with bold insistence on Christ’s truth and stern reproof of lax clerics.

This is to be remembered when many voices today equate doctrinal orthodoxy with “rigidity” and portray the moral demands of Christ as distant ideals, if not impractical encumbrances. Saint Anthony preached against the fanatical Albigensian heretics in southern France whose misunderstanding of creation denigrated marriage and family life while promoting abortion, sodomy and assisted suicide. They considered themselves more “spiritual” than Catholic “doctors of the law” and took Pharisaic pride in boasting that they were not Pharisees. Bold St. Anthony was not an “Albigensian-phobe,” and reasonable people now are not phobic when they tell the truth about mental illness dressed as “transgenderism,” borders open to illegal immigrants excused as hospitality, and denial of religious freedom adjudicated as social pragmatism.

The first Christians knew well the degrading course of systemic moral corruption (c.f.: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11). They would not have been surprised at how the Canadian High Court has modified certain strictures against bestiality, the government of Massachusetts no longer identifies femaleness and maleness as biological categories, people weep when a gorilla is shot to save the life of a human child, and a student in a major university is given a light slap on the wrist for violating a young woman while being complimented for his athletic ability. But they would have been astonished at the politically correct reluctance to identify the religious motivation of terrorists who massacre people. In 1951, General Douglas MacArthur said, “History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”

A cartoon some years back showed a Lilliputian looking at Gulliver and saying, “Either he’s very big or we are very small.” In the instance of Christ, it is not either/or: he is very big, and we are very small. But we need not remain small if by a spiritual awakening we “attain to the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the extent of the full stature of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13).

When Priests Console by Saying Heresy is Not Being Taught from The Chair of Peter (or Church Teaching didn't change)

On this post yesterday, I admired Fr. Zs serenity while we are all discussing the almost daily assaults upon the holy family and the Sacraments coming from the Chair of Peter.

My post received this response from a reader:

Yes, Fr. Z is indeed a 'cool cucumber', but the way I see it, whether or not he is 'teaching from the Chair', he is still 'teaching'...

I completely agree.

This is probably going to sound sexist, but I think the reason why ordained men without children do not comprehend the unprecedented disaster of a pope who publicly contradicts Church teaching and instructs others to do so is, their intimacy is the Church and ours is our family members.

To a man married to the Church, his vocation finds consolation in the perpetual outcome of teaching - which we all know is preserved. They tend to see things as a soul count in a wider community in the context of perpetuity.

I don't exactly see eye-to-eye with his rosy outlook for vocations. The coup working in Rome will significantly change how priests are changed to practice theology and the Sacraments in seminaries. As this cancer matures and grows, bishops make it difficult for priests to teach and practice our religion. As he well knows.

IMO, the damage being done to the priesthood by Pope Francis, intentional or unintentional, is catastrophic.

For those of us who chose the vocation of marriage, of course the perpetual outcome of Church teaching is important to us, but the Holy Father is persuading people in our home to practice contradiction to Church teaching when making judgments.

This has two consequences:

In the holy family it's causing great harm to the people in our homes, families, friends and community.

Our vocation thinks in terms of the people right in front of us.

If the people right in front of us get lured into practicing contradiction to Church teaching, we have lost our own unborn descendants in perpetuity. Our children, children's children and so on.

For this reason, laity is much more distraught about what the Holy Father is doing to the people we love and the inheritance he is robbing from our unborn descendants.

The reader also said:

For the life of me, I cannot understand why NO ONE in the hierarchy of the Church is solidly confronting him with his nonsensical yet devastatingly damaging off the cuff remarks.

We know, with absolute certainty, he has been told.

He is not a stupid man and he understands that teaching requires oversight of how your audience understood what you were trying to convey. He has the duty to observe this himself, without others having to tell him.

On top of this duty, there is public knowledge that Cardinals and Bishops have articulated what he already can see and hear.

In some cases, this places him into the position of being forced to dial something back - such as the case of changing the 'majority of Catholic Marriages are living in a perpetual state of adultery' to 'some'.

We further have the confessions of Cardinal Kasper who has reported his confidential discussions with Pope Francis to the press and some direct confessions from the Pope himself. While I don't have the quote in front of me, the Holy Father said something like We know what we are doing will receive opposition and it will not deter us from proceeding.


As he continues to do it ad nauseum, it is impossible to believe it's unintentional.

His credo is 'make a mess' and as one Bishop said, mission accomplished.

Off the cuff remarks are very difficult to manage. This is why 2000 years of Pope's before Pope Francis did not engage in off the cuff remarks. He obviously believes the wisdom of 2000 years of his predecessors inferior to his intellect.

John Henry Weston suggested fasting for the Pope yesterday, saying 'the hour is late'. It is a message I constantly need to hear. I was reminded of the time in Christ's ministry when somebody was acting up and the Apostles asked Christ why He wasn't responding to it. He told them some demons can only be driven out with fasting.

The daily ridiculousness tends to keep us focused on the catastrophic consequences in our families and the righteous anger of being robbed blind.

It doesn't have to be a complete fast from food. Even fasting from daily pleasures can be fruitful when coupled with prayer. Tea, coffee, sugar. I love, love, love my morning tea.

I'm going to do a 30 day fast from these pleasures starting July 1 for the intention of spiritual protection for our Holy Father and the people being affected by it.

A driving the demons out fast.

It doesn't have to be that dramatic. It could be as simple as fasting from one thing when you he says something off of the reservation. God knows we have plenty of reminders in that realm.

Some food for thought.

Pope Says If You Got Married in the Catholic Church the Joke was on You, But You Have the 'grace of a real marriage' if You Shacked Up

It's hard to read when you have steam coming out of your ears but I've read the blow-by-blow a few times on Rorate and it seems to me, that's what he said.

Pope Francis said Thursday that the great majority of sacramental marriages today are not valid, because couples do not enter into them with a proper understanding of permanence and commitment.

That's quite an indictment of catechesis. However, in our stupidest hour in a parish run by a raging apostate who doesn't give a flying fig about the salvation of the two people in front of him, the vows are intentionally written in the interest of full disclosure:

"I, ______, take you, ______, to be my wife/husband. I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life until death do us part."

BOOM.

Does he think the all the Confirmations of teenagers are invalid?

How about the parents who haven't seen the inside of a Church since their own baptism who bring their own children to the Font of Baptism in the Catholic Church? All invalid??

What about priests who don't realize what they've gotten themselves into, their ordinations are invalid?

Please. Nobody ever really knows the challenges and difficulties that lie ahead. We are not sorcerers.

The number of people getting married in the Catholic Church who believe what they're doing is something temporary is could dance on the head of a pin.

..and brace yourself:

He added that a majority of couples attending marriage prep courses in Argentina typically cohabitated.

It seems it never occurred to him that this outcome is the results of his teaching and leadership. This is what happens when you stop the river of Sanctifying Grace to make it all about you.

“They prefer to cohabitate, and this is a challenge, a task. Not to ask ‘why don’t you marry?’ No, to accompany, to wait, and to help them to mature, help fidelity to mature.”

He said that in Argentina’s northeast countryside, couples have a child and live together. They have a civil wedding when the child goes to school, and when they become grandparents they “get married religiously.”

Grandparents?! Good grief.

And all the family members of Catholics who suffered your silence and watched their loved ones die before they 'became grandparents' would like to give you a swift kick in the backside for your 'accompaniment'to that end.

As if the above wasn't enough, he subordinated the Sacrament of Marriage in the Catholic Church to shacking up:

“It’s a superstition, because marriage frightens the husband. It’s a superstition we have to overcome,” the Pope said. “I’ve seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage, they have the grace of a real marriage because of their fidelity, but there are local superstitions, etc.

Does this make saints out of people having one-night stands? LOL.

Quite frankly...It's kinda scary how backwards it all is.

You know what gets me about this revelation?

In his mind he spent his vocation standing by watching a majority of priests simulate a sacrament and sentencing a majority of Catholics to live in a perpetual state of adultery.

And you have to love the 'twitters' of Catholics who should know better - like Robbie George:

This is entirely possible. The erosion of the understanding of what marriage is has consequences for what people do.

A 'majority' of Catholic Marriages are invalid?

That is ridiculous.

This might well be the worst case papal asshattery in the history of the Church. It's going to be hard to trump this but I have a feeling we won't have to wait too long.

Excellent comments at Rorate and Fr. Z's.

Our Fr. Z is a cool cucumber!

Bishop Lynch Accuses Christ of Breeding Contempt

Lynch's Latest:

Second, sadly it is religion, including our own, which targets, mostly verbally, and also often breeds contempt for gays, lesbians and transgender people.

If you ask me, blaming Christ is a demonic utterance to defend the muslimic credo to kill infidels.

If you don't vote for Trump we'll be seeing a lot more of it, but I digress.

Some well-written analysis at Lifesite.

But in what may be the most outrageous case of speciously projecting fault, the Catholic bishop of St. Petersburg, Florida, distorted the very faith he was ordained to uphold.

You've got that right!

Didn't this God-forsaken wolf turn 75 yet?

Is he serious?

Church teaching doesn't breed contempt for prostitutes.

It doesn't breed contempt for people who live together.

It doesn't breed contempt for people who steal your car.

It doesn't even breed contempt for rapists and murderers.

But somewhere in his twisted mind, "though shalt not commit adultery" breeds contempt for homosexuals.

When these kinds of statements have been made by ordained men in the past, faithful priests refer to the phenomenon as a 'self-loathing homosexual'.

I call your attention to this.

The sexual misconduct charge against Lynch involved former diocesan employee Bill Urbanski, 42, who reported to Church officials that Lynch had sexually harassed him on numerous occasions.

Lynch later gave this context to following the man around like a dog in heat,

Later, Bishop Lynch admitted that he may have crossed the line between friendship and work. He made a vague reference to getting some "counseling."

Lesson learned. Always chase your eyecandy outside of your place of employment.

The contractor was a much better fit:

In addition to reporting on the Lynch-Urbanski story, the St. Petersburg Times and the Tampa Tribune were looking into rumors of Bishop Lynch's intimate relationship with bachelor David Herman, a contractor who had moved from Fort Lauderdale to St. Petersburg with Lynch when he was installed as bishop. The two men had vacationed together in Hawaii, San Francisco, Key West, Bermuda, Israel and Rome, sometimes accompanied by Urbanski.

Herman had several things in common with Urbanski, one of them being that both men were triathletes. In March 2000, all three men, that is Herman, Urbanski and Lynch went to West Palm Beach for a weekend. Urbanski said the bishop pressured him to go. When they got to their hotel, Urbanski said that Lynch made him take a steam bath together. Herman, who joined the two men said that Urbanski clearly did not want to be there.

Urbanski said that when Lynch began to make sexual overtures towards him, he tried to avoid the bishop as much as possible. "I tried to avoid him as the years progressed, without him getting mad at me. I couldn't have him mad at me. It was a tough day at work if he was mad at me, yet I couldn't leave. He went as far as to tell me how to wear my hair. If I got my hair cut, he would say, 'Oh, Bill. You need to grow your hair back. It's not a flattering haircut for you.'" He said that when he and Bishop Lynch traveled together the bishop always insisted on sharing rooms, and sometimes appeared naked from the shower.

In April 2002, Urbanski gave a lengthy interview to Brad Smith of the Tampa Tribune in which he elaborated on his four and a half-year relationship with Bishop Lynch. He said that Lynch was a lavish spender who always traveled first class and that he (Urbanski) was frequently the recipient of the bishop's largesse — watches, designer clothing and other expensive items. Urbanski said at first he was grateful, until he realized that the gifts came at a price — more time, attention, and ultimately sexual favors for the bishop.

It is interesting to note that reporters following the case appeared to be unfazed by the homosexual overtones of the Lynch-Herman relationship or Lynch taking sexual familiarities with Urbanski, a married man with two small children baptized by the bishop. They were upset, however, by the accusation that Lynch, as Corporation Sole of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, had awarded Herman highly inflated new construction contracts totaling $30.3 million on a non-competitive bid basis even though diocesan regulations mandate open bidding for church construction work.

He certainly had some innovative programs in place to help, as he put it, homosexual relationships present no risk to the Church, and in fact can be godly and elevate society and the Church.

As I've said a million times before - if they are preaching it, the likelihood it is a public confession is very high.

It is so scandalous that the Holy See empowers this man and the thousands just like him.

Vatican Official Monsignor Jean-Marie Mupendawatu Says Pope Francis Welcomes United Nations Killing Goals

Watching US bishops with proabort politicians for several decades, I've often wondered if they would ever have the spinal fortitude to stop the passive-aggressive support of killing infants and just come right out and announce their support for it.

I never thought they would, LOL.

No doubt emboldened by the sight of the wild pack of dogs mauling 2000 years of Church teaching in St. Peter's Square, Pope Francis appointee has taken a step forward:

Pope Francis’ representative to the United Nations told the World Health Assembly in Switzerland last month that the Holy See “welcomes” goal 3 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), focused on ensuring “healthy lives,” and the goal’s 13 targets.

Pope Francis despicable administrative support of abortion is being spun as 'healthy lives'.

If the UN ever decides to endorse countries executing unwanted priests and bishops, 'healthy lives' political agendas that include killing their backsides would have a hard time finding a ecclesiastical wizard with a welcome wagon.

In a lot of ways I admire Monsignor Jean-Marie Mupendawatu intellectual honesty.

We've spent a lot of years calling them to the carpet for honoring Herod, pretending their killing decrees were meaningless ancillary initiatives that shouldn't stop them from going on a cruise together.

Aren't you tired of listening to their deceptive excuses?

Last year pro-life advocates became alarmed when Holy See representative Archbishop Bernardito Auza told the UN that the Vatican supported the goals and targets of the SDGs “verbatim” despite two goals having targets that call for “universal access” to “sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights” as well as “family planning” services.

Isn't it refreshing to see somebody finally just come out and admit it?

“The Holy See delegation welcomes the vital emphasis on the dignity of the human person and the strong focus on equity expressed in the pledge that 'no one will be left behind'.

Except the dead babies and the mothers who sell their salvation for killing their children. They are left behind but they mean nothing to them. The politicans can kill babies right under their nose and the Holy See will call the initiative 'a vital emphasis on the dignity of the human person' and an initiative “to combat climate change and its impact on health”.

Rorate post here.

"Be it mine to practice and defend the Catholic, the Apostolic, the Roman faith against the enemies of religion. "

As always, a great reflection from Fr. Rutler.

FROM THE PASTOR

June 12, 2016

by Fr. George W. Rutler

At a Vigil Service before the burial of a friend who was a Knight of Malta, a comfortable attorney who was a self-styled “progressivist” took umbrage at a phrase I had read from the daily prayer of that Order: “Be it mine to practice and defend the Catholic, the Apostolic, the Roman faith against the enemies of religion. . . .” He said that there are no enemies of religion anymore. When our Lord sent his disciples out, he told them what to expect and disabused them of such dangerous naïveté. They would be lambs among wolves, and not lambs among lambs.

In little more than a dozen years, the Christian population in Iraq has dropped from 2 million to 300,000. In Syria, where Christians once were ten percent of the population, there are fewer than a million now, and many of them are being kidnapped and held for ransom at $100,000 each. The misery of enslavement, destruction of churches, crucifixions and beheadings was brought into sharp focus last March when sixteen people were gunned down in a nursing home, including four Indian religious sisters of Blessed Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity who were caring for them. That may have been the efficient cause for the U.S. State Department declaring, after long tarrying, that all this is deliberate genocide.

In Lord Jim, Joseph Conrad wrote: “. . . no man ever understands quite his own artful dodges to escape from the grim shadow of self-knowledge.” Artful denial is a common disposition among those who do not want to compromise their ideology with reality, lest they be discomfited by confrontation with evil.

The Turkish government persists in denying the genocide of 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and 1923. Japan still denies the massacre of hundreds of thousands of Chinese in 1937 during the Second Sino-Japanese War. Not until 1994 did Russia accept full responsibility for the slaughter of 21,857 Polish officers, clergy, and academics in the Katyn forest. At the time, President Roosevelt blamed that on the Nazis and exiled to American Samoa the Navy officer, George Earle, who produced the facts.

In that same year of 1943, Roosevelt received in the Oval Office the Catholic layman Jan Karski who had heroically microfilmed evidence of the German concentration camps, but the President wanted only to talk about farm horses. Even Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter later wrote: “I did not say that (Karski) was lying. I said that I could not believe him. There is a difference.” George Orwell called the obliteration of conscience in the face of malice “doublethink.” The psychological term is “dissociation.”

Our parish is blessed to have as its patron Saint Michael the Archangel, and his “defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil” is not the last resort but the first in the perpetual spiritual combat. That is why on Sundays we invoke him at the end of Mass.

Consecration in the City of Aliquippa, PA

A magnificent way to kick off the Lord's Day!


On Saturday, 4 June 2016, in a historic ceremony sponsored by the Knights of Columbus Woodlawn Council 2161, the City of Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, was solemnly consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

The consecration was performed by the pastors of the three Catholic parishes located in Aliquippa, and the mayor.

What a stronghold!

More Good News...

The heretical battleaxes have been summoned to the Holy See again.

News comes after pope ended investigation of nuns and a 2010 inquiry into ‘secular mentality’ and ‘feminist spirit’ within some religious groups

The Vatican has summoned an American nun whose Kentucky-based order has run afoul of the church in the past to come to Rome and respond to “areas of concern”, raising questions about whether the Vatican is embarking on another crackdown on liberal-minded US sisters.

This is why it is absolutely critical to keep the bishops feet to the fire when he's made clear he's going to support spiritual malpractice.

Continuing to pound your local heirarchs with the same waves of heresy your relatives are receiving in your school, parish, apostolate, newspaper, magazine - etc, most especially when they pretend they don't see the problem.

The order declined to provide a copy of the Vatican letter to the Guardian. But according to Global Sisters Report, the group has been asked to explain “ambiguity” in its adherence to church teaching and way of living religious life.

The CDF has not fallen to the counterfeit church!

Pope Francis on "Assisted Suicide" (At long last, a sermon on the mount)

Here's a teaching he finally agrees with: Killing your helpless sick relatives is selfish false compassion.

Excuse us sir, but do you see how this judgment come from 'rigid this or that' teaching of the Church?

If the family of a sick person has to go to work, they make the judgment they are not capable of caring for their relatives. The sick person realizes they are a burden and nobody is going to take care of them - and together they decide its time to commit suicide. That's when doctors provide medications to carry out the act.

With all due respect, this is where your fable of 'able' falls flat on it's face.

Christ provided Church teaching to make judgments and all the Sanctifying Grace one needs to carry out His Will.

This is what the holy family has been teaching at home through decades of undisciplined heretical priests, nuns, lay people spiritually misguiding three generations of your people.

Pope Says if You're Using the Church to Draw Sanctifying Grace to Keep from Falling to Temptation and Sin - You are a Heretic.

The Holy Father further claims the Church doesn't have any binding teachings, just ideals.

Church teachings are just suggestions we should live to the extent we are able?

What exactly does 'able' mean?

If an individual sees some eye candy in the liquor store they are able to say to themselves "I'm not able to keep the Commandments today."?

If the woman conceives a child from the hook up, the Deposit of Faith that explains the Commandments is not a resource from which judgments should be made about the meaning of 'able'?

So much for the Magnificat.

I'm just going to leave this here:

"It would be a very serious error to conclude... that the Church's teaching is essentially only an 'ideal' which must then be adapted, proportioned, graduated to the so-called concrete possibilities of man, according to a 'balancing of the goods in question'...”
---Pope St. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter, Veritatis Splendor

The Holy Father then goes on to say that Catholics who use Church teaching for judgments are heretics.

Wouldn't you love to know why the Holy Father finds the fiat of the Holy Family so insidious?

Like Herod, he's passed out the swords and given orders to slay the children of Israel. As they wreak havoc in every home and family, he's sulking about the people who have fled to take shelter.

Seriously, this is completely out of control.

"Spiritual but not religious"

Outstanding explanation of this foolish assertion.

But I think there is another adolescent thing going on in this claim. There is the desire of “I want to do what I want to do.” If I have religion, then I am obligated to obey someone else’s will. But if I am merely spiritual, there are no demands upon me other than to follow my own sense of “this is what I currently prefer.”

I’ve seen this mindset manifest itself with comments like, “Well, I find God the most in nature, so I would rather go into the woods on Sunday morning than to a church.” I also find God revealing himself in nature. But what is going on here? I am merely asserting my own preference: I want to go to the woods, so I will go to the woods. I don’t actually have to be concerned with what God might want. I’m not even asking if God has a preference regarding where he wants to be found or how he wants to be worshiped. I am merely doing what I want to do.

In this case, my “god” is me. I become the one who decides “this is what God would want,” rather than asking, “God, what do you want?”

“Spiritual but not religious” is just another form of idolatry. In this case, the false god is the god I have invented. God is no longer a someone. “God” is now just some vague idea, an impersonal force that makes no demands on me and is simply “there” so that I don’t feel lonely.

The article is a must-read.

People amaze me.

Don't they think about what they're saying?

"I keep my spiritual rudder away from God."

Okay. Bye!

CDF describes theology of Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernàndez as heretical.

In May of 2015, it is likely that Müller also learned of Archbishop Fernàndez’ provocations. If he did know, he maintained a public silence – until now. Müller has just given an interview to the German Catholic journal, Herder Korrespondenz. This interview has already created a stir due to the CDF Prefect’s comments indicating surprisingly strong stipulations concerning reconciliation of the SSPX. What has mostly escaped notice was another segment of the interview, one in which Cardinal Gerhard Müller thoughtfully returns to the earlier statements of Archbishop Fernàndez, at least one of which was clearly directed against Müller, if not by name.

Müller labels as heretical the claim that the pope is not bound to live in Rome. When asked about Pope Francis’ “acts of relativizing the papal office” and whether “his style is changing the theological profile of the papal office,” the German cardinal said the following :

The teaching on the papacy as a Divine institution cannot be relativized by anybody – this would mean to want to correct God Himself. […] A while ago, there were people who were presented by certain tendentious media outlets as being the closest counselors of the pope, and specifically according to whom one could even well move the residence of the pope down to Medellin or distribute the offices of the Curia to the different local churches. This is fundamentally wrong and even heretical [“sogar häretisch”]. In this matter, one only has to once read the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council in order to recognize the ecclesiological absurdity of such thought games. The residence of the pope is the Church of St. Peter in Rome. (my emphasis added)

Amoris Laetitia is absolutely NOT calling for 'a new kind of ministry' -- it's the same old nonfeasance and malfeasance they have been practing for 60 years.

In an address to 50 Nigerian bishops, the president of the Pontifical Council for the Family said recently that Pope Francis’s new apostolic exhortation on love in the family calls for a new style of ministry to families without changing doctrine.

A new style of ministry to families?


Like hiring and ordaining apostates to tell our children to find virtue in polygamy and sodomy?

Are they serious?

That's been the practice for 60 years.

All the pope did was give them all a piece of paper with an edict telling priests who haven't been doing it to join them for the sake of unity.

Big Pow-Wow in Rome: What the Church Needs Now is the Dismantling of Oversight and Accountability of Bishops

Their reflections, he said, also delved into "possible forms of decentralization in relation to episcopal conferences" around the world.

The nine-member council, which assists the Pope in matters of church governance and the reform of the Roman Curia, also discussed the work of several Vatican offices, including: the Congregation for Bishops, the Secretariat of State, as well as the congregations for Catholic Education, Eastern Churches and Clergy and the pontifical councils for Culture, Promoting Christian Unity and Interreligious Dialogue.

Following the announcement June 4 of the establishment of a new Vatican office for laity, family and life, Father Lombardi told reporters that the council also discussed the possible responsibilities of a new office dedicated to charity, justice and peace.

The office would bring together four existing pontifical councils responsible for promoting Catholic charity, justice and peace, providing pastoral assistance to healthcare workers and for migrants, refugees and other itinerant peoples.

They have really outdone themselves in audacity in corruption and screwed-up priorities.

We all know what the Church says about 'charity' without truth.

The pontificate of sappy sentiments.

Here's some good news for a change...

St. Agnes Parish in Manhattan entrusted to Opus Dei.

Outstanding news for catechesis!

And, are you ready for this?

“I warmly welcome the Prelature of Opus Dei as a partner in serving the people of God of this archdiocese,” Cardinal Dolan said in a statement. “The parishioners of St. Agnes, I am sure, will quickly come to know and appreciate their apostolic zeal in preaching the Gospel, and serving the religious and sacramental needs of the people entrusted to their care.”

Msgr. Thomas G. Bohlin, the U.S. vicar of Opus Dei, said, “We are grateful that the cardinal has asked us to carry out this pastoral work, and we look forward to serving the faithful of the parish of St. Agnes and the Archdiocese of New York.”

Say WHAT?

I can't help but wonder if he 'asked' immediately after a big fat check was deposited into the Archdiocesan coffers!

I don't care!

Fabulous news!

Words of Advice for Boston's New Bishops-Elect (and screed on the catechesis of the family)

I gave some casual commentary on the new bishops-elect in the comments section yesterday but living in Boston, I thought it deserved its own post.

I'm going to add a little background. I know it's long. Consider it the Sunday Edition.

Catholic parents have faced many trying years. Teaching right judgment at home has been severely challenged by the amoral, immoral and Godless secular culture. Public school and the media are constantly hammering at children of well-catechized families.

We very much needed (and need) our priests to evangelize, affirm, confirm the temporal goods of the Church so they wouldn't get sucked into the lies they were being fed at school and in the culture that the 'advancement' of widespread cultural demoralization has made Church teaching outdated.

It's a really stupid supposition when you think about it, but it has been (unfortunately) effective. Especially after the death of St. John Paul II who had the ability to connect with young people and keep them grounded. Pope Benedict's appeal was more geared to adults. St. John Paul II had the rare talent of connecting to both.

I don't have to tell TTC readers what happened in our local parishes, but it's important to articulate when talking about a bishop's role in catechesis of the family.

Home the kiddies come from school with the sexual agenda of the teachers union. Television,social media, Hollywood and music aid and confirm sexual demoralization of children. It sounds terrible, but the reality is, public school teachers position themselves as sexual mentors to our children. They foster the theory that parents are old-fashioned and children can't rely upon them to form their moral compass. It is a religious freedom constitutional issue that is thriving in lawlessness of this nation. The teachers explain because parents are so out of touch, they must provide books and resources to teach sexual experimentation. They provide links to websites that have 'chat rooms' where all kinds of adult predators lurk. At-risk and troubled children are lured into believing the answers to their low self-esteem will be found in promiscuity. Even the most solid kids can be sucked into the vacuum.

It's a mess and we needed our priests to position themselves as the 'go-to' people outside of the role of parents.

Right?

Just about the time children are old enough to observe the culture lives differently than mommy and daddy, and public school teachers are right there to hijack the situation, the role of a priest becomes critical in the spiritual foundation and formation of our children.

But we had worse than nothing. Our priests turned our local parishes into places where promiscuity, contraception and abortion was encouraged. There was a period when good priests continued to ground children with the teachings of the Church. But the people would call the Chancery and threaten to withhold donations. Bishops want the money in the wallets of people coming to Church and pressure good priests into silence.

Parents whose children are catechized call the Chancery about this or that priest doing significant damage to their children/parish/community.

Right?

This is the situation as it exists today. On and on it goes.

I am not even going to get into how the mess in the Chair of Peter has strengthened and empowered sexual demoralization of our families at the local parish.

My focus today is the family, the parish and bishops.

I have numerous times expressed my experience as a parent going back to the Cardinal Law days. Up against the know-it-alls on the internet, all I have is about five years experience as a parent encountering disorderly conduct at local parishes from which my family could not find refuge.

When I began calling, I would encounter chancery wizards on the phone who would assure me they would speak to Cardinal Law about Fr. SoandSo's spiritual misconduct. Time and time again they would tell me Cardinal Law said Fr. SoandSo was right.

The judgments I was being told he was making about heresy were completely inconsistent with the solid theology of his homilies. I was also very aware of his ministry to the dying. He would climb a mountain to make sure the sick and dying had access to Extreme Unction, sometimes to the frustration of people around him.

I was mystified. How could a man so serious about salvation with one hand empower the obstruction of its exercise at the parish level with the other? It didn't make sense.

This went on for a couple of years.

Then one day the "office for worship" rolled out a new Liturgy and Sacramental program that was completely out to lunch. A group of nutters came to parishes and told us the Blessed Sacrament was going to be removed from the worship space, reservation in a Church should be in the Sacristy and used only for Extreme Unction, we were switching to pita bread and lay Eucharistic ministers would surround the Altar and Lift Christ with the priests at Elevation during the Canon,then break It into little pieces to give communicants as we stand in line, we were not to kneel in prayer after Communion -- etc., etc.

I made the phone call to the Chancery and once again was told this program had Cardinal Law's blessing.

I had been to his Liturgies and knew how perfectly and respectfully they were executed. Every detail of his Liturgies gives to Christ and the people the honor the mystical Sacrifice deserves.

I knew something was really screwed up. I just had to know if he completely off of his rocker.


I went to the Cathedral, stood at the end of the hand-shaking line, gave him a one-minute highlight of changes and said I was told you approved of these changes.

He blew a gasket. He told me he absolutely did NOT know and it would be stopped tomorrow morning. And it was. And every time a priest damaged my children's moral compass and conscience, every time a disordered program was announced from a parish - I went directly to him and it was always kiboshed.

I told other parents encountering the spiritual misfeasance of their children to do the same.

I really did not understand the magnitude of the spiritual battles going on within the diocese until Walter Cuenin organized the local lavender mafia and they all rushed out of the closet. There is no question that Walter Cuenin and his cabal, with the help of Richard McBrien, cooked up the gross embellishment of the urban legend that the Catholic Church is operating a pedophile business and the bishops are the pimps. The goal was to try to introduce heresy in the chaos. And try they did. (God knows we had problems which continue to manifest themselves today, but the hysteria was a well-organized coup. Cuenin even had the stupidity to boast about HERE)

That is what makes Terry McDonough's retreat to the free masons so rich. At 80 years old, he has abandoned hope his dream will come true (more of his sob story here). This is the remnant of Cuenin's 'reformers'. Their retreat is a testimony to a tremendous victory in the battle for the soul of Christ's Church. Don't let the doors hit you on the booty on the way out!

Again, I am not getting into any other tsunamis. This post is about the spiritual nonfeasance and malfeasance of priests and how bishops handle the situation, how Cardinal Law handled it. The families who had a front row seat to this battle have very little doubt that he will be greatly rewarded for his faithful service to Christ's Church when push came to shove. And that's the way it is.

We have had a long 20 years of theological struggles in the aftermath. The Chancery has never been, in my lifetime, a place where there is a structure to ensure the spiritual safety of catechesis of the family. It is a bunker. Money and political power is the oxygen.

Some good bishops have come, gone and remain.

Bishops are the local guardians of the tools for salvation in the family. Titular bishops carry out the wishes and instructions of an Archbishop. If the modus operandi of an Archbishop is the protection of priests committing spiritual crimes against the family/community, then the titular bishops are strangled to do anything about spiritual abuse taking place in the family.


When the head of a family calls to report incidents in a situation like this, they are patronized, lied to, mistreated. If the situation goes public, slander is deployed against the family for damage control.

This is very much the situation most Catholic families in the US are living (and why the Pope who uses these tactics has become an enemy of the family).

A great deal of my service to Catholic families living this nightmare has been focused on encouragement to continue to hold the bishops/Archbishops feet to the fire. Heads of families whose spiritual focus is the salvation of their loved ones - we are not here to win friends and influence folks in the Chancery.

We are a witness to our children on how to live in service to Christ's Church, always speaking the truth, interceding in the deception of our people and trying to right wrongs.


Sometimes the bishop intentionally surrounds himself with people who deploy it on his behalf and sometimes people flock to the Chancery and deploy it while the bishop is being shuffled around like the entertainment elephant in the circus.

It is impossible to serve a priest or bishop in any other capacity when he is not on the team of the holy family. Or his team is not on the team. Stick to your role as a Catholic parent and let the chips fall where they may.

The battles of the holy family in Boston are not secretive. We ran out of every option internally and were forced to shed light on the ridiculousness in the public square. The battles have been fierce. For many years, every tried and true tactic was deployed without mercy. I believe we succeeded in making clear we will never be dissuaded and it is our intention to remain steadfast in our allegiance to Christ and empower other family victims of spiritual skullduggery to do the same.

It was a good 15 years of bloody war. There have been many victories and I can say with conviction there were temporal victories in every stop the madness campaign. We have been able to diffuse, stall, obstruct and frustrate 80% of it.

Over the past few years I have encountered a waving of the white flag.

There's a new 'tude. When spiritual guardians call to report misconduct, there is acknowledgment that what is happening is spiritually damaging and there is intervention. This is a most welcome change and hope and pray the momentum continues to traverse upon that trajectory.

With what is going down in St. Peter's Square, it is more important than ever to focus on the local parish and Chancery to preserve and empower the tools of salvation.

Here is my causal feedback on the new sheriffs:

Prayers for them both!

I recently had an interaction with Fr Reed about something outrageous that was published in the Pilot and was very impressed with how he handled the matter. He came across as a very honest, humble, kind priest who understood why parents are on top of nonsense that is offers for consumption by people whose duty it is to know better. He is an excellent addition to the bishops of Boston.

I have also had numerous interactions with Fr O'Connell but not for many years. He is a feisty one and my general experience won him the Nick name of sled dog. The hierarchy would make a stupid judgment call and load him up to deliver the goods and deliver them, he did. He pulled a couple of fast ones when the Chancery was really a bunker they were protecting with skullduggery. I believe the skirmishes and some personnel changes have softened most of them up a bit. Not sure how he emerged from the battles. Time will tell!

I believe a week or so ago, a third bishop was named that I wasn't familiar with? Anyone know him?

Are some bishops retiring or excardinating? Seems a little top heavy? My sense is Cardinal Sean has been an airport bishop for some time and the inmates were running the asylum. Perhaps these changes reflect better staffing in his absence.

A warm welcome to the fracus!

Here are some words to the wise to those who would like to avoid being the subject of stories on Boston's Catholic blogs.

1. Please, no patronizing letters. Our cellars have run out of storage place and we will only gather more families to persuade you to intercede.

2. If a head of a family approaches you and you do not see or hear the spiritual damage being done by the priest, pastor, lay person, nutty dame, program or resources, you are not listening with your soul.

3. There are numerous priests who have been spiritually misleading family members for decades. We don't give a flying fig if he is a friend of the Cardinal or the Pope. The role of a bishop is to stop him.

4. If you put a priest in charge who doesn't have the wherewithall to know he can't cut a deal to subcontract abortions, the Catholics who call your office to 'splain the theological problems with luring the uncatechized into killing people cuz you know you can't do it, are not the people 'doing a disservice to the Church'. Don't put that allegation out into social media. The priest with the spiritual judgment problem is the person doing a disservice to the Church. If you catch my drift.

5. Catholic families who live and teach the fiat of living every day in a state of Sanctifying Grace (and everything that comes with it), we understand pastoral judgment may sometimes require patiently steering a struggling priest. If the priest has been misleading souls for two decades without any kind of effective intervention for the holy family, the hierarchy has exhausted that patience. And rightly so. Treat those who approach you accordingly. It may seem like somebody is sweating the small stuff but there is a history and the likelyhood that some child has wondered off with a dragon because of the situation - to the great pain of the person you are listening to.

6. I know this is very misunderstood but it must be said: To Catholics who live our fiat, a priest who is spiritually misleading our children is more serious than a priest who is raping them. The gravity of the loss of salvation is paramount to us. This does not, in any way, diminish rape of a child, which we know has a demonic spiritual dimension that consumes a family and loved ones, but it explains the seriousness of the charges of spiritual malpractice that is your responsibility to stop. This is not a contest of ideas. People are being hurt.

7. The network we have built over the years is very much in place. It's a small world. If somebody approaches you about a problem and you mishandle it, assume that situation will show up on a blog. Everyone starts with a clean slate and the benefit of the doubt but we are more vigilant than ever. It's been relatively quiet and everyone likes it that way. Don't. Rock. the. Boat!

8. Take a rain check on invitations to stand beside politicians who are demoralizing our families. Your presence gives credibility to their political agenda which is slaying the souls of our people.

9. The damage control and publicity stunts coming out of Rasky Baerlein are God-awful and politically motivated. If you don't have the courage to tell the Cardinal (as we have) have a list of excuses handy to politely decline participation. The starvation of our people is catechetical, it is right under your nose and is catastrophic. The Jack Connors socialist and communist photo ops do lethal damage to the trust of the holy family who is being victimized by it.

10. God's abundant blessing and the protection of the Queen of Angels upon your vocations!

I Have Noticed Something: The Moonbats Really Love to Give Each Other Awards

Pope Francis awards George Clooney and Richard Gere!

Do they do it in your diocese?

They do it here and it's always the biggest enemies of the family in religious education and politics. It is a chancery contest to find the richest people who have done the most damage to the salvation of souls and come up with some kind of an award to give them.

They pretend the person's day job helping to slay bodies and souls is irrelevant.

Why is the Roman Pontiff sponsoring farcical award ceremonies for philandering movie stars and putanas from Hollywood?

Am I missing a few chapters in Scripture?

Did Christ run award ceremonies for the sorcerers and entertainers?

Something ain't right!

What is next?

Michaelangelo award for artistic excellence to Larry Flint?

The Blessed Virgin Award for Virtuous Performance to Miley Cyrus?

Archbishop Chaput Says His Appointment to US Committee to Implement Amoris Laetitia Is Just the Same Old Dog and Pony Show

Catholic social media was buzzing with news that Archbishop Chaput was appointed to Chair the 'committee' on US implementation of Amoris Laetitia.

Some penned articles suggesting Archbishop Chaput's appointment signaled admitting unrepentant adulterers to the Blessed Sacrament was imperiled with this new development.

I honestly thought to myself, What kind of a Dog and Pony Show is this?

And sure enough, hours later, Archbishop Chaput confirmed the committee doesn't give a flying fig about the underlying license for spiritual malpractice in Amoris Laetitia. Their purpose is simply reconnaissance.

Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia described as “misleading” an article claiming that his leadership of a working group on the Pope’s most recent document “sends a signal” regarding U.S. policy on Communion...

“The news sends a signal on the question of admitting divorced and remarried people to Communion,” the Catholic Herald said, citing instances in which Archbishop Chaput has affirmed Church teaching on the subject.

However, Archbishop Chaput said that the Catholic Herald’s characterization was not entirely accurate.


“There is no policy dimension to what we are doing,” he said. “The bishops in the group are currently the chairmen of various committees and I am the chair-elect of the committee on Laity, Marriage, Family and Youth...

“Our ‘committee’ is very ad hoc and may exist for only three or four months,” Archbishop Chaput told CNA June 1.

“Our goal is to gather what the bishops of the USA are doing and share that information with the other bishops, and then also send a report to Cardinal (Lorenzo) Baldisseri who has asked for reports from the various conferences."

Archbishop Chaput clarified any misconception the Holy Father has interests in supervising wayward priests and bishops who will use his practice manual to mislead souls to spiritual suicide.

That misconception would be such a terrible disservice to Catholic families, he had to rush out into the public square to clear up the delusion he will help us.

Thanks very much!

I can save the committee a lot of trouble.

You can report back to the Holy See that the three years of mockery of our religion and slandering faithful practice of Sacramental Grace is going swell.

I recently ran into one of Boston's canon lawyers who very happily told me that in some cases they are turning around annulments in a little over a month.

You can tell the Holy Father that picking apostates to author and articulate his policy to contradict Church teaching in practice worked splendidly. As this sleazy and deceptive jury-rigging always does, it has undermined and discredited catechesis of our religion in the home, family and every apostolate in the Church.

The Holy Father really struck the right chord with the caricature of himself as the modernist pope who has arrived not to change Church teaching but rather to change the moral compasses of our relatives with edicts to practice contradiction.

He really hit the jackpot with his award-winning talking points of the virtues of adultery and sodomy and using contraception to thwart giving life to disabled people.

I'm not sure the uncatechized are catching on to the utopia of communism. I think praising and helping the campaigns of socialists may have been hampered by the 'mercy' of country-wide starvation in his home country of Argentina.

But he already knows all this. Millions of Catholics have written to him to inform him of the fruit of his talking points. Faithful Bishops and Cardinals have told him.

The committee headed by Archbishop Chaput is the same old dog and pony show of forming a committee to tell him what he already knows: the intended outcome.

Giddy up!