Friday, 3 July 2015

An appeal for a Deacon in India on this Feast of St Thomas of India and Apostle of Our Lord Jesus Christ!


A few weeks ago, I wrote about a Seminarian in India in the Syro-Malabar rite of the Catholic Church. He is the Reverend Deacon Joice Joseph Puliyammakal whom you can read about below. He is to be ordained to the priesthood and is completing now his final studies. Deacon Joseph was raised by good and holy parents who have little in material aid. He has been called by the LORD to the harvest but he also desires to honour his father and mother by providing for them a house so that he can go to serve God in the holy priesthood without worry. He is their oldest son and on him is this great responsibility.

I have verified his Diaconal Ordination and good standing with his Order and his seminary. When I first put out the appeal it was at $60. As of today, it is at $1800.  You are wonderful!

You can visit his page below and see the progress on the house, our dollars can go a lot further in India. You can also see photos of Deacon Joseph's ordination and the house of his parents and some videos of how hard living there has been for them, particularly in the rainy season.

However, what has been raised is not enough to complete the house.

We have been bombarded with bad news affecting our faith. We are bombarded for money. Yet, here is an opportunity to build a house in India for our Catholic brethren in need and at the same time to help this man become a priest to serve the Lord and you can watch it all happen too - you can actually see your generosity's result.

Today is the Feast of St. Thomas the Apostle. Did you know that the Syro-Malabar Rite of the Mass is apostolic in origin and was brought to India by this great apostle? These original Catholics of southern India refer to themselves as St. Thomas Christian!

Let us honour this great Apostle on his Feast by helping Deacon Joseph get this house built and become a priest for the Missionary Society of St. Thomas the Apostle!

You can be assured that you will be in his prayers and those of his parents. 

A Seminarian in India - The Lord has called him to the "harvest." What can we do to help?

The purpose of this blog is not fundraising; but every once in a while, the need comes along to help one of our brothers or sisters. I have urged help here for New Jersey teacher, Patricia Jannuzzi and there are two seminarians whom I know personally, one studying for the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest in Italy (we will have another campaign in September) and more recently a man from Toronto studying for the Ukrainian Rite.

Recently, Reverend Deacon Joice Joseph Puliyammakal of the Missionary Society of St. Thomas the Apostle, a Society of Apostolic Life in Ujjain City, Madhyapredash, India has written to me in the hope that through this blog, we can help him on his journey to the priesthood. 

Deacon Joseph's formation is the Ruhalaya Major Seminary where over 120 men are studying for the priesthood over its seven year program of Philosophy and Theology. Would that we  had that in Toronto and every North American and European seminary. Praise be Jesus Christ! If you click on this link to the Seminary and then click on "IIIrd Year Students" and scroll down to #15, you can verify Reverend Joseph's position. You can find him on Facebook.

For your assurance, and mine, I have written to the Director General of the Missionary Society of St. Thomas the Apostle, Father Kurian Ammanathukunnel pictured on the left during Deacon Joseph's diaconal ordination in the Syro-Malabar Rite, of the Catholic Church founded by St. Thomas the Apostle. Father has confirmed to me directly, that Deacon "belongs to our Society (MST) and is at present a student of our own Major Seminary (Ruhalaya) at Ujjain in the State, Madhya Pradesh. His request is genuine and authentic and, I shall be happy if you can render a helping hand to him. Hence I confirm the legitimacy of his position and request. May God Bless you." 

Here is Deacon Joseph's story:

My Story
I am from a poor family. My father is a farmer and mother is house wife. My father was affected by tuberculosis some years back but now he is ok. I have a younger brother. He is at home now taking care of my family. And he finds time to study by himself. We don’t have a good house. We have been staying in a plastic shelter for long years. It was my great ambition to become a missionary priest that made me joining in seminary. I have been living in seminary with minimum things and even short of. I was happy all the time and even now. God is leading me in good way. Now I have become a deacon and I will be ordained to priesthood soon.  My parents are not able to support me for my studies and now I need to find some ways to do my ordination ceremony and to build a small house for my parents. If you can help me a bit by posting my fundraiser campaign in your page and website, I may be helped. i request your cooperation and help to consider me as your own brother. Since you have visited Kerala I hope you might have witnessed the life of normal people here. Only in cities we have good houses and rich people. Here in villages we are poor. But we have a lot of vocations from these villages. I hope you would help me.
With hope
Deacon Joice Joseph 

Deacon has taken out a YouCaring support page. As of this writing, there is $60.00 listed. 

Voxers, what is $20, $60, or $100 to us these days? McDonald's for two is $20. How much can we do for this Deacon and his family and for the Church in India. How much further can our money go there than here?

May the Lord send many harvesters to the harvest in India and may they come to re-evangelise those of us who have forgotten so much.

Thursday, 2 July 2015

Justice Thomas is called a "clown in blackface." What would that make the person who said it?

Clarence Thomas official SCOTUS portrait.jpgI have no horse in the race in U.S. politics but I have long been impressed by Mr. Justice Clarence Thomas. In what I have read of him and hearing him speak in interviews and reading some excerpts of his decisions he has come across to this Canadian as a man of dignity, grace, courage and humility. He rose from child poverty and a racial segregation to rise to the position he has today. He is also a Roman Catholic.

On the other hand, I could never get Star Trek, notwithstanding the Canadian son who played the main character.

George Takei, a man who engages in sodomy with another man, was also on the series. The child of Japanese immigrants interred during World War II, called Justice Thomas a "clown in blackface."

I should think two things.

One, Mr. Takei is fascist and a racist.

The second is; I doubt he would like to be called one of these.

The treason of Canada's bishops in the debate on so-called, same-sex "marriage"

Recently, I wrote that the blame for the recent American SCOTUS decision changing the legal definition of marriage lay with the bishops and priests who for a half-century have failed to properly teach and admonish the faithful in the Truth of the Catholic faith, the Truth of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

As an aside, and perhaps some of my many and loyal American readers can comment. It seems to me that the 10th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America is the model of Catholic subsidiarity. It states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since the Constitution is silent on the whole issue of marriage, how can the SCOTUS force a State to go along with its redefinition of marriage? Has this been interfered with before without States' objections leading to a de facto abrogation?

Getting back to the matter of bishops, my good friend ELA at ContraDiction has posted a column an article of July 8, 1996 by Joseph K. Woodword in Alberta Report, which ceased publication in 2003.

It is worth reading today to understand how our bishops in Canada failed us too. The red text is my commentary to update the article, the bolding is mine for emphasis.

Treason Of The Clerics
Subtitled: Gay Apostasy Subverts And Paralyzes The Canadian Catholic Church

By Joseph K. Woodard
w/ permission

Alberta Report, July 8, 1996 

One of the mysteries surrounding the speedy passage of Bill C-33, the "sexual orientation" clause to the Canada Human Rights Act, is the near-silence of the Canadian Catholic Church in the debate. The Vatican defines homosexual behaviour as an "objective moral disorder" and has opposed repeatedly the very idea of "gay rights." The Church's silence in 1996 was a marked change from 1994, when the robust opposition of Ontario bishops was instrumental in defeating the NDP provincial government's own homosexual rights bill. (The NDP stands for New Democratic Party a democratic socialist and labour party at the federal and provincial levels in Canada. It is radically pro-abortion and one cannot run nor be a member of one subscribes to an "anti-choice" position.) Now a possible and shocking explanation has surfaced. It is now known that the Canadian Catholic hierarchy made its own peace with the radical homosexual agenda in 1992, when in a settlement of sexual abuse claims made against Ontario monks, it recognised homosexual "spousal benefits."

Despite Justice Minister Allan Rock's assurances to the contrary, C-33 will soon result in the complete elimination of legal distinctions heterosexual marriages and homosexual liaisons. (Rock was then Minister of Justice in the government at the time under Prime Minister Jean Chretien; both Rock and Chretien were Roman Catholics. So-called, same-sex "marriage" was approved by the Parliament of Canada on July 20, 2005 put forward by the minority government under Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, also a Roman Catholic.) And so the relative uninterest of the Canadian bishops in this crippling blow to the legitimacy of the traditional family has not gone unnoticed. Indeed, Bishop James Wingle of Yarmouth, a C-33 opponent, has condemned the "false impression" that his colleagues had actually supported the legislation. (The Diocese of Yarmouth no longer exists having been folded into the new Halifax Yarmouth Archdiocese. Wingle later became the Bishop of St. Catharines in Ontario and disappeared suspiciously and without explanation resigning in April 2010.)  

It is true that no Canadian bishop actually endorsed C-33. But of the more than 50 Anglophone bishops, only a handful stood firmly against the bill. And when representatives of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB)--the church bureaucracy, appeared before the House Justice Committee on May 2, they effectively sabotaged what little opposition Canada's prelates had mustered.

When C-33 was announced, Vancouver Archbishop Adam Exner issued a statement demanding the law continue to protect "the conscience rights of Canadians morally opposed to homosexual behaviour," and "allow employers to make non-practice of homosexual activity a bona fide occupational qualification." Yet on May 2, when homosexual MP Svend Robinson questioned CCCB general-secretary Doug Crosby about that statement, the priest could only stammer an incoherent denial of Bishop Exner's position. (Bishop Douglas Crosby is now the Bishop of the Diocese of Hamilton, in Ontario. Next year, he will become the President of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops). The CCCB delegation also repudiated the Vatican's 1992 statement on homosexuality.  

"It was pathetic," objects Sylvia MacEachern, of Ottawa's traditionalist St. Brigid's Association. (named after the sad state of the parish and the Oratorian Affair made known in the book The Last Roman Catholic by the late James Demers. I had the honour as a parishioner there of suffering along with them) "Here was Canada's most infamous gay MP, the only one quoting the Church's teaching, and when he asked the representatives of the Canadian Church whether they agreed with it, they were tongue-tied." In her response to Mr. Robinson, Father Crosby's colleague, Jennifer Leddy, could only beg him, as a "serious advocate for human rights," to "give us a chance to participate constructively," since "we want to participate."

Apologists for the Canadian Catholic hierarchy say the speed with which C-33 was rammed through Parliament made any strong resistance impossible. (This is true, it was rammed through. Canadians could barely organise against it and had no say as we were bombarded by the dictatorship of a minority parliament dancing to an evil agenda and we're too damn polite!) But the capitulation of the Catholic bureaucracy to the gay rights agenda was in April, when New Brunswick Senator Noel Kinsella introduced his "sexual orientation" Bill S-2. The CCCB was offered the opportunity to make a submission against it to the Senate but declined.

Furthermore, the Liberal government has been promising to bring in such legislation since 1993, and renewed its promise last winter. Yet the national church office did nothing.

National bishops' conferences are a modern innovation. In 1964, when episcopal collegiality was discussed at the Second Vatican Council, the venerable Cardinal Oddi quipped that he could find only one biblical citation for the notion, the time during Christ's passion when "they all fled." By 1985, Vatican theology watchdog Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was warning of the "burdensome bureaucratic structures" of the national offices. They have "no theological basis" and "do not belong to the structure of the church," he insisted. Each bishop has complete authority in his diocese and is subject only to the pope. But the national conferences, however, allow the majority of the bishops to hide in anonymity.

The CCCB's General Secretariat employs just under 100 people in a half-dozen commissions, with a budget of roughly $4.5 million. Its functionaries deal directly with their opposite numbers in the local dioceses, and thus they control information flow in the Canadian Church. The secretariat is under the nominal governance of an executive committee--this year led by Kingston Archbishop Francis Spence. But the election of full-time directors falls to its periodic "plenary sessions," dependent on the "guidance" of the existing directors.

"Individual bishops have great difficulty in freeing themselves from the national conference," says MonsignorVincent Foy, a Toronto canon lawyer. "They're afraid their authority can be undercut at any moment. It's a great burden on the Church. But the Holy See is now preparing a document on the problem." (On June 7, 2014 a Solemn Mass according to the Roman Missal of 1962 was offered in the presence of Cardinal Collins to celebrate the 75th anniversary of ordination of Msgr. Vincent Foy. He turns 100 on August 14, 2015.)

While lack of accountability is the "iron rule" of bureaucracy, the CCCB's "gay-friendliness" is the result of personalities.  In the 1980s, Father Doug Crosby, (now the Bishop of Hamilton and Pastor there when the whole "Oratorian Affair" occurred and from where the main antagonists came)  who was appointed CCCB general-secretary, was pastor of Ottawa's St. Joseph's Church. This parish was jocularly referred to "St. Joe's by the Whirlpool," because of the party tub in its rectory. St. Joseph's became home to the Ottawa chapter of Dignity, the homosexual fifth column within the Catholic Church. Special pews were reserved for Dignity members at the church's noon masses. (To this day, St. Joseph's in Ottawa under the OMI priests is still a parish of liturgical, ministerial and catechetical dissent. 

Gay or gay-sympathetic priests tend to form a solid, cohesive block within the church, observes Michael McCarthy, a retired priest from the diocese of Saskatoon. "They have such an enormous potential to create embarrassment with their dirty little secrets, the bishops won't stand up to them."

While the number of homosexuals in the Canadian Catholic priesthood is unknown, it is known they have a particular interest in seminaries, where new priests are formed. On the eve of Pope John Paul II's visit to Canada in 1984, Emmett Cardinal Carter, then-archbishop of Toronto, ordered a clean-up of his St. Augustine's Seminary. "Students in the residence could hear other seminarians padding up and down the halls at night, and everybody knew what was going on," says one Toronto-area priest, who wishes to remain anonymous. The obvious theological dissidents were fired, but the previous graduates were already worming their way through the Canadian hierarchy. (The Dean of Studies at the time was notorious. and known by all to be gay. The Rector at the time, Father Brian Clough whose first Mass I attended as a boy around 1968 as my parents were friends of his and its a darn good thing I didn't end up in Seminary at the worst possible time; was fired by Carter for a leaked paper encouraging "tolerance for the heterosexual seminarians." It is documented in the book, The Desolate City by Anne Roche Muggeridge but being pre-Internet days, that document has never been able to surface. Father Clough went on to become the Judicial Vicar for the Archdiocese of Toronto.)

An investigation into St. Augustine's found no evidence of homosexual behaviour. That investigation, however, was led by the then-bishop of London, Ont., Marcel Gervais. Bishop Gervais subsequent career has revealed him to be one of Canada's foremost gay-friendly clerics. He has since become Archbishop of Ottawa, sometime president of the CCCB, grand chancellor of Ottawa's dissident St. Peter's Seminary, (this may be an error in the author's original piece. St. Peter's Seminary in in London, Ontario, Ottawa no longer has one though there is a school of philosophy and theology at St. Paul's University within the once Catholic University of Ottawa on whose campus St. Joseph's parish sits. As for the dissidence of St. Peter's Seminary in London, I know four fine priests that came from there and that is all I will say about that!) and the ultimate superior--and protector--of its heterodox sexual ethicist, Fr. Andre Guindon. (whose work was condemned by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under then Cardinal Ratzinger!) 

A just-published book, Who's in the Seminary, suggests that Canadian seminaries are still hothouses of homosexuality. St. Paul University professor Martin Rovers sent out 455 questionnaires to students at Canada's three major seminaries (St. Augustine's, London's St. Peter's, and Edmonton's St. Joseph's). Fully 25% of the 203 respondents claimed they were either gay, bisexual or unsure of their orientation. As with most self-reported surveys, the accuracy of Prof. Rovers data is open to question, yet it is certain that homosexual representation in Canadian seminaries is many times higher than the now-accepted figure of 1.5% to 3% for the population at large.

"The Catholic Church had a major problem with the retention of priests through the 1970s," says Pennsylvania State University sociologist Philip Jenkins, author of the major new study, Pedophiles and Priests. "So they let in a lot of guys they ought not to have." Many thousands of priests had left the North American churches after the tumultuous changes ushered in by the Second Vatican Council. Desperate for new vocations, seminaries relaxed intellectual and moral standards. According to Prof. Jenkins, many homosexuals have been ordained since then, resulting in "the gay movement becoming solidly entrenched in the Canadian hierarchy." He cautions, however, not to confuse the issues of homosexuality and pedophilia. "If you look dispassionately at the figures, priestly pedophiles run maybe two per thousand, about the same as the rest of the population," says Prof. Jenkins, an Episcopalian.

The perception of a pedophilia crisis was created both by a hostile media and by the division between conservative and liberal Catholics, says Prof. Jenkins. The former blamed homosexuality, and the latter, celibacy. "In fact, the figures indicate that there is no Catholic pedophilia problem, so it's not caused by celibacy." Most of the recent school and choir scandals have not been pedophilia, with prepubescent victims. Rather, they've involved 14-or 15-year-old boys--which is classic homosexuality. That problem, Prof. Jenkins repeats, arose from poor recruiting and later, subversive networking among gay priests. (This is what most of us have been saying all along. Homosexual men came into the priesthood and raped post-pubescent boys. They used the priesthood as their cover.)

Ironically, it is the worst homosexual scandal in Canadian history that has cemented the power of gay network within the Church. The Christian Brothers, a lay Catholic order, was for decades under contract to the government of Ontario to run reform schools at Alfred, near Ottawa, and Uxbridge, near Toronto. These schools may have seen some 500 to 1000 cases of physical and sexual abuse, from the 1960s through the early 1980s. When this abuse became public in 1990, a victim's group, Helpline, hired Toronto lawyer Roger Tucker to pursue their claims. Mr. Tucker approached long-time liberal-Catholic functionary Doug Roche, to mediate. Mr. Roche, a powerful Church fixer for three decades, was the founding editor of the Western Catholic Reporter, and a former MP and Canadian disarmament ambassador. He was then also Mr. Tucker's father-in-law. His mediation proved agreeable to the Ottawa Christian Brothers and the Toronto and Ottawa archdioceses. (The Toronto Christian Brothers have refused to endorse Mr. Tucker's efforts. They are pursuing a separate compensation arrangement with abuse survivors).

By 1992, Mr. Roche had completed an agreement whereby validated abuse claimants would receive some $20,000 each and keep silent about their abusers' identities. Yet by 1996, says negotiator Mike Watters, the claimants had received an average of only $12,000 each, Mr. Tucker had pocketed $750,000, and more than $10 million had been spent in administrative costs. Mr. Roche's fee remained secret. Even more interesting, Mr. Roche or one of his colleagues slipped a curious little clause into the agreement, one that was not noticed until years later.

"If you want to know why the bishops didn't fight Bill C-33 and argue the case against gay marriages, check out the reform school agreement," says journalist Michael Harris, author of Unholy Orders, an account of the Mount Cashel Orphanage scandal. The agreement with the Christian Brothers' victims provides for dental, medical, educational, and counselling benefits to victims, their family members, and those "in a close personal relationship that others recognize is of primary importance in both persons' lives." This, claims Mr. Harris, constitutes the Canadian Catholic Church's recognition of gay spousal benefits.

It is unclear whether (then) Ottawa's Bishop Gervais or Toronto's Bishop Ambrozic knew about the "personal relationship" clause in 1994, when both vocally opposed the Ontario gay rights bill. But by 1996, "I think the bishops knew it was there, and Svend [Robinson] knew it was there," suggests Mr. Harris. Bishop Gervais remained silent during the C-33 debate, and Bishop Ambrozic, normally the "pit bull" of the conservative Canadian bishops, merely distributed a summary of the lacklustre CCCB statement.

For whatever reason, dissident former priest and theologian Gregory Baum (Baum was interviewed by Father Thomas J. Rosica of Salt + Light Television, the transcript of that fascinating interview includes, "You remain a faithful, deeply devoted Catholic, you love Jesus, the Church, the Eucharist.") is glad the Canadian bishops ducked Bill C-33. "I don't think the Church has any business saying this is okay or this isn't okay." he says. "This was not a church wedding the government was debating, but a human right." 

While Canada's Catholic heretics are pleased with the C-33 resolution, the orthodox are appalled. "The Catholic Church isn't a foreign institution," says Toronto lawyer David Brown, (then) vice-president of the Catholic Civil Rights League. "Canada is founded upon a vision of the human being, grounded in religion. And if the country loses that vision, it risks self-destruction."

Wednesday, 1 July 2015

The Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ was spilt for all, even for those who mock him in derision

Today on July 1 in Canada we celebrate "Canada Day" or until Pierre Elliot Trudeau wiped away our cultural history, Dominion Day. We are still, the Dominion of Canada and our motto is from the 72nd Psalm, Ad mare usque ad mari-- "And he shall have dominion from sea unto sea." My readers in the United States will soon celebrate Independence Day. May it be a peaceful day, in spite of the threats from Islamo-fascists and yet, given the scandalous and destructive decision of the SCOTUS, it may not be peaceful. In ancient Israel the Lord often withdrew His protecting hand. Can either of our countries founded on the bedrock of Christianity, ours in Canada Catholic, at least initially, claim His protection now? We sanction sodomite "marriage" we kill our infants in the wombs of their mothers and we expect His help?

Liturgically speaking, in the Ordinary Form it is rather ordinary, as Wednesday of the Thirteenth Week in Ordinary Time. However, there is a Votive Mass of the Precious Blood in the Third Roman Missal which could be easily said today. Perhaps it should be, in reparation for what will come at the end of this post.

In the traditional calendar, today is the Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which in the new was combined on Corpus Christi. If you look at your new rite Missal it will say Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ where as in the traditional it is simply the "Body of Christ" -- Corpus Christi. It was added to the calendar in 1849 by Pope Pius IX and was observed in Spain since the 16th century having been brought to Rome by St. Gaspar del Bufalo. Corpus Christi is from the 13th century and the whole Proper of the Mass and its sequence and the Office were assembled from scripture and composed by St.Thomas Aquinas. He gave us the texts of the hymns Pange Lingua, gives us the Tamtum ergo, Sacris solemniis gives us the beautiful compositions of Panis Angelicus, Verbum supernum prodiens is from where we sing O Salutaris Hostia and of course, Adore te Devote. 

One of the seven deadly sins is pride from which all others flow. We know what it is used to celebrate. A few days ago, in Sao Paulo, Brazil, in a city named after the great Apostle to the Gentiles, 2,000,000 people gathered in the streets. A man who had gone through the mutilation of a surgery and chemical cocktail to appear as a woman was displayed on a float "crucified" in a mockery of Our Lord Jesus Christ. That is not all. In other parades, Our Blessed Lord was also blasphemened in manners which I cannot write, nor can I post the pictures. You may find these links:

On this day in Dominion Day in Canada and on Independence Day in the United States, before our BBQ's, let us gather in our gardens and parks and together say these:


May the most holy, most sacred, most adorable, most mysterious and unutterable Name of God be always praised, blessed, loved, adored and glorified in heaven on earth and under the earth, by all the creatures of God, and by the Sacred Heart of our Lord Jesus Christ in the most Holy Sacrament of the altar. 
Imprimatur - T. J. Toolen, Archbishop of Mobile-Birm.

Praise to the Holy Name of Jesus 
The Holy Name of our Saviour is taken in vain so often. When we hear someone use the Name above all names as a common swear word, we can cross ourselves and reverence the precious Name being defamed. Another commendable practice involves the devout, fervent recitation of the following prayer:

May the Holy Name of Jesus be infinitely blessed!
May the Holy Name of Jesus be infinitely blessed!
May the Holy Name of Jesus be infinitely blessed!
May the Holy Name of Jesus be infinitely blessed!
May the Holy Name of Jesus be infinitely blessed!

Act of Reparation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus
O Sacred Heart of Jesus, animated with a desire to repair the outrages unceasingly offered to Thee, we prostrate before Thy throne of mercy, and in the name of all mankind, pledge our love and fidelity to Thee.
The more Thy mysteries are blasphemed, the more firmly we shall believe them, O Sacred Heart of Jesus!

The more impiety endeavors to extinguish our hope of immortality, the more we shall trust in Thy Heart, sole Hope of mankind!

The more hearts resist Thy Divine attractions, the more we shall love Thee, O infinitely amiable Heart of Jesus!

The more unbelief attacks Thy Divinity, the more humbly and profoundly we shall adore It, O Divine Heart of Jesus!

The more Thy holy laws are transgressed and ignored, the more we shall delight to observe them, O most holy Heart of Jesus!

The more Thy Sacraments are despised and abandoned, the more frequently we shall receive them with love and reverence, O most generous Heart of Jesus!

The more the imitation of Thy virtues is neglected and forgotten, the more we shall endeavor to practice them, O Heart, model of every virtue!

The more the devil labors to destroy souls, the more we shall be inflamed with desire to save them, O Heart of Jesus, zealous Lover of souls!

The more sin and impurity destroy the image of God in man, the more we shall try by purity of life to be a living temple of the Holy Spirit, O Heart of Jesus!

The more Thy Holy Church is despised, the more we shall endeavor to be her faithful children, O Sweet Heart of Jesus!

The more Thy Vicar on earth is persecuted, the more will we honor him as the infallible head of Thy Holy Church, show our fidelity and pray for him, O kingly Heart of Jesus!

O Sacred Heart, through Thy powerful grace, may we become Thy apostles in the midst of a corrupted world, and be Thy crown in the kingdom of Heaven. Amen. 2

Nihil Obstat - John J. Clifford, S.J. Censor Liborum

Imprimatur - + Samuel A. Stritch, December 17, 1943 Archbishop of Chicago.

Tuesday, 30 June 2015

Life imitates art? The fantasy has become the reality!

Gird your loins my brothers and sisters.

Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

Fantasy is becoming reality where "one vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused."

And yet, there is only one Reality.

And His name is Jesus Christ.


Saturday, 27 June 2015

Questioning Same-Sex "Marriage?" - Blame the leaders of the Catholic Church!

For my non-Catholic readers you may find that title surprising, for some of my Catholic readers you may find it scandalous. However I suspect most of you will know exactly what it means.

As you know by now, the Supreme Court of the United States of America in a 5-4 vote decided that two men or two women have the constitutional right to enter into a legal marriage. What a lie. What utter poppycock. 

As for the comments by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' President, you're a little late. You did this. You and your colleagues and your predecessors. You are a scandal to the faithful. You are a disgrace to the Martyrs.

Marriage is between one man and one woman, period. You can call this legal definition whatever you want  but marriage, it is not. 

In Canada, we have had it forced upon us for a decade now. I recall the years before the debate with the news articles about why such an abomination was necessary. We were presented with stories about how a co-habitating couple who were together for many years found themselves cut out of medical decisions or funeral arrangements for one or the other by cruel and vindictive families of the ill or deceased. We heard about how their health benefits were not available to the other (corporations quickly changed that lest they be accused of discrimination). Houses and bank accounts were frozen and the poor survivor was left homeless or penniless after death. And then of course, it was all about his and his towels, kitchen appliances and how much they love one another. These arguments never seemed to be part of the debate in America which seemed to centre specifically around "equality." While that was the eventual argument here under the minority rights provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms it was not how Canadians were softened up. 

The truth is, it was never about marriage. One did not need "marriage" to affect inheritance, property financial security or visits in a hospital, decisions by others as to treatment or funeral arrangements. Canada, after all, is a nation with laws and legal precedence and civil courts and legislation. No "gay" couple needed marriage to give them legal protection. They needed a Last Will and Testament, a Power of Attorney for Personal Care, a Power of Attorney Over Personal Finances, an "On Title" to a property, "Joint Tenantship" to a lease. You see, legal protections were already there for any two persons to make any kind of legal relationship that they desired. If I were not married, I could give my brother or my best friend legal decisions or my medical care or finances should I become incompetent. 

All western and probably most other nations have these kinds of legal instruments. No, it was never about marriage and it was never about love. It is about destroying the fundamental foundation of a civil and rightly-ordered society, the nuclear family. It has been a battle going on for half a century or more now that began with contraception, then no-fault divorce, abortion and the decriminalisation and legalisation of sodomy, what our Criminal Code of Canada called, "buggery."

The most intense study ever done on the population of homosexuals reveals that no more than about 2% of people are self-described, homosexuals. So, how does 2% of the population manage this? They wield this power because enough others are afraid to be called "bigots" and while they may not identify as "homosexual" they have had an experience with sodomy and are "bi-sexual" and some are blackmailed. It has happened because most people watch pornography and are chronic masturbators and their minds and reason have been poisoned by their own sexual perversions. They fear being called a hypocrite and they do not want to be judged for their own escapades with pornography, masturbation and massage parlours and prostitutes so they turn from the truth and allow license for everyone. 

All of us have sinned and have and continue to fall short of the glory of God.

It was then and is about a fundamental hatred of the One Supreme God, the sacrificial offering of His Son and the intense hatred for His Church and by Church I mean, the Catholic Church as most protestants have long since apostatised from the Truth in the matter of marriage in addition to doctrine.

And it is the Catholic Church itself that has caused it all. Or perhaps I should say, it is the leadership of the Catholic Church, not the Church as the Mystical Body, but the leaders who have caused this abomination to happen to our nations. This lie has been given to us by Catholics. 

In the decision yesterday in America, it was two Catholic Justices, Kennedy and Sotomayor, an Irishman and a Hispanic woman, both baptised and raised Catholic who did this. In fact, if only one of them was not blind to the Truth the vote would have been 5-4 in the other direction. 

In Ireland, the bishops of that once Catholic land presided over the disaster of a referendum favouring this abomination of same-sex "marriage" looking at best as deer in headlights. 

In Canada, we never had the chance to vote for it. It was forced upon us out of the blue by a Catholic Prime Minister who was a failure as a leader by the name of Paul Martin. There was no election mandate. The roots of it were already in place thanks to four other Catholic Prime Ministers, Jean Chretien, Brian Mulroney, Joseph Clark and Pierre Elliot Trudeau. These men, contributed each to the weakening of the Parliamentary system and the constitutional framework unknown before in this country that gave us judicial activism. Martin wanted to act before the Supreme Court forced it. We the people had little choice but as Canadians, we just went along to get along.

You see then?

It was Catholics in Canada and the United States imbued with false understanding of the One, True, Faith and blinded by secularism, liberalism and dictatorship of relativism hat gave us this situation. It happened because bishops failed to teach the faith properly for the last have century or more. It happened because the destruction of the liturgy lead to weak Catholics. It drove people from Mass and the Sacraments and the priests failed to preach the Truth. 

Last October, we saw the filth and lies of these same bishops put forward in a Synod of the Church that would literally anoint sodomy for the "gifts" it can bring to the Church. All under the eyes of Pope Francis himself.

The consciences of these parliamentarians, congressmen, senators, prime ministers, presidents, and supreme court judges; Catholics many of them, were ill-formed and darkened by a corrupted Church that has betrayed Our Lord Jesus Christ because the Church has been infiltrated by sodomites and Marxists who hate Her and wish to bring about Her destruction because the Catholic Church is the only thing that stands in their way of total world domination. 

The push for this abomination began in Holland and Belgium and Canada soon followed. Yet the United States is the most culturally hegemonic nation in the world. The disaster of this decision will have profound affects on other nations that have not yet gone down this road.

The truth is that persons who are "homosexuals" have much wrong with them. Aside from the "sin which cries out to heaven" they die younger and will continue to do so - "marriage" will not change reality. They die from hideous diseases and younger than the rest of the population. Suicide rates, violence between "lovers" depression, drug-abuse, alcoholism, self-mutilation. All of these are higher by significant percentages compared to the general population. It is not alleged discrimination that causes these conditions, it is their physical behaviour and the untreated spiritual and psychological conditions that lead to the physical manifestations. 

Anal cancer (with caution, you can google the pictures and see what sodomy can cause) is 50% higher than the normal. Parasites such as amoebiasis due to oral-fecal contact and giardiasis, gonorrhea and anal warts (condyloma acuminata) abound in the population. Anorectal sepsis, Epstein-Barr Syndrome, Burkitt's Lymphoma, Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Karposi's Sarcoma, Hepatitis, AIDS, Prostrate Cancer, colitis, enterities, proctitus, proctocolitus and diseases of the mouth which would cause horror to view. 

All this, because the leaders of the Holy Catholic Church have and continue to fail to teach the truth with clarity and charity that homosexual relations are not only sinful and against the Laws of God and nature but they are deadly. 

All men and women are children of God made in His Divine image and are called to something greater. This includes homosexuals and lesbians.

They are loved by the Triune God and the Father call them through the Holy Spirit to come to the Son, Our LORD Jesus Christ for salvation.

God does not will that they die in their sin and are lost in Hell. He wants them, as He wants all of us in heaven for eternity with Him.

If the Church does not proclaim the Truth with clarity, no Year of Mercy is going to save them.

God help us.

Friday, 26 June 2015

I will not submit to sodomy as anything other than the filth and evil that it is and it is straight out of Hell

This was on a friend's Facebook entry. While it has been a decade in Canada and has only just come to the United State of America.

I reprint it here:

I DECLARE, PROFESS, PROCLAIM, AND STATE WITHOUT AMBIGUITY OR COMPROMISE that Same-Sex (so called) Marriage is an UNNATURAL, MORTAL and GRIEVOUS SIN that cries to heaven for vengeance and is reprobate, as are all acts of SODOMY!

NO HUMAN AUTHORITY, no matter how legitimate or honorable, whether, monarch, republic, democracy, or totalitarian dictatorship as the right to make lawful that which is unlawful by nature and by nature's GOD. It does not matter how many people agree (even if it were the whole world) to legitimize anything against the law of GOD especially 

ABORTION, SODOMY, and EUTHANASIA it still remains illegitimate and NO ROMAN CATHOLIC can in anyway, condone, legitimate, accept, support or agree with an unjust law that is opposed to the Law of GOD.

Silence in the face of evil is cooperation with evil. It is the duty and the obligation of all Roman Catholics to vociferously OPPOSE any law that is opposed to the Law of GOD. To do or say nothing when these unjust laws are enacted is to silently approve them even if you do not.

I therefore PROCLAIM for all to see, read, and hear I believe that Sodomite 'marriage' is an evil that cannot be tolerated. I oppose it with every fiber of my being as I oppose the murder of Abortion and the murder/suicide of Euthanasia. I will proclaim this and oppose these evils to my death. If I am persecuted because of it so be it. NEVERTHELESS, let it be known that I will never go quietly into the night, I will not be arrested without a fight, I will not loose my freedom without a fight to the death.



BREAKING REPORT—June 26: A Day That Will Live in Infamy

The Catholic justices that did this, Sotomayor and Kennedy, have, unless they repent, condemned themselves to Hell.

The days are coming, indeed, they are already here

The Days Are Coming, and Are Already Here

The Antichrist, says Soloviev, was "a convinced spiritualist." He believed in goodness, and even in God. He was an ascetic, a scholar, a philanthropist. He gave "the greatest possible demonstrations of moderation, disinterest, and active beneficence."

In his early youth, he had distinguished himself as a talented and insightful exegete: one of his extensive works on biblical criticism had brought him an honorary degree from the University of Tübingen.

Giacomo BiffiBut the book that had gained for him universal fame and consensus bore the title: "The Open Road to Universal Peace and Prosperity," in which "a noble respect for ancient traditions and symbols was joined with a sweeping, audacious radicalism toward social and political needs and directives. Limitless freedom of thought was united with a profound comprehension of everything mystical; absolute individualism with an ardent dedication to the common good; the most elevated idealism toward guiding principles with the complete precision and viability of practical solutions."

It is true that some men of faith wondered why the name of Christ did not appear even once, but others replied: "If the contents of the book are permeated with the true Christian spirit, with active love and universal benevolence, what more do you want?" Besides, he "was not in principle hostile to Christ." On the contrary, he appreciated his right intentions and lofty teaching.

But three things about Jesus were unacceptable to him.

First of all, his moral preoccupations. "The Christ," he asserted, "has divided men according to good and evil with his moralism, whereas I will unite them with the benefits that both good and evil alike require."

He also did not like Christ's "absolute uniqueness." He was one of many, or even better – he said – he was my precursor, because I am the perfect and definitive savior; I have purified his message of what is unacceptable for the men of today.

Finally, and above all, he could not endure the fact that Christ is alive, so much so that he repeated hysterically: "He is not among the living, and will never be. He is not risen, he is not risen, he is not risen. He rotted, he rotted in the tomb…"

But where Soloviev's presentation shows itself to be particularly original and surprising – and merits greater reflection – is in the attribution to the Antichrist of the qualities of pacifist, environmentalist, ecumenist. […]

Did Soloviev have a particular person in mind when he made this description of the Antichrist? It is undeniable that he alludes above all to the "new Christianity" that Leo Tolstoy was successfully promoting during those years. […]

In his "Gospel," Tolstoy reduces all of Christianity to five rules of conduct which he derives from the Sermon on the Mount:

1. Not only must you not kill, but you must not even become angry with your brother.

2. You must not give in to sensuality, not even to the desire for your own wife.

3. You must never bind yourself by swearing an oath.

4. You must not resist evil, but you must apply the principle of non-violence to the utmost and in every case.

5. Love, help, and serve your enemy.

According to Tolstoy, although these precepts come from Christ, they in no way require the actual existence of the Son of the living God to be valid. [...]

Of course, Soloviev does not specifically identify the great novelist with the figure of the Antichrist. But he intuited with extraordinary clairvoyance that Tolstoy's creed would become during the 20th century the vehicle of the substantial nullification of the gospel message, under the formal exaltation of an ethics and a love for humanity presented as Christian "values." [...]

The days will come, Soloviev tells us – and are already here, we say – in which the salvific meaning of Christianity, which can be received only in a difficult, courageous, concrete, and rational act of faith, will be dissolved into a series of "values" easily sold on the world markets.

The greatest of the Russian philosophers warns us that we must guard against this danger. Even if a Tolstoian Christianity were to make us infinitely more acceptable in the living room, at social and political gatherings, and on television, we cannot and must not renounce the Christianity of Jesus Christ, the Christianity that has at its center the scandal of the cross and the astonishing reality of the Lord's resurrection.

Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Son of God, the only savior of mankind, cannot be transformed into a series of worthwhile projects and good inspirations, which are part and parcel of the dominant worldly mentality. Jesus Christ is a "rock," as he said of himself. And one either builds upon this "rock” (by entrusting oneself) or lunges against it (through opposition): "He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but when it falls on any one, it will crush him" (Mt. 21:44). [...]

So Soloviev's teaching was simultaneously prophetic and largely ignored. But we want to repropose it in the hope that Christianity will finally catch on to it and pay it a bit of attention.

The new book by Giacomo Cardinal Biffi from which the passage on the Antichrist was taken:

Giacomo Biffi, "Pinocchio, Peppone, l’Anticristo e altre divagazioni [Pinocchio, Peppone, the Antichrist, and other Meanderings],” > Cantagalli, Siena, 2005, pp. 256, euro 14,90.

And this:

Soloviev And Our Time
By Giacomo Cardinal Biffi

Vladimir Sergeevic Soloviev passed away 100 years ago, on July 31 (August 13 according to our Gregorian calendar) of the year 1900. He passed away on the threshold of the 20th century -- a century whose vicissitudes and troubles he had foreseen with striking clarity, but also a century, which, tragically, in its historical course and dominant ideologies, would reject his most profound and important teachings. His, therefore, was a teaching at once prophetic and largely unheeded.

A Prophetic Teaching

At the time of the great Russian philosopher, the general view -- in keeping with the limitless optimism of the "belle epoque"' -- foresaw a bright future for humanity in the new century: under the direction and inspiration of the new religion of progress and solidarity stripped of transcendent elements, humanity would enjoy an era of prosperity, peace, justice, security. In the "Excelsior" -- a form of dance, which enjoyed an extraordinary success in the last years of the 19th century (and which later lent its name to countless theaters and hotels) -- this new religion found its own liturgy, as it were. Victor Hugo proclaimed: "This century was great, the one coming will be happy."

But Soloviev refused to allow himself to be swept up in this de-sacralized vision. On the contrary, he predicted with prophetic clarity all of the disasters which in fact occurred.

As early as 1882, in his "Second Discourse on Dostoevsky," Soloviev foresaw -- and condemned -- the sterility and cruelty of the collectivist tyranny which a few years later would oppress Russia and mankind. "The world must not be saved by recourse to force." Soloviev said. "One could imagine men toiling together toward some great end to which they would submit all of their own individual activity; but if this end is imposed on them, if it represents for them something fated and oppressive... then, even if this unity were to embrace all of mankind, universal brotherhood would not be the result, but only a giant anthill." This "anthill" was later constructed through the obtuse and cruel ideology of Lenin and Stalin.

In his final work, The Three Dialogues and the Story of the Antichrist (finished on Easter Sunday 1900), one is struck by how clearly Soloviev foresaw that the 20th century would be "the epoch of great wars, civil strife and revolutions" All this, he said, would prepare the way for the disappearance of "the old structure of separate nations" and "almost everywhere the remains of the ancient monarchical institutions would disappear." This would pave the way for a "United States of Europe."

The accuracy of Soloviev's vision of the great crisis that would strike Christianity at the end of the 20th century is astonishing.

He represents this crisis using the figure of the Antichrist. This fascinating personage will succeed in influencing and persuading almost everyone. It is not difficult to see in this figure of Soloviev the reflection, almost the incarnation, of the confused and ambiguous religiosity of our time.

The Antichrist will be a "convinced spiritualist" Soloviev says, an admirable philanthropist, a committed, active pacifist, a practicing vegetarian, a determined defender of animal rights.

He will also be, among other things, an expert exegete. His knowledge of the bible will even lead the theology faculty of Tubingen to award him an honorary doctorate. Above all, he will be a superb ecumenist, able to engage in dialogue "with words full of sweetness, wisdom and eloquence."

He will not be hostile "in principle" to Christ. Indeed, he will appreciate Christ's teaching. But he will reject the teaching that Christ is unique, and will deny that Christ is risen and alive today.

One sees here described -- and condemned -- a Christianity of "values," of "openings," of "dialogue," a Christianity where it seems there is little room left for the person of the Son of God crucified for us and risen, little room for the actual event of salvation.

A scenario, I think, that should cause us to reflect...

A scenario in which the faith militant is reduced to humanitarian and generically cultural action, the Gospel message is located in an irenic encounter with all philosophies and all religions and the Church of God is transformed into an organization for social work.

Are we sure Soloviev did not foresee what has actually come to pass? Are we sure it is not precisely this that is the most perilous threat today facing the "holy nation" redeemed by the blood of Christ -- the Church?

It is a disturbing question and one we must not avoid.

A Teaching Unheeded

Soloviev understood the 20th century like no one else, but the 20th century did not understand Soloviev.

It isn't that he has not been not recognized and honored. He is often called the greatest Russian philosopher, and few contest this appellation.

Von Balthasar regarded his work "the most universal speculative creation of the modern period" (Gloria III, p. 263) and even goes so far as to set him on the level of Thomas Aquinas.

But there is no doubt that the 20th century, as a whole, gave him no heed. Indeed, the 20th century, at every turn, has gone in the direction opposed to the one he indicated.

The mental attitudes prevalent today, even among many ecclesially active and knowledgeable Christians, are very far indeed from Soloviev's vision of reality.

Among many, here are a few examples:

Egoistic individualism, which is ever more profoundly leaving its mark on our behaviors and laws;

Moral subjectivism, which leads people to hold that it is licit and even praiseworthy to assume positions in the legislative and political spheres different from the behavioral norms one personally adheres to;

Pacifism and non-violence of the Tolstoyan type confused with the Gospel ideals of peace and fraternity to the point of surrendering to tyranny and abandoning the weak and the good to the powerful;

A theological view which, out of fear of being labeled reactionary, forgets the unity of God's plan, renounces spreading divine truth in all spheres, and abdicates the attempt to live out a coherent Christian life.

In one special way, the 20th century, in its movements and in its social, political and cultural results, strikingly rejected Soloviev's great moral construction. Soloviev held that fundamental ethical principles were rooted in three primordial experiences, naturally present in all men: that is to say, modesty, piety toward others and the religious sentiment.

Yet the 20th century, following an egoistic and unwise sexual revolution, reached levels of permissivism, openly displayed vulgarity and public shamelessness, which seem to have few parallels in history.

Moreover, the 20th century was the most oppressive and bloody of all history, a century without respect for human life and without mercy.

We cannot, certainly, forget the horror of the extermination of the Jews, which can never be execrated sufficiently. But it was not the only extermination. No one remembers the genocide of the Armenians during the First World War.

No one commemorates the tens of millions killed under the Soviet regime.

No one ventures to calculate the number of victims sacrificed uselessly in the various parts of the earth to the communist Utopia.

As for the religious sentiment during the 20th century, in the East for the first time state atheism was both proposed and imposed on a vast portion of humanity, while in the secularized West a hedonistic and libertarian atheism spread until it arrived at the grotesque idea of the "death of God."

In conclusion: Soloviev was undoubtedly a prophet and a teacher, but a teacher who was, in a way, irrelevant. And this, paradoxically, is why he was great and why he is precious for our time.

A passionate defender of the human person and allergic to every philanthropy; a tireless apostle of peace and adversary of pacifism; a promoter of Christian unity and critic of every irenicism: a lover of nature and yet very far from today's ecological infatuations -- in a word, a friend of truth and an enemy of ideology.

Of leaders like him we have today great need.

Born in Milan on June 15, 1928, Biffi was ordained on December 25, 1950. A Milan seminary professor, he became a bishop in 1976, then archbishop of Bologna in 1984 and a cardinal on May 25, 1985.

In Bologna, he is the 110th successor of St. Petronius.