Friday, 30 January 2015

Where is the outrage?

Photo 1: A Filipina scalded with boiling water by her Saudi ARAB Islamist employer for being late with his coffee.

maid abused with boiling water

Photo 2: Asia Bibi continues to await her execution in Pakistan for alleged "blashphemy" against someone impossible to blaspheme.


Photo 3: Mary Wagner who pricks the conscience of the state by reminding one and all that babies are being murdered under the law this very minute as you read this.


Picture 4: The Vicar of Christ and Bishop of Rome, Jorge Bergoglio on Wednesday at the Vatican being entertained by a circus troupe.


Picture 5:

Wednesday, 28 January 2015

So, does this mean that there was no "rimproverare?"

Rimproverarepettinare - redarguire - richiamare - rinfacciare - sgridare - strapazzare -strigliare
In English - to admonish - call down - discipline - pull up - reprove - scold - shame - take to task - berate - carpet - chasten - chastise - chide - dress down - have words with - indict - lecture - objurgate -rebuke - remonstrate - reprehend - reprimand - reproach - tell off - upbraid

Look, don't give me that stuff about not changing doctrine or the media distorted. The very fact that this has become an issue lies at the door of one person.

But who am I to judge?

Pope Francis's Meeting with Transsexual Gives 'Powerful' Hope to LGBT Catholics
Pope Francis's Meeting with Transsexual Gives 'Powerful' Hope to LGBT Catholics 

01/27/2015 AT 04:15 PM EST

As word spread that Pope Francis had opened his residence to a transsexual man denounced by his own parish priest, LGBT activists celebrated the papal meeting as powerful help in the fight for acceptance.
Diego Neria Lejárraga of Spain, 48, wrote Francis last year about how, after sex-reassignment surgery, he felt shunned by his local church in Plasencia in western Spain, where a priest denounced him as "the devil's daughter."
Francis, known to cold call letter-writers, surprised Lejárraga with a Christmas Eve phone call that was followed up on Saturday with a private meeting of Lejárraga and his fiancée at the Vatican City guesthouse Francis calls home.
Lejárraga told the Spanish newspaper Hoy: "It was a marvelous, intimate and unique experience. What happened in that meeting, what was said, is something that will remain between us, the ones that participated, since this is something I want to live with the utmost intimacy."
Even without details of that private discussion, Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, which advocates for LGBT Catholics, tells PEOPLE that the fact that it took place is potent symbolism.
"Pope Francis's papacy has been all about encouraging the church to have personal encounters with those on the margins, and that's what this meeting was," says DeBernardo.
The activist says he's not counting on any swift changes to the Catholic Church's teachings on questions of LGBT rights, "but the pope's method seems to be for slow and gradual change and his example is going to encourage other church leaders to seek out and have conversations with transgender individuals and others in the LGBT community."
"A pope's influence is more from his personal example than from any doctrinal edits," DeBernado continues. "That's why this meeting is very powerful and can really help to bring about a lot of good."

Cardinal Baldisseri or Layman - Who do you think knows the Catholic faith better?

Cardinal Baldisseri is one of Pope Francis' closest confidants and is in charge of the disgraceful Synod on the Family.

The Cardinal said that the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ can be "called into question."

A layman said Our Blessed Lord's words are "immutable law."

The Eponymous Flower as the story here.

This and Maradiaga and Marx and reprimands and trans-sexuals.

Are these men all heretics - Aryans? Gnostics?

How much more?

How long until all see the situation from even the very top for what it is?

Ontario's Lesbian Premier's perverted sex education agenda

Benjamin Levin, Wynne and Trudeau adviso, child pornographer
It's not enough that her last adviser, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education's tenured professor and former Ministry of Education bureaucrat Benjamin Levin is a convicted (plead guilty to two of seven charges in a settlement) child pornographer and sexual deviant; now our Lesbian Premier is taking advice from two 13 year old coquettes who could also be considered by a certain four letter-word, but hey, who am I too judge, eh?

Joe Warmington of the Toronto Sun reports that  if "Premier Kathleen Wynne thought bringing in two 13-year-old girls to help push through her new sex education curriculum would prevent push back, she misread it." 


The lesbian premier intends to force this filth on children at Grade 1 including masturbation, oral sex, deviant sodomic behaviour  and lies and indoctrination about multiple genders.


Reverend Charles McVety, a faithful Christian and President of Canada Christian College and the Institute for Canadian Values was "appalled" and made it know that "it won't be done without a fight" according to Warmington. “We abhor the premier announcing that Ontario’s teachers will be forced to teach little children how to give permission for that child to engage in sex” and “I don’t think it is legal to advise a child before the age of 16 on how to give sexual consent."


Teresa Pierre of Parents Are First Educators has organised a petition that so far, has nearly 30,000 signatures. It is important to sign this.

Below, is an example of the pervert that the lesbian Wynne will have foisted on our children. Really? You want this masturbating pervert in front of your kids?


Sunday, 25 January 2015

What is it about Germans named Marx?

Jan 22 2015 - 9:11am | Luke Hansen, S.J.
An exclusive interview with the president of the German bishop's conference and papal adviser

Photo courtesy of Stanford University Office for Religious Life/Hagop's Photography
Cardinal Reinhard Marx, archbishop of Munich and Freising, is head of the German bishops’ conference, a member of the Council of Cardinals that advises Pope Francis on church governance, coordinator of the Vatican’s Council for the Economy and author of Das Kapital: A Plea for Man (2008). Cardinal Marx delivered the annual Roger W. Heyns Lecture on Jan. 15 at Stanford University in California.This interview, which has been edited for clarity and approved by the cardinal, took place on Jan. 18 in Memorial Church at Stanford University.
Has your experience on the Council of Cardinals offered you a different perspective on the church?
I have a new responsibility. When I am interviewed—like today—and I am asked, “What are you doing on the council?” and “What does it mean to be with the pope?” I feel a higher responsibility. I don’t see the church in a new way, though. I have been a bishop for 18 years, a cardinal for five years, and have been part of synods. I do see my new responsibility and the new opportunities, and also the historical moment to step forward in the church and be part of the history of the church.
What are the new opportunities?
This whole pontificate has opened new paths. You can feel it. Here in the United States everybody is speaking about Francis, even people not belonging to the Catholic Church. I have to say: The pope is not the church. The church is more than the pope. But there is a new atmosphere. A rabbi said to me, “Say to the pope that he helps us, because he strengthens all religion, not just the Catholic Church.” So it’s a new movement.
In the Council of Cardinals we have a special task to create a new constitution for the Roman Curia, to reform the Vatican Bank and to discuss many other things with the pope. But we cannot be present every day in Rome. You must see this pontificate, this way, as a wider and new step. It is my impression that we are on a new way. We are not creating a new church—it remains Catholic—but there is fresh air, a new step forward.
What challenge accompanies this new time in the church?
It is best to read “Evangelii Gaudium.” Some people say, “We don’t know what the pope is really wanting.” I say, “Read the text.” It does not give magical answers to complex questions, but rather it conveys the path of the Spirit, the way of evangelization, being close to the people, close to the poor, close to those who have failed, close to the sinners, not a narcissistic church, not a church of fear. There is a new, free impulse to go out. Some worry about what will happen. Francis uses a strong image: “I prefer a church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets,” rather than a church that is very clean and has the truth and everything necessary. The latter church does not help the people. The Gospel is not new, but Francis is expressing it in a new way and is inspiring a lot of people, all over the world, who are saying, “Yes, that is the church.” It is a great gift for us. It’s very important. We will see what he will do. He has been pope for only two years, which is not much time.
What can you tell us about Pope Francis, the person, from working closely with him?
He is very authentic. He is relaxed, calm. At his age he does not need to achieve anything or prove he is somebody. He is very clear and open and without pride. And strong. Not a weak person, but strong. I think it is not so important to analyze the character of the pope, but I understand the interest.
What is very interesting is how, together with him, we will develop the path forward for the church. For example, he writes in “Evangelii Gaudium” about the relationship between the center in Rome and the conferences of bishops, and also about the pastoral work in parishes, the local churches and the character of the synods. These are very important for the future of the church. It is also very important that we have a pope. Now everybody in the world is speaking about the Catholic Church, not entirely positively, but mostly.
So Christ did very well to create the office of St. Peter. We see it. But that doesn’t mean centralism. I told the pope, “A centralized institution is not a strong institution. It is a weak institution.” The Second Vatican Council began to establish a new balance between center and the local church, because they saw, 50 years ago, the beginning of the universal church. It is not achieved, however. We must make it happen for the first time. Now 50 years later, we see what it might be to be a church in a globalized world, a universal, globalized church. We have not yet organized it in a sufficient way. That is the great task for this century. The temptation is to centralize, but it will not function. The other challenge is finding a way to explain the faith in the different parts of the world. What can the synods and the local churches do together with Rome? How can we do this in a good way?
Two issues at the present synod are divorced and remarried Catholics and gay Catholics, especially those in relationships. Do you have opportunities to listen directly to these Catholics in your present ministry?
I have been a priest for 35 years. This problem is not new. I have the impression that we have a lot of work to do in the theological field, not only related to the question of divorce, but also the theology of marriage. I am astonished that some can say, “Everything is clear” on this topic. Things are not clear. It is not about church doctrine being determined by modern times. It is a question of aggiornamento, to say it in a way that the people can understand, and to always adapt our doctrine to the Gospel, to theology, in order to find in a new way the sense of what Jesus said, the meaning of the tradition of the church and of theology and so on. There is a lot to do.
I speak with many experts—canon lawyers and theologians—who recognize many questions related to the sacramentality and validity of marriages. One question is: What can we do when a person marries, divorces and later finds a new partner? There are different positions. Some bishops at the synod said, “They are living in sin.” But others said, “You cannot say that somebody is in sin every day. That is not possible.” You see, there are questions we must speak about. We opened a discussion on this topic in the German bishops’ conference. Now the text is published. I think it is a very good text and a good contribution for the discussion of the synod.
It is very important that the synod does not have the spirit of “all or nothing.” It is not a good way. The synod cannot have winners and losers. That is not the spirit of the synod. The spirit of the synod is to find a way together, not to say, “How can I find a way to bring my position through?” Rather: “How can I understand the other position, and how can we together find a new position?” That is the spirit of the synod.
Therefore it is very important that we are working on these questions. I hope that the pope will inspire this synod. The synod cannot decide; only a council or pope can decide. These questions must also be understood in a broader context. The task is to help the people to live. It is not, according to “Evangelii Gaudium,” about how we can defend the truth. It is about helping people to find the truth. That is important.
The Eucharist and reconciliation are necessary for people. We say to some people, “You will never be reconciled until your death.” That is impossible to believe when you see the situations. I could give examples. In the spirit of “Evangelii Gaudium,” we have to see how the Eucharist is medicine for the people, to help the people. We must look for ways for people to receive the Eucharist. It is not about finding ways to keep them out! We must find ways to welcome them. We have to use our imagination in asking, “Can we do something?” Perhaps it is not possible in some situations. That is not the question. The focus must be on how to welcome people.
At the synod you referred to “the case of two homosexuals who have been living together for 35 years and taking care of each other, even in the last phases of their lives,” and you asked, “How can I say that this has no value?” What have you learned from these relationships and does it have any bearing on sexual ethics today?
When speaking about sexual ethics, perhaps we must not begin with sleeping together, but with love, fidelity and the search for a life-long relationship. I am astonished that most of our young people, and also Catholic homosexuals who are practicing, want a relationship that lasts forever. The doctrine of the church is not so strange for people. It is true. We must begin with the main points of the doctrine, to see the dream: the dream is to have a person say, a man and woman say, “You and you, forever. You and you, forever.” And we as church say, “Yes, that’s absolutely OK. Your vision is right!” So we find the way. Then perhaps there is failure. They find the person, and it is not a great success. But life-long fidelity is right and good.
The church says that a gay relationship is not on the same level as a relationship between a man and a woman. That is clear. But when they are faithful, when they are engaged for the poor, when they are working, it is not possible to say, “Everything you do, because you are a homosexual, is negative.” That must be said, and I have heard no critic. It is not possible to see a person from only one point of view, without seeing the whole situation of a person. That is very important for sexual ethics.
The same goes for people who are together but marry later, or when they are faithful together but only in a civil marriage. It is not possible say that the relationship was all negative if the couple is faithful together, and they are waiting, or planning their life, and after 10 years they find the way to come to the sacrament. When it is possible we must help the couple to find fulfilment in the sacrament of marriage. We discussed this question at the synod, and many synod fathers share this opinion. I was not alone in this opinion.
Just last month Bishop Johan Bonny of Antwerp, Belgium, said the church should recognize a “diversity of forms” and could bless some gay relationships based on these values of love, fidelity and commitment. Is it important for the church to discuss these possibilities?
I said in the synod that Paul VI had a great vision in “Humanae Vitae.” The relationship between a man and a woman is very important. The sexual relationship in a faithful relationship is founded on the connection of procreation, giving love, sexuality and openness to life. Paul VI believed that this connection would be destroyed. He was right; see all the questions of reproductive medicine and so on. We cannot exclude this great model of sexuality, and say, “We have diversity,” or “Everybody has the right to….” The great meaning of sexuality is the relationship between a man and a woman and the openness to give life. I have also previously mentioned the question of accompanying people, to see what people are doing in their lives and in their personal situation.
How will the Catholic and Protestant churches mark the 500th anniversary of the Reformation in 2017? What are the possibilities for greater cooperation among our churches?
We are on a good path in Germany and at the level of the Holy See, with the Lutheran World Federation, to bring together our memory of this time. We the Catholic Church cannot “celebrate” this anniversary, since it is not good that the church has been divided during these centuries. But we have to heal our memories—an important point and a good step forward in our relationship. In Germany I was very happy that the heads of the Protestant church are very clear they don’t want to celebrate the anniversary without the Catholics. One-hundred years ago, or even 50 years ago, a Protestant bishop would not have said, “I will only celebrate when the Catholics are present.” So we are planning it. “Healing Memories” will be a celebration together.
In Germany the heads of the Protestant church and the Catholic Church will also make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, to go back to our roots. We will make a greater celebration not of Martin Luther but Christ, “Christusfest,” to look forward: what is our testimony now, what can we do now, what is the future of the Christian faith and what can we do together. These are our plans for marking the 500th anniversary.
Pope Francis has called for an increased role of women in the church. What can you imagine as possible? What would help the church better fulfill its mission?
The de-clericalization of power is very important in the Roman Curia and the administrations of dioceses. We must look at canon law, and reflect theologically, to see what roles necessarily require priests; and then all the other roles, in the widest sense possible, must be open for lay people, men and women, but especially women. In the administration of the Vatican it is not necessary that clerics guide all the congregations, councils and departments. It is a pity that there are no women among the lay people in the Council for the Economy. The specialists were chosen before I started as coordinator, but I will search for women to serve in this role.
For the first time ever in the Vatican, our council has lay people with the same responsibilities and rights as the cardinals. It does not seem like a big thing, but great things begin with small steps, right?
I say it and repeat it also in my diocese: Please see what you can do to bring lay people, especially women, into positions of responsibility in diocesan administration. We have made a plan for the Catholic Church in Germany to have more leading positions in diocesan administrations to be fulfilled by women. In three years we will look at what has been done.
On this issue we must make a great effort for the future, not only to be modern or to imitate the world, but in realizing that this exclusion of women is not in the spirit of the Gospel. Sometimes the development of the world gives us a hint—vox temporis vox Dei (“the voice of the time is the voice of God”). The development in the world gives us signs, the signs of the time. John XXIII and the Second Vatican Council said we must interpret the signs of the time in light of the Gospel. One of these signs is the rights of women, the emancipation of women. John XXIII said it more than 50 years ago. We are always on the way to fulfilling it.
Progress is not apparent.
Sometimes it has become worse!
What impediment needs to be overcome?
Mentality! Mentality! Mentality! And the decisions of those responsible. It is clear: The bishops have to decide. The bishops and the Holy Father have to begin the change. I was very often in seminars or courses for heads of companies, and that was always clear: the stairs are cleaned from above, not from below—top down, not bottom up. So the leaders must begin; the chiefs must begin. The mentality must change. The church is not a business, but the methods are not so different. We have to work more in teams, in projects. The question is: Who has the resources to bring these ideas forward? Not: Who is clerical? God gives us all these people, and we say, “No, he is not cleric, he cannot do this job, or his idea is not so important.” That is not acceptable. No, no, no.
Pope Francis will make his first visit to the United States in September. What is your hope for the visit?
I am always astonished by the pope’s capacity to bring people together and to inspire them. I hope the people in the United States can experience this too. One of the main tasks and challenges for a bishop, and for the pope, is to bring people together and unify the world. The church is instrumentum unitatis, an instrument and sacrament of unity among the people and between God and the people. I hope that when the pope visits the United States—and possibly the United Nations—the church can show to the world that the church will be an instrument not for itself but for the unity of the nation and the world.
Luke Hansen, S.J., a former associate editor of America, is a student at the Jesuit School of Theology of Santa Clara University, in Berkeley, Calif.

All things on heaven and earth submit to the Cross of Christ

The Arab world has a disease. It is sick and fruitless. As one of Lebanese ancestry, I am particularly able to say it. They have given the world nothing good. What good has come in 1500 years? Right, you can't name it because there is nothing. No great scientific achievement, no medical discovery. No feet of engineering. No art. No great cultural advance, No great spectacle of engineering. No musical gifts for the world. No genius. Nothing! Nothing good for the world. Nothing but blood and terror inside their lands and wherever they have gone in the world.

These desert Bedouin have destroyed the great cultures of Egypt, of Babylon and Chaldea, of Assyria, of Persia and of Mount Lebanon; all which had become Christian within their ancient cultures. They've extended their reach to Asia and have done nothing for those in poverty. What culture now exists in these lands other than poverty and hatred? 

What have they done with their wealth. Wealth they did not earn but sat upon until the British taught them how to get it out of the ground. Where is the generosity to the Palestinians to educate, build factories and hospitals and research institutes and live in peace with their neighbour? The Arabs don't care about about the Palestinians, they never did. It is not in their pathetic interest to see them prosper in peace with the Jews because they need the Jews to focus hatred and envy and war and death. Where is their filthy oil money? Why does it not help to alleviate suffering in the lands that their false prophet religion has dominated. How many suffer in Bangladesh and these filthy oil sheiks sit by. 

The world is to mourn the death of a desert King? Well, may the Triune God have mercy upon him but at least he knows now the truth about his so-called prophet. 

They twisted the truth because they hate and named the bastard son of Abraham as Isaac instead of Ismael the real bastard and they rejected the Light of Christ and have spread a false religion throughout much of the world leaving in its wake poverty, backwardness, persecution and death.

Nothing good has come from them, nothing will until the day comes when the word Islam which means "to submit" does exactly that. That day will come, very soon, when these and their progeny will come to the reality that even the crescent will submit to the Cross without which their is no hope, no life, no victory!


Saturday, 24 January 2015

Focus on the issue

Some would like to distract from the issue. Michael Coren has done it. There are some others that have criticized Barona and myself for our campaign. They can hold their perverted views, we prefer to speak the truth with clarity and support those who do brave work; the work of Christ and first in our minds in this regard is Mary Wagner and her sacrifice and her own mother whose heart bears its own spear. We will never forget the reason why she does it.

Those such as Coren who would undermine her character and those others out there, barking up the wrong tree and brought to my attention today [you know who you are] that would impute motive to us and to her, need to consider their consciences. Instead of focussing on the truth and the reality of Mary's imprisonment,  you have perverted our motives.  What have you done brother? What have you done about this but reveal your own inadequacies. 

The pressure  by this blog and Barona will continue until Catholics wake up and consider the evil before us. 

Here is the open letter from Jane Wagner to the Editor of the Catholic Register who has this week printed a guest column by Alissa Golob (below) to challenge Coren's mutterings.


An Open Letter to "The Catholic Register", by Jane Wagner ~ "this is a story worthy of publication, but you have been silent..."




Dear Editor

I had not intended to write to you after Michael Coren's scathing indictment of my daughter, Mary Wagner. I do not believe he is deserving of a reply; his "opinion" was both spiteful and childish. Beyond that, to continue to discuss the topic of Mary's incarceration, in the way that he does, makes it about Mary, and that is something she clearly never wanted. Her focus has always been, and will always be, the babies, who lives are being taken every day at the abortion mills in cities all over our country. We Canadians, we Catholics, have become numb to the killings and have demonstrated daily that we don't care, at least not enough to do something about it. 

I am writing to you, not to convince you of my daughter's purity of motives, because she doesn't need defending. You need only to meet her to know that she is real, that she lives and breathes the Gospel of Life with all of her being. I am writing to let you know that I am greatly disappointed in your paper, one which ought to herald a story that affirms so deeply the value of human life in the womb. That one person would renounce her freedom, her youth, and her own future, speaks clearly of the value of these little ones. She has raised them up for our collective consciousness by her willing sacrifice. It really is about these precious babies. Mary has taken to her heart the words of our great St John Paul II to "be not afraid", and to follow his lead in disobeying an illicit law that permits abortion. 

“Abortion and euthanasia are crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize.... In the         case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is never licit to obey it..."  St John Paul's exhortation in The Gospel of Life.

This is a story worthy of publication, but you have been silent about it. 

So, why does The Catholic Register stoop to publish absurdity such as Coren has penned? As an editor of a Catholic newspaper you should uphold the Teachings and the Truth given to us by of our Catholic leaders, our saints, our Popes. Instead, you publish a deplorable article from a man who has never spoken to or met the woman he is vilifying. Clearly, you have failed in your duty to write the Truth in a Catholic manner this time around. 

God bless you. I hope you do better next time.

Sincerely,

Jane Wagner

What say you Timothy Dolan, Bravo, Brava?

In one of the shorter Vortex's in memory, Michael nails it. The photo below is disgusting and it was taken on the dome of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. Two men "engaged" in perversion and sodomy and in our holy place right over the tomb of St. Peter!

Wretched filthy sodomites!

But then, who am I to judge, eh?


Timothy Dolan, what say you about this?

Perhaps it was a former bellhop who took the picture. 



Richard III, Catholic King of England - God save the King!





Last night, the Vox and Fox watched "It's a Wonderful Life" as we did not get to see it over the holidays of Christmas, (yes, the tree is still up until Candlemas). The story is well known and George Bailey is given a gift to see what the world of Bedford Falls and further - a warship in the Pacific - would have been like without him.

It brings to mind another life, that of King Richard III and Henry VII of the House of Tudor, King of England father of Henry VIII.

Father Z has a post on King Richard III's upcoming "Anglican" funeral. A sad thing to be sure considering he was a Catholic. The funeral should be in the Sarum Rite without question. The column which he includes in the story has a quote from a British historian that a Catholic funeral would be the most appropriate and that had Richard not been murdered, the Anglican Church probably would not have happened.

I left the following comment:
Richard III was of the House of Plantagenet; the Anglican Church would not have happened, not probably. In fact, the murder changed the course of world history. Think about it. If England had continued as a Catholic land one presumes it would have still engaged in world exploration as did the Spanish, French and Portuguese but what would have been the result? What would it have meant for Canada? If the French were still defeated at the Plains of Abraham would not all of Canada have been Catholic? What about Australia? More importantly, what of the United States? There would have been no pilgrims. Would the native peoples have been treated differently, more akin to how the French did in Canada? One would presume that the War of Independence would not have happened as it did, the Colonies may have developed more as Canada did, and the United States would have been Catholic. What would have been the impact on the rest of the world? On Islam? Would Luther’s heresies died out or been reduced t0 a sect of parts of Europe? Would the French Revolution occurred in the manner that it did? What lives were wiped out in England in its own Catholic persecution? What would the continuation of the Plantagenet line at the War of the Roses meant today for evangelisation of the world?
It is incredible to think of the possibilities.

Golob rebuts Coren's disgraceful hit

ichael Coren disgraced himself as a Catholic twice recently with reference to Mary Wagner and her unflagging sacrifice of her youth and life for the unborn. The most recent was in the Catholic Register two weeks ago, a few days after Campaign Life's Alissa Golob appeared on his SUN TV program where he also attempted to discredit Mary by questioning her motives.

This blog and Barona at Toronto Catholic Witness has been very aggressive in our opinion that Coren's column was inappropriate for the Catholic Register, a newspaper owned by the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation for the Archdiocese of Toronto, a Corporation Sole, meaning it is literally owned by the Ordinary himself. 

Alissa Golob refutes Coren's disgraceful comments in The Register which invited her to write a guest column.

As Golob writes
Some may question Wagner’s motives. After all, what can she do to change the abortion laws or save any babies if she’s behind bars nine months of the year? Indeed, a column in last week’s Catholic Register suggested Wagner intentionally sets out to be arrested and there “is certainly a heavy dose of contrived disingenuous in all this.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. But who better to explain her motives than Wagner herself? In an open letter from her imprisonment at the Vanier Centre for Women in Milton, Ont., she eloquently explained her motivation for actions that have led to multiple incarcerations. 

Wednesday, 21 January 2015

Sometimes some things ...

... are better left unsaid. 

But I really feel for the 5, 6 and 8 children families whom I know that are terribly offended right now.

We got what we deserved, not what we needed.


Tuesday, 20 January 2015

Will Fr. Thomas Rosica of Salt and Light TV reject the "neo-pagan ideology" of the Mid-term relatio of the Synod of the Family?

A joint post by Barona and Vox Cantoris


No one can fail to realize that these approaches pose a challenge to the very identity of the moral conscience in relation to human freedom and God's law.
 Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor

Bishop Athanasius Schneider
Today, Salt and Light TV will broadcast alecture recorded late last year by Fr. Thomas Rosica, CSB, on the Synod of the Family.  We are hoping that he will have addressed the scandalous and gravelyerroneous remarks made by Alicia Ambrosio on "The Agenda"a program featured on TVO, here in Ontario.  In that interview, Ambrosio glowingly promoted the mid-term relatio, denounced by Bishop Athanasius Schneider as "neo-pagan ideology". He was but one of many churchmen who rightly exposed the homosexualists and adulterists as subverting the Church. Bishop Stankiewicz called it a"counterfeit gospel". Fr. Rosica has yet to denounce the relatio, indeed he seems to be part of the dissident group.  

We also hope that Fr. Rosica will correct the chronology of events pertaining the interjection of the eventually rejected passages on homosexuality in the mid-termrelatio. The homosexualist and Adulterist positions must be utterly rejected as unCatholic. 

Of the insertion of the text on homosexuality into the relatio,Ambrosio says: 

A: "So, the function of that mid-term document was really: here's the summary of what you all have said. I'ts like the mirror being held up to the bishops; here you go, this is what you have been talking about. So it's not exactly a prescription, these are the topics you talked about, and these were the key points you made about these topics. So, it's telling the bishops: you said this! When I, when I hear that statement, what I'm hearing is, really for the first time, in that room, bishops were talking about the reality of people who are in same-sex relationships, who want to come to church,  and have not found their place in their parishes and they are asking: OK, so what do we do? Where do we find the balance"? 

There is ample evidence from Synod Fathers that the events leading up to, and the manner in which the relatio was written, is not as Ambrosio related it. Will Rosica correct this? We await the lecture. 

Next, we have this:

Q: "...so, is it a change in Catholic teaching"? 

A: "No, but it is a change in tone. And the change in tone, I believe, from what I'm seeing - and just because I'm hearing it coming not just from the top, but from the bottom up - that's going to result in, on the ground, in parishes, a change in attitude. A change in: you know what? Maybe we don't have to tell people they're wrong. Maybe we can work with them, and find a way to welcome them into our community, even though they might not be perfect in our eyes. So that's going to be huge!" 


Italian report taken from Toronto Catholic Witness
We hope that Thomas Rosica, CSB, will correct the Christological heresy that Ambrosio articulated; that being doctrine will not be changed, only pastoral practice. As Cardinal Muller has noted pastoral practice is founded on doctrine. To invert this is heresy by the backdoor. We await Fr. Rosica's condemnation of pastoral practice that runs contrary to doctrine. 


Finally, we have this: 

"Q:... re: Francis DeBernardo's of New Ways Ministries comments on the relatio"...it is not just a change in tone... never before Lesbians and gays have gifts to offer.. never before has the Church accepted that their sexual orientation ..... gifts to give". 

A: "Which is true, and in the past, probably, you know, if a pastor did feel, that that the um, the gays in his  community had something to offer to the parish it was said quietly. And it was kind of, they were welcomed into the parish and it was hush-hush. And not in every parish. Um, and I think also that also there's a tendency with groups like "New Ways [Ministry]" to really, maybe hoping for a little too much...hoping that doctrine will be rewritten, that Church teaching will be rewritten.But that, that shift in tone is big, I think he's right, that is big, because like I said before it means on the ground level, it's not going to be acceptable to other faithful, it's not going to acceptable to exclude someone who has a sincere thirst for God, and has a sincere desire to practice their faith, but is either in a same-sex relationship, or is  divorced and remarried; it's not going to be acceptable to exclude that person anymore and that's huge"! 


We hope that Fr. Rosica will correct Ambrosio's statement, that the Church will no longer be telling people who are committing intrinsically evil homosexual acts, that these acts are indeed wrong; that such people need to repent  and confess their sins - an amended life is a manifestation of a true, sincere desire to thirst for God. The person has always been accepted, but the sin  is to be utterly rejected. Ah yes, that dirty word is missing again for all of this: "sin". 


Archbishop Gadecki
As she says it herself: "... and this is huge". Yes, indeed it would be "huge" if the Church no longer called a sin, a sin, and no longer called people to repentance. "Huge" as it is, it will be far more scandalous for the Faithful, if Fr. Rosica is silent on addressing these issues, and does not correct the public utterances of Ambrosio. We are not speaking here of just a private individual expressing completely erroneous positions, but someone who was interviewed as an employee of Salt and Light TV. 

In the words of Bishop Athanasius Schneider: we "refuse to throw grains of incense before the staute of the idol of gender ideology, before the idol of second marriages, of concubinage..." This fight is not over, as Archbishop Gadecki said; it has just begun. 



Barona and The Vox