The Heresy of "Pope" Francis Has Now Opened the Door for Approval of Homosexual Practice - New Ways Ministry Says So!

The imprudent and evil machinations of the heretic Pope named Bergoglio has now allowed New Ways Ministry to push what some of us predicted a day ago.

The malefactor on the Throne of Peter must be held to account.

What Does Change in Church’s Death Penalty Teaching Mean for LGBT People?

August 3, 2018/2 Comments/in Anti-LGBT Criminalization, Theology & Church Teaching /by Francis DeBernardo, Editor

Church teaching can change.

While many of us knew this before, we’ve just received news that is contemporary proof positive.  From The New York Times:

Pope Francis at August 1st audience in St. Peter’s Square

“Pope Francis has declared that the death penalty is wrong in all cases, a definitive change in church teaching that is likely to challenge faithful Catholic politicians, judges and officials in the United States and other countries who have argued that their church was not entirely opposed to capital punishment. . . .

“The church also says it will work “with determination” for the abolition of capital punishment worldwide.”

It’s important for Catholic advocates for LGBT equality to take note of this change because for decades Catholic opponents of LGBT equality argued that it is impossible to change church teaching.  They often pointed to the fact that condemnations of  same-sex relationships were inscribed in the Catechism, and so were not open for discussion or change. Yet, the teaching on the death penalty is in the Catechism, too, and, in fact, to make this change in teaching, it was the text of the Catechism that Francis changed.  Here’s the announcement from the Vatican press office:

New revision of number 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the death penalty – Rescriptum “ex Audentia SS.mi”, 02.08.2018

The Supreme Pontiff Francis, in the audience granted on 11 May 2018 to the undersigned Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has approved the following new draft of no. 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, arranging for it to be translated into various languages and inserted in all the editions of the aforementioned Catechism.

The death penalty

2267. Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.

Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.

Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,^[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

The New York Times explained what was changed by this revision:

“In the catechism promoted by St. John Paul II, in 1992, the death penalty was allowed if it was ‘the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.’ “

What is also interesting is how the Vatican news service explained the change,  In their news story, they included the following section under an important subhead:

Revision in continuity with preceding Magisterium

In the Letter to the Bishops  Cardinal Ladaria [prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] explained that the revision of n. 2267 of the CCC  [Catechism of the Catholic Church] “expresses an authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium” and said “these teachings, in fact, can be explained in the light of the primary responsibility of the public authority to protect the common good in a social context in which the penal sanctions were understood differently, and had developed in an environment in which it was more difficult to guarantee that the criminal could not repeat his crime”.

So, the change is not a contradiction, even though it is the opposite of what came before it? Hmmmm.

What does this death penalty news mean for Catholic advocates for LGBT equality?  A few things.

First, we now have a clear, explicit contemporary example of church teaching changing, and also a look into how it can be done: with a papal change to the Catechism.

Second,  we can see that the process that brought about this change has been decades of theological debate and discussion, and not just a papal whim.  That means the theological and even ecclesial discussions and debates right now about LGBT people have great potential to shape future changes in church teaching in regard to those topics.

Third, the death penalty is condemned because it violates the human dignity of a person.  In Ladaria’s “Letter to the Bishops” explaining the change in teaching, he quotes Pope Francis: “no matter how serious the crime that has been committed, the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and the dignity of the person.”  The dignity of the human person is the same foundation upon which many of the arguments for LGBT equality are based in theology, so seeing this teaching promoted more vigorously by Pope Francis and other church leaders is a positive step for Catholic LGBT topics.

Fourth, Pope Francis emphasis that human dignity is not eradicated despite whatever condition a person may be in highlights an important theme of his papacy which has been helpful for pastoral ministry to LGBT people: Because everyone has inherent human dignity, the Church should be open and welcoming to all people, regardless of whether or not their lives conform to church teaching in other areas.  The church should not leave anyone out.

Fifth, the quote from Ladaria in the indented excerpt above explains that one of the reasons for the change  in teaching is a new social context that has new understandings of punishment.  Again, this development bodes well for change in Catholic LGBT issues because society has been witnessing a tremendous change in social context of LGBT people, as well as new understandings of sexuality and personhood.

Sixth, and perhaps most directly related to this new and strong condemnation of the death penalty from the Catholic hierarchy, is that this new teaching can be used to protect the lives of LGBT people in nations where they are criminalized and subject to the death penalty.  This new teaching from Pope Francis comes with a promise that the Church will work “with determination” for the death penalty’s “abolition worldwide.”  Ladaria’s “Letter” concludes by reinforcing this point:

“The new formulation of number 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church desires to give energy to a movement towards a decisive commitment to favor a mentality that recognizes the dignity of every human life and, in respectful dialogue with civil authorities, to encourage the creation of conditions that allow for the elimination of the death penalty where it is still in effect.”

If church leaders in fact follow through with this promise, the result can greatly help the LGBT people who are most oppressed in our world.

Of course, what would be really good is if the Vatican simply condemned the criminalization of LGBT people, regardless of the punishment–a cause for which New Ways Ministry has been campaigning for several years.  Such a condemnation would not even require a change in church teaching, as  the church, even in the Catechism, forbids discrimination against and oppression of LGBT people.  It would only take the Vatican leaders developing the political will to do so.

That would be another great change to celebrate in the Church!

—Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry, August 3, 2018

Sorry "Cardinal" Kevin Farrell - Your "Authority and credibility is compromised"

Correcting the Heretic Pope named Francis and His Papolater Apologists

From a priest friend in Canada; Fr. PMJMcD

Death penalty and catechism of the Catholic Church

" Thou shalt not kill‎ ‎" does not concern Society, but the individual man. The doctrine of the Church has never condemned the death sentence when it comes to society protecting itself. It is even for her a DUTY , a charity (read Liberalism is a sin of Don Sarda y Salvany). The catechism of the Catholic Church, published by John Paul II in the original French version of 1992, still indicates this in article 2266 :

"Preserving the common good of society requires the incapacitation of the aggressor, and as such, the traditional teaching of the Church has recognized the validity of the law and the DUTY of public authority. It is legitimate to punish by penalties suited to the gravity of the offense, without excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty ... The penalty has the first effect of compensating for the disorder introduced by the fault. voluntarily accepted by the culprit, it has the value of atonement , the sentence also has the effect of preserving public order and the safety of the person.Finally, the sentence has medicinal value, it must, as far as possible, contribute to the amendment of the culprit. "(Catechism of the Catholic Church, Pocket MAME / PLON Edition, Manchecourt 1992, article 2266, pp. 564).

Don Sarda y Salvany, Doctor of Theology, Priest of the Diocese of Barcelona and director of the newspaper "La Revista popular", in his book Liberalism is a sin (1887) specifies the Catholic doctrine on the subject of charity:

"Catholic theology gives us the definition by the most authorized body, ..., the catechism, so full of wisdom and philosophy.This definition, here it is:Charity is a supernatural virtue that inclines us to love God above all things and the neighbor as ourselves for the love of God ... To love is to want the good to the one we love ... It follows from that we can love the neighbour, well and much, by displeasing him, by annoying him, by causing him a material injury and even on certain occasions by depriving him of life. Everything is summed up, in short, to examine whether, in the event that one displeases him, where we oppose him, humiliate him, do it, yes or no, for his own good, (1) for the good of someone whose rights are superior to his own (2), or simply for the most great service of God (3).

1) For his good . If it is shown that by displeasing the neighbor, by offending him, one acts for his good, it is evident that one loves him, even in the annoyances and disgusts imposed on him. for example :

We love the patient by burning him with the cautery or by cutting off his gangrenous limb; we love the wicked by correcting him by repression or punishment, etc., etc. All this is charity, and perfect charity.

2) For the sake of another whose rights are superior . It is often necessary to displease a person, not for his own good, but to deliver others from the harm it causes him. It is then an OBLIGATION of charity to defend the attacked against the unjust violence of the aggressor; and the aggressor can be done as much harm as the defense of the attacker demands. This is what happens when a robber is killed by a traveler. In this case, to kill the unjust aggressor, to wound him, to reduce him in any other way to impotence, is to act as a true charity.

3) For the service due to God . ... Just as in a just war men hurt themselves and kill each other for the service of the Fatherland, so they can hurt themselves and kill each other for the service of God. In the same way that, in accordance with the law, it is possible to execute men because of their offenses against the human code, we have the right, in a Catholic society, to do justice to men guilty of offenses against the divine code. in those of his compulsory articles in the external forum. ...

Modern liberalism does not understand it that way, which is why it is wrong.... By his apostrophes and his banal accusations of intolerance and uncompromising intransigence, he disconcerts even very firm Catholics. Our formula is very clear and concrete. Here it is: the sovereign Catholic intransigence is none other than the sovereign, charitable charity .This charity is exercised relative to the neighbor, when, in her own interest, she confounds, humiliates, offends and chastises her neighbour...

And because today there are few true hardliners, there are also few truly charitable people. Liberal charity, fashionable at present, is condescending, affectionate, tender even in form, but at bottom it is only the essential contempt of the real goods of man, the supreme interests of truth and of God. "(Don Sarda y Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin). 

Barred from Twitter

Friends,

I am barred from Twitter for 7 days for Tweeting about Bergoglio's coverup of "sodomite perverts" by his announcement today. If you can let my readers know I would appreciate it. \

Vox

Bergoglio embraces pervert priests - this is what he wants you to forget, don't let him do it!

 

Bergoglio Quotes Himself to Justify Change in the Catechism - is the teaching on Homosexuality next?

We awoke this morning to find that the Bishop of Rome has changed the Catechism of the Catholic Church and its teaching on capital punishment. In the letter to bishops, Bergoglio, unable to quote anything from Holy Scripture, Church Fathers, Saints or other Popes to justify his decision, humbly quotes himself.

Allow me to quote myself.

http://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2017/10/again-bergoglio-muses-on-rarely-used.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2017/08/pope-francis-life-in-prison-is-death.html

You can read erudite words from Louie Verricchio and Steve Skojec and Edward Pentin and others on this matter, I will be brief.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-changes-catechism-to-declare-death-penalty-inadmissible

https://onepeterfive.com/pope-francis-wrong-death-penalty-heres/

https://akacatholic.com/death-penalty-and-fatima/

Jorge Bergoglio is wrong. Not only is he wrong, he is manipulative and deceitful. He cannot change the catechism and he cannot compel you or me to accept something that is contrary to what we accepted before. How can something that the Church has had a position on for two thousand years be fine yesterday and not today? It is simply not possible. 

I do not accept this change. I reject it. I condemn it. I renounce it and him. I welcome any canonical censure imposed upon me from this wretched malefactor. 

Here in Canada, we do not have capital punishment and have not had it for decades. I accept that I don't agree with it, but I accept it. I also believe differently.

Now, I wish to address something more salient.

Why now?

1. It is a manipulative attempt to take direction off the scandal of Mr. Theodore McCarrick and is enables and those Cardinals who knew and covered it up.
2. It is an attempt to pressure American Catholics to abandon Donald J. Trump and vote Democrat in the November mid-term elections.

If you think that this heretic will not shortly amend the catechism to change the teaching on homosexuality then you have not been paying attention.

Mark my words; a future pope will declare this man a heretic and all of his work and appointments will be anathematized. 

Jorge Bergoglio is an enemy of the Faith. He must be denounced.

Episcopal Sodomy: Exposing the Enablers

Episcopal Sodomy: Exposing the Enablers: The first in series of special reports

Bergoglio's Fraudulent Humility on Display Again - Distraction and Vatican Spin to Deflect from an Abuse and Homosexual Crisis!

For five years now, from the moment he emerged on the loggia, the Vatican media machine continues to spin how "humble" is our Pope Francis. From his house cassock to the Motel St. Martha and his car, to carrying his own bags or kissing the poor or disfigured. It is all a show, all spin, all a fraud. We can find many pictures of other popes doing charitable acts. Papal kindness and charity did not begin with Bergoglio. 

Of all the machinations, manipulations and spin, put out by the likes of Spadaro, Rosica, Burke and their ilk in the past, this one takes the cake. His Humbleness has forgotten Our Blessed Lord's words in the Gospel of Matthew found in Chapter 6, beginning at verse 3.

TAKE heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven. Therefore when thou dost an almsdeed, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be honoured by men. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward.  But when thou dost alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doth. That thy alms may be in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret will repay thee.

It is particularly galling considering the crisis that the Church is in due to the perversion of its priests and bishops, and let us not forget, its cardinals due to sodomites -- homosexuals who have infiltrated the clergy to an extent where one must only conclude that the majority of them, are faggots. These filthy men have betrayed Christ, they have betrayed you and me. They have used the Church to get close to their potential victims. They are repugnant, filthy monsters and they still, as in the case of James Martin, -- they still push their corrupt, evil, filthy agenda. They are frauds, all of them.

Pope Francis makes surprise visit to elderly woman in Rome

Demonstrating once again his compassion and pastoral concern for those in need, Pope Francis makes a surprise visit to a sick, bedridden lady in Rome.

Pope Francis this weekend visited an elderly lady, whom he knows, in Rome’s Salario district on the Via Alessandria.

The Pope arrived late on Saturday afternoon aboard his blue Ford Focus to pay a visit to the lady who is bedridden and had repeatedly invited the Holy Father to her home.

He was accompanied by only a few Vatican Gendarmes and several plainclothes Italian police officers, who waited outside as the Pope entered the house.

Pope Francis stayed with the lady for around an hour, and was greeted as he left by a small crowd of local residents who had recognized his blue car.

The Pope greeted the well-wishers, shaking hands and hugging them affectionately. He took a moment to play with a child, as a young woman sought to hold back tears of joy.

A sick man who lives in the same residential complex also made his way outside to receive the Holy Father’s blessing and words of comfort.

After greeting everyone present, Pope Francis blessed them and returned to the Vatican in his inconspicuous Ford Focus.

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2018-07/pope-francis-visit-rome-elderly-lady.html

If this humble fraud truly wanted to be "inconspicuous" we would not be reading about it.

Next?

http://whatisupwiththesynod.com/index.php/2018/07/28/newark-mccarrick-and-turks-caicos/

Sodomite Predator Pervert Theodore McCarrick "resigns" from College of Cardinals

The sodomite predator former Archbishop of Washington, Theodore McCarrick has resigned from the College of Cardinals. McCarrick was instrumental in the election of Jorge Bergoglio to the bishopric of Rome had come under the influence of powerful and secretive men and instructed to lobby others to elect Bergoglio as repeated reported on Vox Cantoris. 

Curiously, the video of Father Thomas J. Rosica's Salt + Light 2012 interview with the pervert McCarrick has gone dark. 

It is most likely that Pope Francis has "requested" that the "gay" McCarrick resign, His obedience in the light of credible victims of his predatory ways coming forward does not indicate that he resigned of his own accord.

Yesterday evening the Holy Father received the letter in which Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Archbishop Emeritus of Washington (U.S.A.), presented his resignation as a member of the College of Cardinals. Pope Francis accepted his resignation from the cardinalate and has ordered his suspension from the exercise of any public ministry, together with the obligation to remain in a house yet to be indicated to him, for a life of prayer and penance until the accusations made against him are examined in a regular canonical trial.

http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2018/07/28/0548/01187.html

This is not enough. 

The facts show that the predatory behavior of this filthy sodomite was known for decades. Every bishop who knew about this pervert must be exposed. 

Pope Francis has enabled these men. After a valiant effort on the part of Pope Ratzinger to rid the stables of this filth and succumbing to their evil machinations, Francis has given the sodomite mafia, - the homosexual mafia free reign in the Church. 

McCarrick is not alone. There are other Cardinals, other bishops, countless priests. Every one of these filthy sodomites, these homosexuals must be exposed and outed. They must be driven out of the priesthood and the buck stops with Bergoglio.

The homosexual mafia is running scared. We must not let up on the pressure. Victims and those in the know must be encouraged to come forward and out these evil, pathetic monsters.

Expose them all. 

Bergoglio's confidant Maradiaga - another enabler of the homosexual mafia

Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga of Honduras attends a Mass for Latin America in St. Peter's Basilica in 2011. (AP photo/Riccardo De Luca)

VATICAN |  JUL. 25, 2018

Honduran Seminarians Allege Widespread Homosexual Misconduct

But to date, Cardinal Maradiaga has not responded publicly to the allegations regarding his archdiocesan seminary.

Edward Pentin

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Nearly 50 seminarians in Honduras have protested against what they say is a widespread and entrenched pattern of homosexual practice in Tegucigalpa’s major seminary.

In a letter written to the seminary’s formators that was subsequently circulated in June to the country’s Catholic bishops, the seminarians asserted “irrefutable evidence” exists that a homosexual network pervades the institution and is being protected by its rector.

“Heterosexual seminarians are scandalized and really depressed,” one of the seminarians who drafted the letter told the Register.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/honduran-seminarians-allege-widespread-homosexual-misconduct

Withhold all your money Starve out the Bishops

Not.

One.

Penny.

Anywhere!

Sean O'Malley: A fraud and an enabler of perverts and predators

Sean O'Malley, the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston where the abuse crisis in the United States burst forth has issued a statement.

O'Malley is either a stupid man or he is evil, or he thinks that we are stupid people. 

If a letter is sent about a serious matter to a corporation it is fundamentally sent to the Chief Executive Officer. He is responsible even if it is not read by him. His staff is duty bound to inform him if it is of a serious matter. In the matter of the Church, the legal structure of a diocese is a Corporation Sole. The bishop owns it all. From the cathedral to the dining room table in an obscure parish to the dish soap under the sink. 

O'Malley received a "staff level" letter. from a priest about abusee and essentially determined that it was none of his business. 

O'Malley is a disgraceful enabler. A man complicit in the cover-up of the filthy sodomite predator pervert Theodore McCarrick.

When did the fraud O'Malley know and when did he know it?

He needs to resign.

“For the past several days, articles in the national media have reported accusations of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s sexual improprieties with several adults and his criminal violations of the sexual abuse of minors. These alleged actions, when committed by any person, are morally unacceptable and incompatible with the role of a priest, bishop or cardinal.

“I am deeply troubled by these reports that have traumatized many Catholics and members of the wider community. In one case involving a minor the Archdiocese of New York, after investigation, has found the accusation to be credible and substantiated. While another accusation concerning a minor is yet to be investigated, the reports are devastating for the victims, their families and for the Church itself. Each new report of clerical abuse at any level creates doubt in the minds of many that we are effectively addressing this catastrophe in the Church.

“These cases and others require more than apologies. They raise up the fact that when charges are brought regarding a bishop or a cardinal, a major gap still exists in the Church’s policies on sexual conduct and sexual abuse. While the Church in the United States has adopted a zero tolerance policy regarding the sexual abuse of minors by priests we must have clearer procedures for cases involving bishops. Transparent and consistent protocols are needed to provide justice for the victims and to adequately respond to the legitimate indignation of the community. The Church needs a strong and comprehensive policy to address bishops’ violations of the vows of celibacy in cases of the criminal abuse of minors and in cases involving adults.

“My experience in several dioceses and my work with the members of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors have brought me to this conclusion. The Church needs to swiftly and decisively take action regarding these matters of critical importance. In every instance of claims made by victims of sexual abuse, whether criminal violations or the abuse of power, the primary concern must be for the victim, their family and their loved ones. The victims are to be commended for bringing to light their tragic experience and must be treated with respect and dignity. Recent media reports also have referenced a letter sent to me from Rev. Boniface Ramsey, O.P. in June of 2015, which I did not personally receive. In keeping with the practice for matters concerning the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, at the staff level the letter was reviewed and determined that the matters presented did not fall under the purview of the Commission or the Archdiocese of Boston, which was shared with Fr. Ramsey in reply.

“These accusations are understandably a source of great disappointment and anger for many. These cases, involving a cardinal, must be viewed in light of the last two decades of the Church’s experience with clerical sexual abuse. It is my conviction that three specific actions are required at this time. First, a fair and rapid adjudication of these accusations; second, an assessment of the adequacy of our standards and policies in the Church at every level, and especially in the case of bishops; and third, communicating more clearly to the Catholic faithful and to all victims the process for reporting allegations against bishops and cardinals. Failure to take these actions will threaten and endanger the already weakened moral authority of the Church and can destroy the trust required for the Church to minister to Catholics and have a meaningful role in the wider civil society. In this moment there is no greater imperative for the Church than to hold itself accountable to address these matters, which I will bring to my upcoming meetings with the Holy See with great urgency and concern.”

What will it take for Pope Francis to strip the homosexual, pervert, predator McCarrick of his red?

Homosexual pervert "Father" Theodore McCarrick and his victim, James

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/nyregion/mccarrick-cardinal-sexual-abuse.html

James was 11 years old when Father Theodore E. McCarrick came into his bedroom in Northern New Jersey, looking for the bathroom. Father McCarrick, then 39 and a rising star in the Roman Catholic church, was a close family friend, whom James and his six siblings called Uncle Teddy. James was changing out of his bathing suit to get ready for dinner. “He said, turn around,” James, who is now 60, recalled in an interview last week. “And I really don’t want to, because I don’t want to show anybody anything.” But he did, he said, and was shocked when Father McCarrick dropped his pants, too. “See, we are the same,” James said he told him. “It’s O.K., we are the same.”

By then, James said, Father McCarrick had begun abusing him sexually. When he was 13, he said, the priest first touched his penis. At 14, he said, Father McCarrick masturbated him in a beach parking lot. When he was 15, James said, Father McCarrick took him to a restaurant in San Francisco, the Tonga Room, and poured vodka in his drinks. He then brought him back to his hotel room and masturbated him and brought himself to orgasm, James said.

The Bishops who remained and continues to remain silent about McCarrick are complicit in a crime

The New York Times has reported on the disgraceful coverup of the homosexual predator Cardinal, Timothy McCarrick. There is no need to write more here of that filthy monster, the label name at the bottom can take the reader to the history which I have written about this pathetic man. From his long known homosexual predator life to his illegal lobbying for the election of Bergoglio, it is legion.

In the Times article; "He Preyed on Men Who Wanted to Be Priests, Then He Became a Cardinal," the times reveals one of the seminarians who this pervert McCarrick went after. 

As a young man studying to be a priest in the 1980s, Robert Ciolek was flattered when his brilliant, charismatic bishop in Metuchen, N.J., Theodore E. McCarrick, told him he was a shining star, cut out to study in Rome and rise high in the church.
 Bishop McCarrick began inviting him on overnight trips, sometimes alone and sometimes with other young men training to be priests. There, the bishop would often assign Mr. Ciolek to share his room, which had only one bed. The two men would sometimes say night prayers together, before Bishop McCarrick would make a request — “come over here and rub my shoulders a little”— that extended into unwanted touching in bed.

Matt C. Abbott wrote years ago about the pervert sodomite predator Cardinal and later took the column down. I read it archived a number of years ago. Now, Abbott has named the man who was the reason he hid the column originally. Former priest Bart Aslin wrote to Matt and provided a full disclosure of his history. 

To my readers in here Toronto, don't think this Archdiocese is so holy, so clean, so moral. I can assure you that the filth and homosexual penetration of St. Augustine's Seminary in past decades is legendary. What I know about the filth in Toronto would fill a book. I do not report it in order to protect those whom I know that were victims and others who have confided in me, the truth of the sordid history here from the era of Philip Pocock, Emmett Carter and Aloysius Ambrozic. 

Returning to McCarrick, every American bishop must be suspect of the cover up. They knew, all or most of them knew and did nothing, said nothing. Men who are now bishops and cardinals covered it up, think about that.

Think not that Bergoglio is unaware. Bergoglio is the most complicit, he has failed to clean out the filth from the stables and in fact, has pushed the agenda of the homosexualists and done their bidding.

May God free us soon from this perverted juggernaut.

Bergoglio's work is summed up as an "Obliteration of the Sacraments"

There is so much to write on, so much to report on. As usual, this is my most demanding time of year professionally speaking, so blogging is going to be light. Even so, I do hope you will continue to come by, at least to get access to many of the best Catholic bloggers in the English speaking world all linked at the left. I will have less of an opportunity to write original posts, but I will try to post articles of interest and importance. Personally, I do enjoy all of your comments and the debate in the comment box, so do please keep it going.

Recently, Sandro Magister wrote and included this article from "Catholica."

http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2018/07/09/a-monk-and-theologian-breaks-the-silence-on-the-churchs-metamorphosis/

“AMORIS LAETITIA” AND THE OBLITERATION OF THE SACRAMENTS

by Giulio Meiattini, OSB

(passages selected from the interview in “Catholica” no. 140)

NOT DISCERNMENT, BUT CUNNING

The situation of confusion is evident. Naturally, there are those who deny that this is a matter of confusion, maintaining that this is the positive result of a style of ecclesial governance aimed at “initiating processes rather than possessing spaces” (cf. “Evangelii Gaudium” 223). Therefore, the first discernment to be made would be precisely on the nature of this situation: can confusion, disagreement among bishops on sensitive doctrinal points, be fruits of the Spirit? To me it seems not. To discern also means understanding if it is appropriate or not to initiate processes in certain fields, and also with what timing, modalities, and objectives.

Let us observe, for example, the manner in which the new discipline for the “divorced and remarried” was reached.

After Cardinal Kasper’s talk at the consistory had prepared the terrain so to speak, the two synods, with an intermediate year of heated discussions, were unable to give rise to a common approach on the problem discussed. Those who read the accounts of the “circuli minores” of the 2015 synod realize very well that on the point in question there was not a shared perspective.

But one thing is clear: that a large majority of the fathers had not developed the conviction to change the traditional discipline. So much so that the authors of the “Relatio finalis,” on the controversial point, took care not to introduce innovations.

But - here is another small step - they drafted formulas of an indefinite tone that, while not providing for access to the sacraments, changed the atmosphere so to speak. Thus the “non-opposition” to those hesitant formulas (which had trouble getting two thirds of the votes) was enough to allow another subsequent small step: a couple of ambiguous little footnotes in “Amoris Laetitia,” which do not affirm or deny but hint at a certain direction.

This further passage smashed the interpretive boundaries, until in the autumn of 2017 - another step - there came the pope’s official approval of the “Criteria” of the bishops of the region of Buenos Aires on chapter VIII of “Amoris Laetitia.”

But these criteria, if one is honest, are not a simple interpretation of “Amoris Laetitia.” They add and say things that are not to be found in “Amoris Laetitia” and that, above all, had never been approved at the synods and never would have been. […]

Thus, through small successive steps, over the course of three years a very large one was made and the discipline was slowly changed, but certainly not in a synodal manner, in my view.

I may be wrong, but this “modus operandi” is not discernment, but rather cunning. In place of reasonable and open debate (the famous “dubia” have never received a response!), the strategy of persuasion and of the fait accompli took hold.

FAITH REDUCED TO ETHICS

Among the ethical demands and the sacramental foundation of Christian existence, the center is undoubtedly the sacrament, which is the communication to the believer of the grace that saves, and, in that it is welcomed by and transforms man, is also an act of glorification, doxology. […] Ethics is neither the first word not the last.

In “Amoris Laetitia,” however, the opposite logic is followed: the starting points are categories taken from the natural law and principles of general ethics (attenuating factors, the relationship between universal norm and subjective situation, non-imputability, etc.), and from these major premises are drawn the consequences for the pastoral practice of the sacraments.

In this way, the dimension of the symbolic and the sacramental, which should anchor, embrace, and transcend the moral sphere, loses its significance and becomes a mere appendix to ethics. […] The demonstration is given by the fact that in concrete terms the sin of adultery loses its public significance linked to the testimonial aspect of the sacrament, and can be remitted in the “internal forum” without any need to explain before the community why a spouse who publicly contradicts the sacramental sign of fidelity should publicly receive the Eucharist.

In short, the result of the decisions of “Amoris Laetitia” is the reduction of the sacramental to the moral, meaning of faith to ethics, which to me does not seem to be a mere question of pastoral practice. What is at stake here is something essential to the nature of Christianity.

A “TREMENDOUS BURDEN”?

I sincerely do not understand how a bishop, above all that of Rome, could write phrases of this kind: “There is no need to lay upon two limited persons the tremendous burden of having to reproduce perfectly the union existing between Christ and his Church” (“Amoris Laetitia” 122).

Here is the glaring exemplification of what I stated before in a general way: if the evangelical ethic is isolated from the sacrament and reduced to a general norm it becomes “a tremendous burden,” like the Mosaic law, instead of “an easy yoke and a light burden.” Whatever happened, in this perspective, to the transformative effect of the sacrament? […] So then we could ask ourselves whether the encouragement of bearing witness to faith in Christ to the point of bloodshed is not an even more tremendous burden, not to be placed on the shoulders of the people. […]

One arrives at this point only if one is accustomed to conceiving of Christianity - perhaps without fully realizing it - as ethics.

“SIMUL IUSTUS ET PECCATOR”

“Amoris Laetitia” goes so far as to say that even if according to outward appearances one is living in a condition of objective sin, on account of attenuating factors one could be in the state of grace and even “grow in the life of grace” (no. 305).

It is clear that if this is the way things are, the interruption between sacrament and moral action, as already highlighted, leads to outcomes that overlap with the Lutheran conception of “simul iustus et peccator,” condemned by the Council of Trent. […] In this way, one could be at the same time just (before God, invisibly) and a sinner (before the Church, visibly). Works are at risk of having no more significance in the “discernment” of grace.

CATHOLIC COMMUNION EVEN FOR A BUDDHIST?

The direction that is taking shape around intercommunion between Catholics and Protestants obeys the same logic: it is not symbolic realism that determines the decision, but the simple evaluation of the presumed interior condition: if a Protestant is presumably in the state of grace (based on the attenuating factors of invincible ignorance, diminished responsibility, an honest way of life, etc.), why could he not receive the Catholic Eucharist? Perhaps one does not realize that posing the question this way could lead to making the same argument for a Buddhist or a Hindu who lives a good and just life. Tampering with the relationship between morality and the sacraments ultimately can lead to ecclesiological conceptions that are not Catholic.

(English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)

Calling out an adulterer means you need your medication!

Ontario's radical sex-education has been trampled under foot

This is Benjamin Levin. You can read all about him here. Benny was the Assistant Deputy Minister of Education for the Province of Ontario under the then "Catholic" Premier, Dalton McGuinty. Levin was responsible for developing a radical sex-education program that was abhorrent to many parents for its explicitness. The McGuinty government, in face of tremendous pressure and backlash, pulled the curriculum. Not long after, Levin was arrested and later convicted of various charges relating to child-pornography. Though his daughters denied it, Levin claimed to have had committed incestuous acts with them. After his release from prison, only three years, his "depraved world" continued. 

This is Kathleen Wynne (in blue). She is a lesbian and former Premier of Ontario defeated, no; politically obliterated this past June by the good people of Ontario. Much to the horror of her children, Kathleen kicked her husband out of the marriage bed for her lesbian lover, Jane who is pictured in the grey and white at left. Wynne has damn near bankrupted this Province. Jobs have left. Electricity prices are the highest in North America and Ontario is the largest debtor sub-sovereign state in the entire world. Whilst Premier, Wynne implemented the radical sex education agenda of the convicted child-porn aficionado, Benjamin Levin.  

This is the feminist Justin "Groper" Trudeau sitting between the two of them at a gay pride parade.

This is Tanya Granic-Allen. 

Tanya is a Catholic wife and mother who led a multi-year campaign for an organization called Parents Are First Educators against the radical agenda of Levin/Wynne. Tanya ran for the leadership of the Ontario Conservative Party and raised this issue to the top of the agenda. She crowned the new leader Doug Ford, by taking her votes to him. She attempted to run in the election but was removed by Doug because of certain comments made years ago. She may not agree, you may not; but I believe Doug Ford did the right thing and saved her and her family, her children, from an all-out assault that would have even included death threats by a whacked out radical Left not unlike what Americans are now seeing. Tanya Granic-Allen will do more good as a lobbyist than just another Member of the Legislature. She already has. She is a heroine. A lioness.

And this is Douglas Ford, the Premier of Ontario. 

Doug won the election and promised Tanya and Ontarians that he would take action. 

Today, Doug Ford, through his Minister of Education took that perverted radical sex-education program developed by the convicted child pornographer Benjamin Levin and implemented by the lesbian Wynne and threw it on the trash heap.

Doug Ford, like Donald Trump, has put the people first.

Promises made.

Promises kept. 

Calling out the globalist conspiracy of liberal fascist thugs!

Not a day goes by when I don't find myself liking this man more and more. What a man. What a leader.

They are all afraid of him because he is with the people.

Their rotten little fascist, globalist, Christ-hating game is being called out and exposed for the rot and filth and finanical scam that it is.

God bless Donald John Trump.

God bless the United States of America!

Beware of False Prophets

The Gospel for today, the Seventh Sunday After Pentecost according to the only Latin Rite that matters is taken from the Book of St. Matthew, 7:15-21.

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."

Be wary friend, there are many false prophets dressed up as priests and bishops. They are liars, they hate Christ and they hate you.