HOME

 

CF NEWS

The National Association of Catholic Families

Contribute buttonCF NEWS IS FREE BUT IS NOT PRODUCED WITHOUT COST. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR YOUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT.  PLEASE CLICK ON THE BUTTON, LEFT, IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A DONATION.

This edition of CF NEWS (No.2186) posted at 1.05 pm on Sunday, May 14th, 2017. For full contents, scroll down or click on 'more' for the story of your choice. To return here click on one of the small green arrows

 

 

NEWS and CATHOLIC AFFAIRS

 

Contents

NACF news

Ofsted inspections read more >>

Vatican watch

Amoris Laetitia : Send in the Clowns (Sophists) read more >>
The humility of a Prince of the Church read more >>
Anglican orders not 'invalid' says Cardinal read more >>
Pope Francis : 'I do not see Cardinal Burke as an enemy' read more >>
Some saints 'were probably gay' says pro-gay Vatican advisor read more >>
Secret Vatican archive document reveals Freemasonic plot read more >>
Will Humanae Vitaebe the next victim? read more >>

Humanae Vitae

How Humanae Vitae has advanced reproductive healthcare read more >>

Europe

Apres moi le deluge read more >>

United Nations

Poland attacked for its pro-life record read more >>

News from around the world

AUSTRALIA British consulates host same-sex weddings in defiance of local law read more >>
BELGIUM 'As Superior General we cannot accept this decision' read more >>
FRANCE The un-demonization of the SSPX II read more >>
GERMANY Cardinal Marx finally admits his own negligences in abuse cases read more >>
IRELAND Practising homosexuals receive Holy Communion read more >>
UK Normalisation of underage sex leaving children unprotected read more >>
UK Leaked Manifesto : Labour will 'extend abortion to Northern Ireland' read more >>
USA Trump's religious freedom order read more >>
USA Bishop to radical LGBT conference read more >>
VENEZUELA Pontius Pilate has reappeared read more >>
INTERNATIONAL gloria.tv
  VIDEO   read more >>
INTERNATIONAL Some jihad headlines of the week
 VIDEO   read more >>
INTERNATIONAL The Prophet Voris
  VIDEO   read more >>
INTERNATIONAL The World Over with Raymond Arroyo
  VIDEO  read more >>

Newman

The real Victory to be won   VIDEO   read more >>

Media

Homeland read more >>
Film review : Voiceless
 VIDEO   read more >>
CTS publications now available as e-books read more >>

Comment from the internet

Our Lady of Fatima   VIDEO read more >>
The dangers of focusing only on the negative in the Church   AUDIO   read more >>
Francis targets 'rigid' youth. What does 'rigid' mean and why doesn't he tell us? read more >>
Islamic criticism against Al-Azhar read more >>
Metropolitan Hilarion on Episcopal Conferences read more >>
I just don't get the whoopdeedoo about Luther in the Catholic Church read more >>
Amoris Laetitia: How to disguise falsehood under the mantle of truth read more >>

Our Catholic Heritage

Site of the day : Faughart   VIDEO   read more >>
Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate
  VIDEO  read more >>
Stabat mater
  VIDEO  read more >>

Quote

Father John A. Hardon, S.J. read more >>

 

 

ADDITIONAL  FEATURES

Translation

To TRANSLATE this bulletin,Click HERE and then enter the URL
http://www.cfnews.org.uk/CF_News 2186.htm

Recent editions

For last edition of CF News clicks here

EWTN live television coverage

For UK / Ireland click here
For Asia / Pacific click here
For Africa / Asia click here

Podcasts

For podcasts click here

 

    

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

NACF news

 

Ofsted inspections

THE CHRISTIAN INSTITUTE writes : 'There are serious concerns over plans to subject church youth work in England to 'British values' inspections. Under the proposals, Ofsted will be given the power to carry out extremism checks on out-of-school settings. Concern are heightened because of Ofsted's apparent dislike of schools with a Christian ethos. The Government's consultation on the plans stated that any "extremist" or "undesirable" teaching which is incompatible with 'British values' will be prohibited. Any place which provides instruction to under 19-year-olds for more than 6 hours in any week would be covered. This could catch various forms of church youth work, such as holiday Bible clubs some summer camps and even Sunday Schools.

The proposed scheme forms part of the UK Government's wider counter-extremism strategy.

We urged our supporters to respond to the consultatNion on out-of-school settings, which closed in January 2016, as well as asking them to raise their concerns with their MR Although the Government has not yet responded to its consultation, in January 2017 a minister stated that over 18,000 responses had been received. We believe most of these came from concerned Christians.

The plans have been roundly criticised, including by MPs in a Westminster Hall debate in January 2016, by ex-head of the Army Lord Dannatt, and by Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights in July. But in response to the Committee's report, the Government confirmed its intention to go ahead with the plans.

The Welsh Government published virtually identical proposals in its own consultation in February 2016, which stated that any "undesirable" teaching which is "incompatible with our values of mutual respect and tolerance, or which promotes extremist views" will be prohibited. We also helped supporters in Wales respond to a consultation on making professional youth workers, including those in the voluntary sector, register with a regulator and abide by a Government-defined code.


[CI] 2185.N1

 

 


 

LINK TO VATICAN YOUTUBE SITE  HERE

 

Vatican watch

 

Vatican

 

Amoris Laetitia:: Send in the Clowns (Sophists)

CHRISTOPHER A.FERRARA reports for Fatima Perspectives : 'The 'Vatican Insider has published a report concerning the postscript to a volume on Amoris Laetitia entitled 'Amoris Laetitia: a turning point in moral theology?' The title is a dead giveaway to the book's thesis: that the current occupant of the Chair of Peter, by the mere publication of an apostolic exhortation, has altered the Church's constant moral teaching in some dramatic way - as if any Pope had such authority.

The postscript on which the article reports demonstrates how this imaginary 'turning point' is to be defended: sophistry that borders on the clownish, to which a reasonable response would be: 'Is this a joke?'

The authors of the postcript, two Italian academics, take the four cardinals to task for posing as one of their dubia concerning AL the following:

'After Amoris Laetitia (303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II's encyclical Veritatis Splendor, no. 56, based on sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?'

That dubium addresses AL 303, which contains the simply outrageous proposition that even one who knows that Our Lord teaches that his 'second marriage' objectively constitutes adultery - which is always and everywhere wrong - can 'also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one's limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.'

This principle would make normative the private judgment of habitual sinners concerning the morality of their own behavior in the sight of God. It would mean, in practice, the demolition of the entire moral edifice of the Church in favor of a form of situation ethics based on 'the concrete complexity of one's limits.'

But the authors of the postscript maintain that the intrinsically evil act of adultery, which Our Lord ascribes to 'whoever' - without exception - 'divorces his wife and marries another' is not always adultery. They wonder aloud whether someone, 'following a catastrophic marriage from the human point of view, deprived of love and whose character as the image of God has been crushed, cannot find in a new relationship that human and spiritual fullness, lived also in the expressive forms of his corporeal existence.'

Translation: It would not be adultery for someone who has had a very bad experience with his valid, sacramental marriage to take up with another partner and engage in sexual relations outside of marriage in order to regain his/her 'human and spiritual fullness.' The 'argument' - stripped of the pious word salad - reduces to the claim that sexual relations outside of marriage are not adultery if one has a really good excuse for engaging in them.

For this laughable proposition the authors offer the equally laughable explanation that as not every act of killing is murder, nor every act of taking the property of another stealing, it makes no sense to say that every act called adultery is adultery.

Come now. Murder is the deliberate killing of an innocent, and stealing is the deliberate taking of the property of another to which one has no rightful claim. Neither killing nor taking as such is an intrinsic evil, but only murder and theft. Adultery, on the other hand, is by definition a sexual act outside of marriage and thus can never be licit under any circumstances. The authors are playing word games by conflating killing with murder and the taking of property with stealing. A thoughtful ten-year-old could see through this 'argument' in defense of the novelties of AL. But such nonsense is the only argument that can be mustered.

And what of the teaching of John Paul II in Veritatis splendor and Familiaris consortio on the absolute impermissibility of intrinsically evil acts, including adultery, which is in line with the entire tradition of the Church? According to the authors, this teaching is merely the result of 'the influence of neoscholastic thought' which has led to 'blocks of thought and action in the Catholic Church,' but 'with Amoris laetitia, Pope Francis aims to offer a cue for continuing research, even in this field.'

Research? No 'research' will ever turn up a justification for what Our Lord condemned as adultery without exception. By 'research' the authors really mean what they themselves put on display: laughable sophistry in defense of an indefensible document that represents a blatant departure from the constant teaching of the Church on the intrinsic evil of adultery. Of such developments is the Third Secret of Fatima a warning to the Church.

[FP] 2186.1


CF News / Vatican watch

The humility of a Prince of the Church

INSTITUT Repas du Christ Souvereign Prete : Vendredi Saint à Gricigliano, servi par S. E. R. le Cardinal Burke et les Supérieurs.

 

Card. Burke

[Rorate Caeli] 2186.2


CF News / Vatican watch

Anglican orders not 'invalid' says Cardinal

Card. CoccopalmerioCHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA reports for Fatima Perspectives : 'An article in The Tablet reports that Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, whom the liberal journal bills as 'one of the Vatican's top legal minds,' has called into question Pope Leo XIII's infallibly rendered decision on the invalidity of Anglican priestly orders. As Pope Leo declared in Apostolicae Curae (1896), after considering the defects in both form and intention in the Anglican ordination rite and the consistent decisions of his own predecessors:

'Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void.'

Laughably enough, The Tablet characterizes this definitive papal pronouncement as 'Leo XIII's remarks that Anglican orders are 'absolutely null and utterly void'', lamenting that Pope Leo's 'remarks' have been 'a major stumbling block to Catholic-Anglican unity.'

But Coccopalmerio apparently thinks he can find a way around Apostolicae Curae by deploying the usual Modernist method: sophistry. The Tablet quotes a recently published book containing the proceedings of the so-called Malines Conversations concerning Catholic-Anglican relations (a revival of the original event in the 1920s), wherein Coccopalmerio opines: 'When someone is ordained in the Anglican Church and becomes a parish priest in a community, we cannot say that nothing has happened, that everything is 'invalid'… This [is] about the life of a person and what he has given …these things are so very relevant!'

So, as Coccopalmerio would have it, one cannot say that 'nothing happens' when someone undergoes the invalid Anglican ordination rite. After all - a blatant appeal to emotion rather than the teaching of the Church or reason itself - 'This [is] about the life of a person and what he has given.…' Yes, it would just be so mean if the Church were to say, based on the 'remarks' of a mere Pope like Leo XIII, that a layman who thinks he is now a priest is really not a priest. This is about his life, you know.

So then, what does happen if one cannot, per Coccopalmerio, say that 'nothing happens' during the invalid Anglican ordination rite? Apparently, 'something' happens, even if Coccopalmerio, being a connoisseur of Modernist ambiguity, will not declare outright that this 'something' is the conferral of valid priestly orders.

In typical Modernist fashion, Coccopalmerio creates the impression that Anglican laymen in clerical clothing are somehow priests. After all, he queries: 'Pope Paul VI gave a chalice to the Archbishop of Canterbury? If it was to celebrate the Lord's Supper, the Eucharist, it was meant to be done validly, no?' But all that proves is that Paul VI too wished to create the impression­ - the false impression - that the 'Archbishop' of Canterbury, who resides in a cathedral stolen from the Catholic Church, possesses holy orders as well as the stolen cathedral. Here we see one of innumerable examples of the folly of such meaningless, but seriously misleading, ecumenical gestures.

In perfect Bergoglian fashion, Coccopalmerio deploys the eraser concept of 'rigidity' to rhetorically obliterate the difference between one thing and another­ - in this case the difference between validity and invalidity: 'We have had, and we still have a very rigid understanding of validity and invalidity: this is valid, and that is not valid. One should be able to say: 'this is valid in a certain context, and that is valid in another context.''

Perfect nonsense. But then perfect nonsense is what it will take to explain away the definitive declaration of Pope Leo XIII, especially given the absurdity of women's 'ordination' in the so-called Anglican Communion. Does Coccopalmerio think 'something' happens when a woman is 'ordained' or even 'consecrated' a 'bishop' by an Anglican 'bishop' who himself/herself possess no Holy Orders to confer on another?

In a similarly nonsensical manner, we are told by Coccopalmerio and the rest of Pope Bergoglio's collaborators that adultery in the form of a purported 'second marriage' is not adultery in 'certain cases.' To say that 'whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery' would be too 'rigid,' even if God Incarnate might disagree.

A kind of lunacy reigns in the Church today. Surely it is a sign that what the Third Secret predicted is coming to a head.

[FP] 2186.3


CF News / Vatican watch

Pope Francis : 'I do not see Cardinal Burke as an enemy'

DESPITE widespread perceptions of animosity between Pope Francis and American Cardinal Raymond Burke, seen as the leader of the pope’s conservative opposition, the pontiff has declared in a new interview that “I do not see Cardinal Burke as an enemy.”

Francis also denied that the recent decision to send him to Guam to lead a canonical trial of an archbishop accused of sexually abusing minors was any kind of exile.

“Cardinal Burke was [in Guam] because of some terrible incidents there. For that I’m very grateful to him, he’s an excellent lawyer, but I believe the assignment is almost completed,” the pope said.
Speaking about the Order of Malta, which made headlines recently over the firing and re-hiring of its grand chancellor and the role of Burke, chaplain of the knighthood, Francis says that there were problems the American prelate wasn’t able to cope with, but that “he continues to be the patron of the order of Malta.”

Pope Francis did, however, issue a gentle critique of what he described as “fundamentalist Catholics,” a group with which Burke is sometimes associated.

Asked about how the faithful can help each other through “crises of faith,” the pontiff said that crises are essential for growth, both in life and in faith. He referred to a passage from the Gospels in which Peter denied Christ three times, after asserting he would never do so.

“When Jesus feels that certainty of Peter, it makes me think of so many fundamentalist Catholics,” Francis said.

Peter, Francis said, “denied Jesus, had a massive crisis, and was made pope!”

The pope’s comments came in a new wide-ranging interview with the German newspaper Die Zeit, published on Thursday.

One of the many issues Francis was asked about was a recently set-up commission to study the historic role of female deacons in the Church, where the pontiff seemed to downplay expectations for rapid breakthroughs.

“I was asked, why don’t we form a study commission to figure out what these women did and whether they were consecrated or not. I answered, yes, why not?” he said, referring to an audience he had last year with the superiors of female religious orders last year.

“It’s about exploring the subject, not opening a door … Time will tell what the commission finds. They’re supposed to come together again in March for the third time, and I’m going to inquire about where things stand,” Francis told journalist Giovanni di Lorenzo.

The issue of papal trips was also touched upon during the interview, and Francis revealed that a trip to Egypt is in the works for 2017. He also said that, despite recent talks, a trip to South Sudan and the two Congoes (Republic of the Congo and Democratic Republic of the Congo) this year has been almost ruled out. Another trip that he won’t be able to make, is Russia, “because I would have to go to Ukraine too.”

He did, however, confirm that he’s going to India and Bangladesh, which has been in the works for a while, but with no date having been announced yet, and Fatima, in Portugal, mid-May.

Another trip that is being planned for 2017 is Colombia, which has been a possibility almost since the beginning of the pontificate, even more so after the government signed a peace deal with the country’s largest guerrilla, the FARC, to put an end to the longest civil armed conflict in recent history.

Asked if the attacks he receives, particularly those coming “from the Vatican” hurt him personally, Francis responded no.

“From the moment that I was elected pope, I never lost my sense of peace,” he said. “I understand that some might not like my way of acting, I even justify it: there are so many ways of thinking; it’s even licit, human and even a richness.”

On the recent posters that accused him of not being merciful and the spoof version of the Vatican’s newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, the pope said that even though he found no richness in the latter, he did in the posters. 

“The Romanesco [Italian dialect] in those posters was beautiful!” Francis said, adding that they had been written by a cultured person.

“Someone from here?” the journalist asked, meaning the Vatican, where the interview took place.
“No: a cultured person!” Francis said, laughing.

Later on, he revealed that every day he prays St. Thomas More’s prayer, asking for a sense of humor. “The Lord hasn’t taken my peace, and gives me enough sense of humor,” he said.

As he’s done before, the pope acknowledged that he’s a sinner, and that there have been moments in which he’s been mad at Jesus or said that he didn’t understand why something was happening, including things of the pope’s own making, caused by “my own sin: I am a sinner, and I get mad … now I’ve gotten used to it.”

Francis also says that he doesn’t feel like “an exceptional man,” and that the expectations put upon him, “that exaggerate,” don’t do him justice.

“I am not a poor guy, no, but I’m a man who does what he can, but common. That’s how I feel. And when someone says to me: ‘No, you, you are…’ this doesn’t do me any good,” he said.

Asked if he didn’t fear disappointing those in the Roman curia with these words, who have the need of an impeccable father, Francis says that there’s no such thing, because there’s only one, God.
“Every father is a sinner- thanks be to God- because this even encourages us to go forth and give life, in this epoch of orphanhood, where there’s a need for paternity,” he said.

“I am a sinner and I am fallible, and we must not forget that the idealization of a person is always also a subliminal type of aggression,” he said.

 

[Crux] 2186.3a

 


CF News / Vatican watch

Some saints 'were probably gay, says pro-gay Vatican advisor

Fr Martin FAITHFUL CATHOLICS may be in for a 'surprise' when they 'get to heaven to be greeted by LGBT men and women,' said a controversial Catholic priest who was appointed by Pope Francis last month to the Vatican's communications office.

Jesuit priest Fr. James Martin, editor-at-large of the Jesuit-run America magazine, made the comment on his Facebook page May 5 after posting a link to a pro-homosexual event put on by New Ways Ministry and calling it 'another sign of welcome and building bridges.'

When one Facebook commenter responded that 'any canonized Saints would not be impressed' by the infiltration of homosexuality within the Catholic Church, Martin replied that some of the saints are 'probably gay.'

But Catholic saint and doctor of the Church St. Peter Damian called homosexuality a 'vice' that 'opens up hell and closes the door of paradise.'

'This vice [of same-sex activity] is the death of bodies, the destruction of souls, pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the intellect, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, introduces the diabolical inciter of lust, throws into confusion, and removes the truth completely from the deceived mind,' he wrote in his 11th century Book of Gomorrah.

'It prepares snares for the one who walks, and for him who falls into the pit, it obstructs the escape. It opens up hell and closes the door of paradise,' he added.

The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are 'intrinsically disordered' since they are 'contrary to the natural law' and they 'close the sexual act to the gift of life.'

But, not only this: The Church also teaches that same-sex attraction is itself 'objectively disordered' since God created sexual attraction to be between a male and female for the sake of procreation.

In this way, there is no such reality as a 'homosexual person,' but only a person who struggles with the 'disorder' of being attracted to the same sex. The Church teaches that everybody, including those with a disordered sexuality - often expressing itself in lust, masturbation, fornication, pornography, homosexuality - are called to chastity. That is, to the moral virtue of a rightly ordered sexuality integrated within the person.

The Christian faith holds that the homosexual act, along with murdering the innocent, depriving a laborer of his wages, and oppressing the poor, is one of the four sins that cries to heaven for justice. Those who commit grave sin can only enter heaven if they let go of their sinful ways, asking God for forgiveness and mercy. Jesus teaches that it is the 'pure of heart' who will see God.

Martin recently published a book in which he outlines ways he thinks the Catholic Church should be building bridges of acceptance towards practicing homosexuals.

Last year he accepted an award from the pro-homosexual New Ways Ministry. During his acceptance speech, he said that the Church should embrace homosexuality's 'special gifts' and 'lay to rest' language about the 'objectively disordered' nature of homosexual inclinations and acts.

He has used his Twitter platform to support transgendered issues, such as boys using the girls' bathroom and vice versa and has released videos on Youtube that advocate for the normalization of homosexuality in the Catholic Church.

[LSN] 2186.4


CF News / Vatican watch

Secret 1918 Vatican archive document reveals Freemasonic plot to destroy throne and altar

 

Vatican doc

OnePeterFive notes : Image: Scans of the original letter from the secret Vatican Archives. We do not have authorization to publish the full contents of the letter, but the author of this report was given permission to review it in its entirety.

DR MAIKE HICKSON reports : 'Dr. Michael Hesemann, a German historian of the Catholic Church, has just given an interview to Robert Moynihan’s Inside the Vatican Magazine. In this interview, which deals with the 100th Anniversary of the apparitions of Fatima, Dr. Hesemann makes the following statement:

'Also in 1917, Freemasonry celebrated the 200th anniversary of the foundation of the first Grand Lodge in London in 1717. The Masonic ideology is not only based on deism, but also on the Gnostic heresy of self-salvation and “enlightenment,” and has a decidedly anti-Catholic agenda. Just in 1917, Maximilian Kolbe, one of the greatest saints of the 20th century, witnessed a Masonic procession in Rome, carrying banners with the slogan “Satan must reign in the Vatican. The Pope will be His slave.”

'One year later, the German Emperor Wilhelm II was warned by German Freemasons that the Grand Orient planned to force all sovereign monarchs in Europe to abdicate – which indeed happened in 1918 – [also] to destroy the Catholic Church and to bring Europe under the control of American Big Business, according to a document I found in the Vatican Secret Archives.

'Bolshevism would be the instrument of Freemasonry to reach this goal.

'Indeed, 1917 was the year of the Russian [Bolshevik] revolution which ended in a massive persecution of the Church.

'Also 1917 was the year of the United States’ entry into World War I, the year when the two superpowers were born, which formed the history of the 20th century for the next 74 years. [emphasis added]

Dr. Hesemann personally rejects the view that Russia has not been sufficiently consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and denies that there is still a part of the Third Secret of Fatima missing. Nevertheless, he thinks that the message of Fatima is still with us and that some form of grave chastisement is still imminent. And this chastening might, in my view, be connected to the words quoted above: namely, the destruction of many of the European monarchies, together with the weakening and undermining of the Catholic Church. Many historic nations may also be thereby destroyed (as Our Lady implied).

Inspired by his statement that he had himself unexpectedly found an important document in the Secret Vatican Archives, I contacted Dr. Hesemann personally, and he was immediately generous and offered to share with me that original document. He has conducted extensive research at the Secret Vatican Archives since 2009. In March of 2017 and in his own preparation for the 100th Anniversary of Our Lady of Fatima, Dr. Hesemann actually published an article about this historic document in which he himself quotes the most important parts of that document.

The document which Dr. Hesemann found in the Vatican Archives files of the Apostolic Nunciature of Munich is a handwritten letter written on 8 November 1918 by the Archbishop of Cologne, Cardinal Felix von Hartmann, and addressed to the Apostolic Nuncio in Germany, Archbishop Eugenio Pacelli — who would later become Pope Pius XII. In that letter, Cardinal von Hartmann informed Archbishop Pacelli about some information that Emperor Wilhelm II just had received and which he wanted to pass on to the pope, with the help of his personal friend Cardinal von Hartmann. What follows are the most important excerpts of that historic letter:

Your Excellency,

His Majesty the Emperor just has let it be known to me “that, according to news that came to him yesterday, the Grand Orient has just decided first to depose all Sovereigns – first of all him, the Emperor – then to destroy (?) the Cathol.[olic] Church, to imprison the pope, etc and, finally, to establish on the ruins of the former bourgeois society a world republic under the leadership of American Big Capital. The German Freemasons are purportedly loyal to the [German] Emperor (which is to be doubted!) and they informed him about it. Also England wants to preserve the current bourgeois order. France and America, however, are said to be under the full influence of the Grand Orient [Freemasonic Lodge]. Bolshevism is said to be the external tool to establish the desired conditions. In the face of such a great danger which threatens in addition to the Monarchy, also the Catholic Church; it is thus important that the German episcopacy be informed and that also the pope be warned.” So far the message of His Majesty. I have believed myself to be duty-bound to pass it on to Your Excellency, and I have to leave it up to Your judgment whether You wish to pass this message on to Rome. The stormy demand of the [German] Social Democrats that the Emperor should abdicate gives a certain confirmation to this message. May God protect us and His Holy Church in this terrible turmoil! [….] With utmost devotion and being at His Excellency’s disposal, Cardinal Felix de [von] Hartmann.

(Source: A.S.V., Arch. Nunz. Monaco d.B. 342, fasc. 13, p. 95-96)

As Dr. Hesemann himself points out in a manuscript (written in May of 2016) which he kindly shared with me, it was only one day later that the November Revolution broke out in Germany with the consequence that the German Emperor Wilhelm II had to abdicate. The warning had come true.

Dr. Hesemann – who has authored more than 40 books and who has gained much recognition for his important research about the Armenian Genocide – concludes his report on this historic letter with the following words:

'How far away we are today, 98 [now 99] years later, from such an announced [and recommended] “world republic under the leadership of American big capital,” each of us may judge for himself. The “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” TTIP would have brought the world certainly an immense step closer to that goal.

In this respect, the document from the year 1918 seems nearly prophetic. However, it does not describe the visions of a seer, but, rather, quotes a purported plan. Was such a plan of the Freemasonic Grand Orient also the blueprint for the European history of the 20th and early 21th century? That would certainly be a simplification, just like any conspiracy theory. However, one cannot deny that Freemasonry planned, nearly one hundred years ago, what afterwards has come true, and in an almost uncanny way. [emphasis added]

[1P5] 2186.4a


CF News / Vatican watch

Will Humanae Vitae be the next victim?

RUMOURS are circulating in Rome that a secret Vatican commission is reviewing Pope Paul VI's encyclical letter, Humanae Vitae (1969), writes Marco Tosatti. It affirms the Catholic teaching regarding the rejection of artificial contraception. According to Tosatti, the goal of the commission, wanted by Pope Francis, would be a change to allow artificial contraception.

 

[gloria.tv] 2186.Z1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Humanae Vitae

 

How Humanae Vitae has advanced reproductive healthcare

 

 

 

[Franciscan University of Steubenville] 2186.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

United Nations

UN logo

 

Poland attacked for its pro-life record

A UNITED NATIONS organization assailed Poland this week for its pro-life laws.

Several western nations told the mostly Roman Catholic and predominantly pro-life country to give women the right to safe and legal abortions, according to news coverage of the meeting.

Poland’s representatives also heard criticism from numerous western countries about new laws thought to be limiting independence of the judiciary and public media, as well as a reported increasingly xenophobic atmosphere leading to crimes against foreigners.

The debate took place Tuesday in Geneva during a session of the Human Rights Council.

The Council is an intergovernmental body within the UN composed of 47 member nation states elected by the UN General Assembly to be responsible for the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe. The Council periodically reviews all UN members.

The session was the first review of Poland in five years, and also the first since the 2015 election of the country’s conservative Law and Justice party, which is facing accusations of violating the rule of law from the European Union (EU).

Sheila Leonard, the U.S. representative at the session, said her country remains “deeply concerned about judicial independence.”

“We are also concerned about the continued discrimination and incidents targeting minorities in Poland,” Leonard said,” including homophobic, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic speech and acts.”

Turkey’s delegate voiced concern about an anti-Muslim attitude in Poland, and the Russian delegate condemned a recent wave of vandalism on memorials for a Soviet soldier who died in World War II.

Polish officials defended their record and said the changes the Law and Justice party initiated were in accord with European norms.

Polish representative Renata Szczech, an undersecretary of state with Poland’s Foreign Ministry, reported how her government has decreased childhood poverty levels markedly through new cash bonuses for families.

Several delegates acknowledged the drop in childhood poverty and pushed for Warsaw to demonstrate improvement in the other areas.

Abortion is illegal in Poland with the exceptions of rape and incest, risk to the mother’s life, or when the unborn child is irreparably ill. It had previously been legal for decades when the country was under Communist rule.

More recent attempts to ban abortion entirely have fallen short. Feminists took to the streets throughout the country last fall to protest the proposed ban.

In 2015, a document produced by UN Committee on the Rights of the Child called on Poland to give children wider access to abortions, fight against “gender stereotypes,” and amend its penal code to allow for prosecution of “hate speech and other hate crimes motivated by racism, xenophobia and homophobia.”

[LSN] 2186.UN1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Europe

 

France flag

 

Apres moi le deluge

PHIL LAWLER writes for CatholicCulture.org : 'As Emmanuel Macron moved toward his landslide victory in the French presidential election, the fashionable media outlets noticed a stunning reality about Europe's current political leaders:

• Macron, the newly elected French president, has no children.

• German chancellor Angel Merkel has no children.

• British prime minister Theresa May has no children.

• Italian prime minister Paolo Gentiloni has no children.

• Holland's Mark Rutte, Sweden's Stefan Löfven, Luxembour's Xavier Bettel, Scotland's Nicola Sturgeon-all have no children. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, has no children.

So a grossly disproportionate number of the people making decisions about Europe's future have no direct personal stake in that future.

Is it possible for a politician rise to the top of the heap without having earned a college degree or the equivalent? It would be difficult, wouldn't it? And shouldn't it be? We expect our leaders to have a strong academic formation. But doesn't the experience of raising children form character far more than a few years in school?

You may have very little in common with your next-door neighbours, still less with people on the other side of the country. But if you can all recall seeing your newborn baby for the first time, and staying up at night with a sick child, then you share some powerful bonds. You don't share those bonds with the childless European leaders. They don't know what your life is like.

Or then again, perhaps they do, if you are a typical resident of France or Germany or Italy or any of the other affluent countries (including the US) where the fertility rate has dipped below the replacement level. Perhaps it makes sense to choose childless leaders for an increasingly childless society. Surely it is significant that, at the same time Western societies have stopped reproducing, they have begun rolling up unsustainable public spending, piling debts onto their children-or someone else's children.

And who are those children, who will be expected to pay off the debts and to run the old-folks' homes? They are the children of immigrants. Maybe, if enough families from the Middle East and North Africa arrive in Europe, they can furnish the workforce that will pay off the debts and entitlements, and staff the old-folks' homes. Macron's victory is, it seems, a wager on that possibility: an endorsement of current European Union policies, and a repudiation of Marine Le Pen's call for restrictions on immigration.

However, a Europe populated by the children of immigrants will be a very different society. And while it is theoretically possible for a society to accommodate and assimilate a flood of immigrants-the US did it in the early 20th century-to date Europe has not been particularly successful in absorbing the latest influx.

Christopher Caldwell, perhaps the most perceptive American commentator on the European crisis, analyzes the French failure to assimilate Muslim immigrants in an article for the City Journal, The French, Coming Apart. Caldwell reports that current French policies have promoted the interests of the elite, the 'knowledge class,' while squeezing out the middle class. He adds: 'As for the migrants themselves (whose views are seldom taken into account in French immigration discussions), living in Paris instead of Bamako is a windfall even under the worst of circumstances.' The wealthy and well educated are thriving in Paris; the poor immigrants are hunkering down in public housing. The shopkeepers and clerks and blue-collar workers have faded into the countryside and into the political background. Perhaps they are having children, too. In any case their views are no longer relevant to political leaders. If they dissent from the PC standards established by the elite, they are condemned as bigots. Caldwell writes:

Since Tocqueville, we have understood that our democratic societies are emulative. Nobody wants to be thought a bigot if the membership board of the country club takes pride in its multiculturalism. But as the prospect of rising in the world is hampered or extinguished, the inducements to ideological conformism weaken. Dissent appears. Political correctness grows more draconian. Finally the ruling class reaches a dangerous stage, in which it begins to lose not only its legitimacy but also a sense of what its legitimacy rested on in the first place.

In this year's election the French people rejected the radical change of politics advocated by Le Pen and the National Front. But the status quo cannot endure, nor can Macron's political dexterity stave off the eventual reckoning.

Pierre Manent, the leading political theorist in France (if not the world) today, wrote about that reckoning in Beyond Radical Secularism. He argues that the greatest challenge facing France today is the restoration of a true political community. As he sees it, the upheavals of the 1960s were not truly political; they involved 'the great withdrawal of loyalty from the community.' More and more, people came to see themselves as autonomous individuals, motivated by various impulses and desires, rather than as participants in a common endeavor. 'The citizen of action was followed by the individual of enjoyment.'

'We are probably the first, and we will surely remain the only, people in history to give over all elements of social life and all contents of human life to the unlimited sovereignty of the individual,' Manent writes. Political leaders gain influence today by promising to expand the realm of individual autonomy indefinitely, to invent new 'freedoms' that must be protected, to promote new forms of self-expression and self-satisfaction, to make 'diversity' a primary goal. Now, with the rise of Islamic immigration, France faces the ultimate test of its own new political ideals: the growing strength of a minority that rejects diversity, rejects the supremacy of the individual, and therefore rejects the very ideology that allowed the minority to grow.

The only solution, Manent argues, is for France to insist that Muslims accept a role as French citizens, as participants in a common enterprise. But that cannot be if native French citizens do not first acknowledge their role as citizens rather than autonomous individuals.

What is the difference between citizens and individuals? Citizens recognize their duties along with their rights. Small children will always behave as individuals. In a healthy society their parents behave as citizens-because there is no better way to train people in the habits of accepting responsibility than giving them the care of their own children.

[CWN] 2186.6]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Globe

News from around the world

 

Australia British consulates host same-sex weddings in defiance of Australian law

COLIN HART, Campaign Director of the Coalition for Marriage, writes for The Conservative Woman : ' David Cameron may have left power months ago, but his legacy lives on. The BBC has been trumpeting same-sex weddings being carried out at British consulates in Australia which are not valid under Australian law. There have apparently already been over 30 in the capital, Canberra. The UK High Commission in Australia is without doubt acting in defiance of Australia's Parliament, which continues to reject the redefinition of marriage. This offensive attempt to meddle with Australian democracy is part of David Cameron's legacy of exporting same-sex marriage around the world.

It is the Foreign Office playing politics and wasting taxpayers' money as none of these weddings (of UK citizens) will have any legal standing in Australia. What should we expect to see next? Will it be UK embassies providing abortion facilities in Dublin, 'sex change' operations in Moscow, or off-licence drinks in Riyadh? Obviously not. On a whole host of other controversial or sensitive issues, in foreign countries with different cultures, Britain would, surely, be much more respectful.

What is disturbing is that the British Government's gay marriage posturing comes at such a sensitive time in Australia, where the RC Archbishop of Hobart has recently been hauled before the Tasmanian 'anti-discrimination' tribunal over his views on traditional marriage. There has also been 'unprecedented abuse' directed at other senior figures who support traditional marriage, and attempts have been made to pressure their employers in business and academia. For example a hotel has been bullied into cancelling a major Christian conference.

As the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Rt Revd Glenn Davies, said recently: 'the campaign for same-sex marriage is not sailing on a raft of rainbows but on a barge of bullies… Not only has this minority view tried to swamp the public debate with its introspective, authoritarian denial of free speech, it has struck at the heart of Australian democracy and the freedoms that we all cherish.' (The Australian, 31 March 2017).

Responding to the British Government's flaunting of same-sex weddings in Australia, Lyle Shelton, head of the Australian Christian Lobby, said: 'We're seeing the negative consequences of the decision that Britain has made in terms of the impacts on the rights and freedoms of other people in the UK, particularly people of faith, so I think it's up to Australia to make its own decision and not to be swayed by what other nations might do'.

Lyle Shelton is absolutely right. Australia's democratic process must be respected and not defied. Australians should also be alert to the fact that redefining marriage brings many problems for freedom of speech, as cases like Ashers Baking Co. in Northern Ireland and many other such cases have abundantly shown.

[The Conservative Woman] 2186.7


CF News / World news

Belgium 'As Superior General we cannot accept this decision'

EVER SINCE the Belgian branch of the Brothers of Charity said they'll allow mentally ill patients to be euthanized in their psychiatric hospitals, their superior general has been staunchly resisting the move.

Brother Réné Stockman, superior general of the international religious order, has been fighting the decision to allow euthanasia at his community's 15 mental hospitals in Belgium from the time it was posted April 25 on the Belgian province's website. At that time, Stockman, who is stationed in Rome, warned the community that the decision was out of bounds. 'The line between Rome and the Brothers of Charity in Belgium has been disrupted,' said Stockman.

Stockman is fighting a war on three fronts that involve:

• The mostly lay-led board, which made the decision to allow euthanasia in the order's hospitals

• The community's Belgian branch, which has given tacit approval of the action

• The government with its laws, which makes euthanasia seemingly mandatory

The governing board's letter posted on the Belgian province's website notes that Stockman explicitly rejects the board's decision. Stockman has said that only a few brothers remain on the board and that secularization of the group has begun.

'In reality, only a few brothers are still involved in the government of the organization, so the majority are laypeople,' he remarked. 'Indeed, the presence of the brothers is not nearly sufficient, but also secularization is also poisoning the congregation in Belgium.'

The superior general is battling the pro-death decision on several levels. He first addressed his own congregation, saying, '[W]e informed the whole congregation that as superior general we cannot accept this decision because it is going totally against our charism of the charity.'

He's also in contact with the Belgian bishops' conference and its president, Cdl. Jozef De Kesel. Stockman also informed the apostolic nuncio to Belgium, Abp. Augustine Kasujja, of his intention to resist the board's decision. And he is in talks with the Vatican's secretary of state, Cdl. Pietro Parolin. Stockman has hope that these authorities will aid him in his resistance.

Rome has responded; Cdl. Parolin has launched an investigation into the matter. If nothing can be done to stop Belgium from pressuring the psychiatric institutes from performing euthanasia, then Stockman is willing to shut down their hospitals:

'I wait for the clear answer of the Church and that answer will be presented to our organization, in the hope that it will adapt its vision. ... I hope we will not have to withdraw our responsibility in the field of mental health care in the place where we started as a congregation with such care more than 200 years ago'.

[CMTV] 2186.8


CF News / World news

France  The un-demonization of the SSPX II: Bishop Rey makes his move

RORATE CAELI writes : 'Last week we reported on the decision of Bishop Alain Planet of the French diocese of Carcassonne to give full privileges to priests of the SSPX to celebrate marriages within that diocese. This week we received similar news from the diocese of Fréjus-Toulon. There is nothing surprising about this as the diocese is shepherded by Bishop Dominique Rey who has shown himself to be a strong supporter of tradition. His Excellency welcomes men into his seminary who prefer to offer the traditional rite of Mass and he regularly ordains those men according to that rite.

Below is His Excellency's decree:

Considering the letter dated 27 March 2017 concerning the permissions for marriages of faithful celebrated by the priests of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (SSPX), which the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei addressed to the Ordinaries of the Bishops' Conferences concerned;

Considering the terms of canon 1111 § 2;

It is hereby decreed:

Article 1 - We confirm to Our Chancellor the full delegation in matrimonial matter that We have granted to him since June 13, 2013. He will be Our referent on this particular matrimonial question.

Article 2 - Each priest member of the SSPX will have, from the date of signature of this decree, in the territory of Our diocese of Fréjus-Toulon, the delegation necessary to validly receive the exchange of consents between the spouses who appeal to the priests of the SSPX for their marriage.

Article 3 - This delegation is granted according to the following protocol:

§ 1 - If the marriage is celebrated in a church or an oratory of the SSPX, the priest member of the SSPX will inform by mail our Chancellor. The latter will give him a form of the document attesting the celebration of the marriage by a priest of the SSPX in the territory of the diocese of Fréjus-Toulon (specimen annexed to this decree). The marriage will be recorded in the SSPX registers. A copy of these registers will be sent annually to the chancellery of the diocese of Fréjus-Toulon.

§ 2 - If the marriage is celebrated in a parish church of the diocese, the priest member of the SSPX will agree with the parish priest about the day and the time of the celebration and will inform beforehand by postal mail Our Chancellor. The latter will give him a form of the Document attesting the celebration of the marriage by a priest of the SSPX in the territory of the diocese of Fréjus-Toulon. For the distribution of the casual and the quest one will proceed in the following way: the casual will return to the SSPX and the quest to the welcoming parish. The marriage will be recorded in the parish register.

Article 4 - The execution of this decree is entrusted to the chancellor, to the parish priests of the diocese of Fréjus-Toulon and to the local superior of the SSPX; The decree will be published in our official monthly magazine, Église de Fréjus-Toulon.

Notwithstanding all things contrary .

Given at Toulon, on May 4, 2017, Under Our Seal and Our Signature and the Countess of Our Chancellor.

+Dominique REY, Bishop of Fréjus-Toulon

Abbot Alexis CAMPO, Chancellor

[Rorate Caeli] 2186.9


CF News / World news

Germany Cardinal Marx finally admits his own negligences in abuse cases

DR MAIKE HICKSON reports for OnePeterFive : 'Cardinal Reinhard Marx - a close collaborator of Pope Francis and a member of the Council of Nine - is coming now increasingly under pressure for his alleged negligence with regard to past abuse cases which took place in his own Diocese of Trier at the time.

On 3 May, the German newspaper Die Zeit reported on some new information that is coming to light and that shows that Marx, who was Bishop of Trier from 2002 to 2008, did not take the necessary steps as the bishop when one of his priests - Otmar M. - was under state investigation for his conduct in a past sexual abuse case involving a minor. As Die Zeit already had said, in August of 2016:

'Since May [2016], the priest Otmar M., from the Saarland region, has been forbidden to have any contact with children and youth. The Diocese of Trier has filed a charge against him, now the state prosecutor is investigating the charges against the 64-year-old man. He is being accused of abuse - for the fourth time since 2006. And since last week it is clear that Cardinal Reinhard Marx - the President of the German Bishops' Conference and the current Archbishop of Munich-Freising - knew at the time of the charges but did not start an investigation of the case. [emphasis added]

In August of 2016, when the debate had started about Cardinal Marx' role and responsibility, the German Bishops' website Katholisch.de discussed the matter, as well; and had said, in my summarizing words, the following:

'Katholisch.de says that Cardinal Marx did not follow up on this abuse case which was declared to be time-barred (past the statute of limitations) in the eyes of the state. Thus, even though Marx knew of the case and of the fact that there was a problem at hand, he did not pursue it in a way that would fulfill his moral duty as bishop and guardian of his flock. A press spokesman for Marx says that, at that time, Marx followed the Church's guidelines with regard to abuse cases. However, he did not even request to see the files of the state's court at the time in order to obtain a full picture of the documented misdeeds of the abusive priest. [emphasis added]

Thus, Cardinal Marx did not take any reasonable and just steps for stopping this priest's immoral behavior. Importantly, he did not even seek to get in contact with the victim (Michael W.) himself! Yet, Marx still claimed, in 2016, that he himself had nonetheless acted according to the Church's own guidelines at the time.

As the August 2016 Zeit article points out, however, even if the abuse case was time-barred due to the state's laws, this does not mean that Cardinal Marx - even according to the then-binding Church laws - did not still have a duty to take action against the abusive priest:

'This is not fully correct [that Marx had acted according to Church regulations]: Already in the 2002 rules, it was written: 'Immediately after hearing about a suspicion or about a violation, the commissioner starts the investigation.' The suspicion existed, even if the case was held to be time-barred in the eyes of [secular] state institutions. In any case, abuse does not become time-barred in and according to Church Law. [emphasis added]

(Die Zeit now, in May of 2017, also points out that the 2002 Church regulations stated that the Church immediately has to take steps to hear the victims themselves. This specific act had not taken place, either.)

The putative negligence which, under the increasing pressure, Cardinal Marx now seems to have gradually come around to acknowledge, gets even weightier and more culpable when considering the new information just provided in the 3 May 2017 article by Die Zeit. For, since 2006, the priest Otmar M. seems now to have been formally accused in front of the state prosecutor seven times (in two of these cases by the Diocese of Trier itself)! Among the accusations are the charges of 'illegal ownership of weapons up to severe sexual abuse of a pupil of an elementary class.' All of these investigations have now been dropped, however, due to time limitations; or due to the prosecutor's own prudential judgment that the initial suspicions were not severe enough; or that the case would not be realistically judged against the accused priest. Within the Church, however, the case is still under some investigation.

The initial 2006 legal investigation, however, which found that the case was time-barred, nevertheless showed that the suspicion for an abuse was well-grounded. That should have been enough for Cardinal Marx. According to Die Zeit - whose reporters made intense and protracted investigations themselves, and have also had access to some of the legal files - even the accused priest's own lawyer admitted that, according to the legal files, Father Otmar M. did not deny the allegations made by the victim Michael W. and that he (Otmar M.) was aware that he had committed an immoral deed. In 2015, the Diocese of Trier sent Father Otmar M. prematurely into retirement, but without any reference to the abuse allegations. Only in December of 2016, has the Diocese of Trier - now under Bishop Stephan Ackermann - finally gotten around to contact the victim Michael W. himself.

Now, after more than a half a year of public discussion about Cardinal Marx' own role and responsibility in this matter, the German prelate finally also came around making a more direct comment to Die Zeit - up to now, moreover, he had only spoken to the media through his official spokesmen about this case. Even though he still does not comment specifically on the concrete case of Otmar M, Cardinal Marx - with tepid empathy - now says, according to Die Zeit:

'For me personally, I would like to explicitly state that I today - and unfortunately only in retrospect - recognize that I should have inquired more intensively.' The Church - to include himself - was too little willing to realize what priests also can do to young people, and the Church's conduct was not always appropriate with respect to the painful situations of the victims. 'For the Church and also for me myself, this was a painful process of learning, to think and to act especially and in everything from the viewpoint of the victims.' [emphasis added]

Is it not time to consider whether it is still appropriate that such a man as Cardinal Reinhard Marx should be the President of the German Bishops' Conference, and even a member of the Pope's own Council of Nine?

[1P5] 2186.10


CF News / World new

Ireland Practising homosexuals receive Holy Communion

PRACTISING homosexuals in Ireland are encouraged to receive Holy Communion with the support of clergy and under the purview of the top ranking prelate, Abp. Diarmuid Martin.

Active homosexuals and those advocating an LGBT lifestyle, along with dissident groups opposed to Catholic teaching attend Mass every 3rd Sunday of the month at the Avila Carmelite Retreat Centre in Dublin. The monthly gathering is called the All Are Welcome Mass.

Instead of warning those who are conscious of mortal sin to refrain from receiving Holy Communion, the venue instead extends an open invitation for all to receive without exception. 'We would like you to feel that you belong in a praying community and to experience full participation when celebrating the Eucharist.'

The LGBT Mass is sponsored by the dissident group We Are Church Ireland (WACI), activists promoting a gay lifestyle and calling for the ordination of women. In April, the group hosted Sr. Jeannine Gramick and members of the New Ways Ministry (NWM), the dissident group, which she co-founded in 1977. The group is committed to the full acceptance of homosexual activity.

Gramick and her NWM garnered a censure from U.S. bishops in 2010. Cardinal Francis George, archbishop of Chicago and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, wrote in the censure that Sr. Gramick 'is permanently prohibited from any pastoral work involving homosexual persons.' The censure took note that NWM was barred from involvement in such outreach as well.

The gay Masses are organized by Ireland's Association of Catholic Priests. The group notes that celebrants for the Masses 'have included Archbishop Diarmuid Martin and diocesan and religious priests.' Their website notes the Masses began in 'June 2012 in the home of one of the founding organizers.' Subsequently, the group moved to Avila Carmelite Centre. Masses are continuing to be held at the Carmelite center at 3:30 p.m. on every third Sunday of the month.

A picture was taken during one of the Masses offered in the retreat center at which a rainbow flag was draped over the altar, which is contrary to Church rubrics. When the presiding priest, Fr. Fergus O'Donoghue, was asked by local media about the flag, the priest acknowledged that it happened but offered no further comment.

It is further reported that those in attendance at these Masses witness other violations of liturgical norms, which include the Gospel being read by laity and the homily being replaced by group reflections. The greatest violation is that homosexuals living out a gay lifestyle are not warned against receiving Holy Communion. Sponsors of the Mass openly admit the contrary. 'We truly experienced full participation when celebrating the Eucharist together as a praying community,' says WACI.

The same group quotes Mass attendees, who are conversing after Mass in 2015 at the retreat center. One of those quoted, Bernadette O'Reilly, speaking on behalf of her companions, openly dissents from Church teaching, saying, 'Most of us don't go along with what the institution says. Its balderdash and ordinary people know it's balderdash.' Soline Humbert, an advocate for gay rights says, 'There's the authority of the hierarchy but also the authority of your conscience.'

Concerning any and all sins, sexual or otherwise, the Catholic Church teaches that a rightly formed conscience is never at odds with moral teaching. It further teaches that only those who are not conscious of grave sin may receive Holy Communion: to receive in a state of mortal sin is spiritually damaging and potentially damning.

[CMTV] 2186.11


CF News / World news

United Kingdom Normalisation of underage sex leaving children unprotected

THE NORMALISATION of underage sex is exposing children and young people to the risk of sexual exploitation, according to a new report from the national charity, Family Education Trust. Based on an analysis of high profile cases of child sexual exploitation, the study highlights an aspect of the debate which has so far been neglected.

The 152-page report examines the findings of serious case reviews of child sexual exploitation in several parts of England, including Rochdale and Oxfordshire, alongside Professor Alexis Jay's Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham.

It finds that the failure of professionals to detect the abuse of so many young people in different parts of the country cannot be accounted for by the incompetence of individual officers or inadequate systems at the local level. Rather, it has to do with a culture in which underage sexual activity has come to be viewed as a normal part of growing up and seen as relatively harmless as long as it is consensual.

The report's author, Family Education Trust director Norman Wells, commented: 'The evidence from recent serious case reviews clearly demonstrates that fundamental flaws in professional attitudes towards underage sexual activity have directly contributed to exploitation and abuse.'

The study finds common themes emerging from the serious case reviews - themes which have been largely overlooked by agencies and governmental bodies charged with protecting young people from sexual exploitation andabuse:

• A presumption that sexual activity involving children of a similar age (or with an age gap of just a few years) is consensual and will not normally involve child sexual exploitation.

• A failure to recognise that sexual activity between young people of similar ages may still involve abuse or exploitation.

• A culture in which underage sexual activity is not challenged and hence becomes normalised.

• A failure on the part of professionals to raise questions about underage sex or even about the identity of the father when presented with a pregnant teenager under the age of 16.

• A culture in which the response of professionals to underage sex is frequently limited to the confidential provision of contraception in order to reduce the risk of pregnancy or sexually transmitted infection.

• A disparity between the age at which children may access contraception and the age at which they are legally able to give consent to sexual activity.

• Confusion over the interpretation and implementation of guidelines in relation to the routine provision of contraception to under-16s, contributing to child sexual exploitation.

• An expectation that under-16s will be sexually active meaning that access to sexual health services under the age of consent is regarded as normal andpositive, and therefore fails to trigger any consideration of the possibility that the girls might be suffering abuse.

• Young people feeling let down by professionals prioritising patient confidentiality over safeguarding.

• A tendency to dismiss parental concerns and to regard parents as part of the problem.

• Children being treated as adults, with the competence and autonomy to make their own choices in relation to sexual activity.

Norman Wells remarked: 'Relaxed attitudes towards underage sex has led to what can only be described as a paralysis in child protection agencies as far apart as Rochdale in the north, Torbay in the south, Thurrock in the east and Liverpool in the west.

'Even though the normalisation of underage sex has been identified repeatedly in the serious case reviews as a reason for the complacency of child protection agencies, there is no indication of a willingness to address these underlying issues either at the local or the national level.'

The Family Education Trust study raises serious questions about the Government's plans to combat child sexual exploitation by making relationships education a compulsory part of the primary school curriculum and by making relationships and sex education a statutory subject in all secondary schools.

The report argues that the approach to relationships and sex education favoured by the leading campaigners will prove counter-productive and do more harm than good. It comments that:

'The message that children and young people must be left free to decide for themselves when they are ready to embark on a sexual relationship is failing them and exposing them to the risk of sexual exploitation.'

The report further observes that the Oxfordshire serious case review noted that the reluctance in many places, both political and professional, to have any firm statements about something being wrong had contributed to an environment where it is easier for vulnerable young people/children to be exploited. It also makes it harder for professionals to have the confidence and bravery to be more proactive on prevention and intervention.

Norman Wells commented: 'The evidence from the serious case reviews suggests that the relativistic approach advocated by the leading campaigners for statutory sex education is not the solution, but is rather part of the problem.

'We should be wary of any approach to sex and relationships education that is reluctant to declare anything 'wrong'. Children, young people and professionals alike all need a clear moral compass in order to safely negotiate the confused and confusing landscape that lies before them.'

Bearing the title 'Unprotected', the report argues that high levels of child sexual exploitation cannot be addressed by improved communications or the restructuring of local authority and police departments, nor by statutory relationships and sex education. It demonstrates that the root causes that need to be addressed are social, cultural and moral. Unless the government, together with professional bodies and child protection agencies, is willing to grasp the nettle and reverse the normalisation of underage sex, children and young people will remain exposed to the risk of child sexual exploitation.

Professor David Paton of Nottingham University Business School described the report's findings as utterly damning. Writing in the Foreword, he insists:

'With the publication of this report, policymakers and professionals working in sexual health no longer have any excuse to ignore the evidence... It is of the utmost importance that the government takes the findings of this report seriously and undertakes an urgent review of its approach to confidential sexual health services.'

['Unprotected: How the normalisation of underage sex is exposing children and young people to the risk of sexual exploitation', by Norman Wells is published by Family Education Trust, The Atrium, 31 Church Road, Ashford, Middlesex TW15 2UD Paperback, 152pp, ISBN: 978-0-906229-24-8 Price: £7.50. www.familyeducationtrust.org.uk]

[FET] 2186.12


CF News / World news

United Kingdom Leaked Manifesto : Labour will 'extend abortion to Northen Ireland'

A LEAKED COPY of the Labour Party's general election manifesto reveals that the party plans to introduce abortion to Northern Ireland.

The document, which was leaked to several newspapers today and uploaded online, says "Labour will continue to ensure a woman's right to choose a safe, legal abortion - and we will legislate to extend that right to women in Northern Ireland."

The 1967 Abortion Act, which legislated for abortion in England, Wales and Scotland was never extended to Northern Ireland, and the matter is devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly in Stormont. The Labour Party has not clarified whether it would implement the change during a period of direct rule, or whether it would impose it on a sitting Northern Ireland Assembly. The inconclusive result of the Stormont elections makes a return to direct rule a possibility.

Liam Gibson, SPUC's Northern Ireland Development officer explains: "We have the legal and constitutional right to make our own laws on issues such as abortion, which is a matter for the devolved Assembly in Stormont."

In a press release, he said: "The decision by the Labour Party to include in its election manifesto a commitment to impose the Abortion Act on Northern Ireland demonstrates a shocking level of utter contempt for the people of the Province and the devolved institutions established by the Good Friday Agreement. We are outraged but so should every single person in Northern Ireland by this highhanded interference."

He went on to say: "In February 2016 members of the Assembly voted to maintain Northern Ireland's current protection for children before birth. All the parties at Westminster should respect that decision. If the Labour Party were to carry out its threat to override the democratic settlement in the Province in order to push its own extremist and unpopular abortion agenda, it would severely damage the credibility of the political process and make the existence of the Assembly meaningless."

In January 2017 a leading economist estimated at least 100,000 people - men, women and children - are alive today in Northern Ireland who would not have been alive if the Province had the same rate of abortions as Scotland has had since the late 1960s.

[SPUC] 2186.12a


CF News / World news

United States Trump's religious freedom order

CLAIRE CHRETIEN reports for LifeSiteNews : 'Conservative groups have mixed feelings about President Trump's religious liberty executive order. Some claim socially liberal 'Ivanka and Jared won' because it's weaker than the original leaked draft, and others have praised the order as a historic step in the right direction.

The left-wing American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is of the opinion that the order doesn't contain much they need to worry about.

The 'executive order signing was an elaborate photo-op with no discernible policy outcome,' ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said in a statement.

'The directive to federal agencies to explore religious-based exceptions to healthcare does cue up a potential future battle, but as of now, the status quo has not changed,' said Romero. 'What President Trump did ... was merely provide a faux sop to religious conservatives and kick the can down the road on religious exemptions on reproductive healthcare services.'

The executive order, which is on 'Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty,' grants churches more freedom to speak about political issues and elections. It also tells federal agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services to 'consider issuing amended regulations, consistent with applicable law, to address conscience-based objections to the preventive-care mandate' that requires religious employers like the Little Sisters of the Poor to participate in the provision of contraceptives.

'It shall be the policy of the executive branch to vigorously enforce federal law's robust protections for religious freedom,' the executive order declares.

Some Little Sisters of the Poor were present at the signing of the executive order, as was Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl. The Little Sisters of the Poor expressed hope that this may be the beginning of the end of the government persecution they began to face under President Obama.

'Today's action by the government confirms that the government never needed to create this false conflict between women and religion,' Sister Loraine Marie Claire Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor, said Thursday. 'The government never needed the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide these services. We are grateful for this positive step. We Little Sisters look forward to the government finally ending its unnecessary conflict so we can return our full attention to serving the neediest in our society.'

Questions about the Johnson Amendment

The executive order instructs the government to ensure that 'adverse action,' such as retaliation from the IRS, isn't taken against churches or individuals associated with them for preaching 'about moral or political issues from a religious perspective.'

A regulation called the Johnson Amendment currently prevents churches from endorsing political candidates without risking the loss of their tax-exempt status. Scrapping the Johnson Amendment was one of the promises Trump made during his campaign.

National Review's David French blasted the way Trump chose to address this issue.

'An executive order cannot repeal a statute, and legal restrictions on political activity by churches are statutory,' wrote French. The Johnson Amendment must be either overturned in court or by repealing the statute, he argued.

'This order does neither,' French continued. 'In fact, a lawyer will commit malpractice if he tells a pastor or director of a nonprofit that this order allows a church or nonprofit to use its resources to support or oppose a candidate. Even if the Trump administration chooses not to enforce the law, a later administration can tear up Trump's order and begin vigorous enforcement based on actions undertaken during the Trump administration.'

'President Trump's prior assertion that he wished to 'totally destroy' the Johnson Amendment with this order has proven to be a textbook case of 'fake news,'' Romero alleged.

'Americans cannot rely on the discretion of IRS agents, some of whom have abused that discretion for years to silence pastors and intrude into America's pulpits,' said Gregory S. Baylor, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom. He echoed French's point that there's nothing 'to prevent a future, hostile administration from wielding its power to penalize any church who dares exercise its constitutionally protected freedoms in a manner that displeases those in authority.'

'A legislative problem like the Johnson Amendment demands a legislative solution like the Free Speech Fairness Act,' said Baylor.

'Betrayal' or the first step toward restoring religious liberty?

Perhaps the most-criticized element of the executive order is its lack of specific protections for Americans who live their beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The leaked draft promised to protect people who believe, speak, act, or decline to act based on their beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman and 'sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage.' It would have protected those who believe 'male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual's immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.'

The draft also contained language guaranteeing religious freedom for all 'when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts; or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with federal, state or local governments.'

'The order is just as notable for what it omits as for what it reportedly includes,' wrote French. He noted the 'threat' of the Johnson Amendment 'pales in comparison to the comprehensive assault on religious organizations on federally funded campuses, the threats to the religious freedom of Christian educational institutions, and the attack on the rights of conscience of dissenters from the new orthodoxies on marriage, the family, and even the definition of male and female.'

The executive order provides 'no specific relief' to families like the Vander Boons in Michigan, Baylor said. The Vander Boons were threatened with the effective closure of their family-run business for placing religious materials in their breakroom. The materials said marriage is between a man and a woman. The U.S. Department of Agriculture deemed the materials 'offensive' and asked the Vander Boons to permanently remove them.

Marriage, human sexuality, human life, and gender ideology aren't named at all in the final executive order. The original promised specific protection for people who believe in marriage and protecting all human beings, no matter young or old.

The order is 'woefully inadequate' and 'rather weak,' marriage scholar Ryan Anderson determined. The first leaked draft 'protected the religious liberty rights of all Americans in very tailored ways that addressed the problems of today,' wrote Anderson.

Anderson's research and writing over the past few years has highlighted the increasing persecution of bakers, florists, and photographers who don't want to participate in same-sex 'weddings' and ceremonies.

Religious freedom and pro-marriage advocate Professor Robert P. George of Princeton University tweeted that the executive order contains no substantial conscience protections. He suggested Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who are known for supporting the LGBT cause, 'won' and 'we lost.'

Follow

Robert P. George @McCormickProf

The religious liberty executive order is meaningless. No substantive protections for conscience. A betrayal. Ivanka and Jared won. We lost. https://twitter.com/RyanTAnd/status/860191529914310656 …

8:17 PM - 4 May 2017

487 487 Retweets 659 659 likes

Some pro-family advocates are more optimistic.

'President Trump's willingness to address the concerns of millions of religious women, like the Little Sisters of the Poor, instead of ignoring and minimizing their deeply held religious beliefs, as we saw during the previous administration, is a breath of fresh air that gives us great hope for the future,' said Penny Nance, president and CEO of Concerned Women for America. 'There is more work to be done, for sure. But President Trump has set a very different, and a very welcomed, tone in support of religious freedom that will surely bear much fruit in the future.'

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins was at the White House Rose Garden for the signing of the order.

'The President's executive order is a clear reflection of his campaign promise to protect the religious freedoms of Americans,' said Perkins. It 'starts the process of reversing the devastating trend set by the last administration to punish charities, pastors, family owned businesses and honest, hard-working people simply for living according to their faith.'

'We support President Trump in this effort, and we commit to working with his administration to strengthen religious freedom for all Americans, regardless of faith,' said Nance.

'The open season on Christians and other people of faith is coming to a close in America and we look forward to assisting the Trump administration in fully restoring America's First Freedom,' Perkins concluded.

'I know that some of my fellow evangelicals are a bit uneasy because the executive order does not go far enough - but be patient,' Todd Starnes of FOX News wrote. 'This is the first of several steps to protect religious liberty.'

And the ACLU plans on monitoring the order's outcome and possibly taking legal action.

'In the event that this order triggers any official government action at all, we will see Trump in court, again,' Romero threatened.

[LSN] 2186.13


CF News / World news

United States Bishop Stowe to radical LGBT conference: Morality is about 'dignity,' not 'rules'

BISHOP JOHN STOWE of Kentucky has made good on his controversial promise to speak at a New Ways Ministry conference, even though the Catholic group advocates homosexual 'marriage' and has been condemned by the Vatican and the U.S. bishops.

The 51-year-old Franciscan, who was ordained the bishop of Lexington in May 2015 by Pope Francis, gave two Gospel reflections at the April 28-30 symposium, which was called 'Justice and Mercy Shall Kiss: LGBT Catholics in the Age of Pope Francis.'

Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago, where the event took place, has not publicly commented on the symposium, nor on Bishop Stowe's speaking there.

'Christian morality is more concerned with the well-being and dignity of the person than with rules, norms or commandments. Jesus seems to teach this on many occasions,' Stowe told the 300 or so participants at the conference in a reference to Matthew 12:1-14, reported the National Catholic Reporter.

Members of New Ways Ministry have shown 'a valuable expression of mercy' by calling the Catholic Church 'to be more inclusive and more Christ-like, despite being given so many reasons to walk away,' Stowe told the NCR during the conference.

He faced a backlash after news broke in December that he would attend the New Ways Ministry symposium, said the bishop.

'The flack has been enormous and continues on the blogosphere,' and from 'self-righteous strangers online and those who subscribe to these feeds,' Stowe said, adding that some posts and emails were 'vicious.'

Stowe had earlier defended his decision by pointing to Pope Francis's call to mercy.

'I think Pope Francis has signaled that we need to take another look at those things (homosexuality),' he said in December on the Mike Allen Radio Show, an online Catholic program out of Lexington.

Moreover, Catholic teaching on homosexuality is not 'immune from ever changing,' Stowe said then.

'Our usual way of thinking is that justice and mercy are incompatible,' Stowe told the NCR, but Pope Francis has asked Catholics to be open to each other.

'We all still require [mercy]; it's about the need for a conversion of attitudes for both the institutional church and for all its members.'

New Ways Ministry, which lobbies for the Catholic Church's acceptance of homosexual relationships, including 'marriage,' was condemned in 2010 by the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, and in 2011 by Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl, USCCB chairman of the Committee on Doctrine.

'In no manner is the position proposed by New Ways Ministry in conformity with Catholic teaching and in no manner is this organization authorized to speak on behalf of the Catholic Church or to identify itself as a Catholic organization,' George wrote.

Moreover, in 1999 the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 'permanently prohibited' the group's co-founders, Sr. Jeannine Gramick and Fr. Robert Nugent, 'from any pastoral work involving homosexual persons,' after ruling their teaching was 'erroneous and dangerous' and 'doctrinally unacceptable.'

Nugent, who died January 1, 2014, generally followed the Vatican order, but Gramick did not, and left the School Sisters of Notre Dame for the Sisters of Loretto over the matter.

Indeed, the 75-year-old religious was front and center at the symposium, and introduced Sr. Simone Campbell, who rose to fame as pro-abortion leader of the 'Nuns on a Bus' campaign.

Executive director of the social justice group NETWORK, Campbell is widely regarded as undermining the abortion concerns of the U.S. bishops during the Obamacare debate.

She preached at the pre-symposium's optional retreat.

'Let us pray as Jesus taught us: Our Mother, Our Father … ' intoned Campbell during the retreat's opening prayer service, which included a 'reading' from Pope Francis.

'Don't get bogged down in your own limited ideas and opinions, but be prepared to change or expand them. The combination of two different ways of thinking can lead to a synthesis that enriches both. The unity that we seek is not uniformity, but a unity in diversity, or reconciled diversity. Keep an open mind' was the papal text, although the source document was not cited.

The speakers included Fr. Bryan Massingale, who teaches moral theology at Fordham University in New York and is a priest for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, where he was at one point spiritual director of seminarians.

'I don't believe in a vengeful God, I really don't, but there are times when I hope that someone has to account for the spiritual damage that's being done that leads people to walk away' from the Catholic Church, he told the symposium.

The bishops must know that LGBT Catholics are involved in church ministries, observed a participant before asking how the bishops are 'reckoning' with that.

Massingale replied that 'there is more going on in our church than is sometimes reported,' but that the Catholic Church is not the bishops.

'We have to stop this dysfunctional dance to ask Father to baptize our every opinion,' Massingale said. 'The church is us.'

The symposium also featured, on a loan from a sympathetic priest, a collection of relics of saints who New Ways ministry director Frank DeBernardo said 'are known or thought to be LGBT people.' He named Perpetua and Felicity, Sergius and Bacchus, Joan of Arc, and Aelred of Rievaulx.

Conference sessions included 'Lesbian Nuns: Gift to the Church, Gay Men in Priesthood and Religious Life,' and 'Transgender & Intersex Identities and the Family.'

[LSN] 2186.14


CF News / World news


Venezuela Pontius Pilate has reappeared

SANDRO MAGISTER blogs from Rome :'The number of dead is now around forty, the wounded number a thousand. It is the price of a month of popular demonstrations, even of only women dressed in white, against the presidency of Nicolás Maduro, in a Venezuela on the brink.

A Venezuela in which a new factor has recently taken the field, and this is the growing, systematic aggression against properties and personnel of the Catholic Church.

Vatican sources - starting with “L'Osservatore Romano” - as detailed as they are in covering the developments of the crisis, are sparing with news about aggression against the Church.

There is not a single reference to this even in the letter that Pope Francis wrote on May 5 to the Venezuelan bishops, who on the same day published a vibrant declaration against the announcement made by Maduro of a “constitutional convention” to reform the state for his use and consumption, meaning in practice - the bishops charge - to impose “a totalitarian, militaristic, violent, oppressive police state system” even worse than the “21st-century socialism” set up by Maduro’s predecesssor, Hugo Chávez, a leader still praised by many leftist populist groups in Latin America and elsewhere.

For Sunday, May 21, the bishop have called a “Day of prayer for peace in Venezuela.” But meanwhile, here is an initial survey of the aggression against the Catholic Church, published by the Venezuelan journalist Marinellys Tremamunno in La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana of April 2:

Nothing is off-limits. Death threats and blasphemous graffiti on the walls of churches. Masses interrupted by incursions of Chavist “colectivos.” Caracas cardinal Jorge Urosa Savino silenced during the homily and forced to leave the church. The venerated image of the Nazarene in the cathedral of Valencia smeared with human excrement. The chanceries of the dioceses of Guarenas and Maracay plundered. Thefts of consecrated hosts in Maracaibo. The headquarters of the episcopal conference devastated. One priest killed in Guayana and another abducted.

But it doesn’t end there. On May 4, the doors of the cathedral of Caracas were damaged and its walls were covered with graffiti in praise of the government. That same day, a crowd of students from the Catholic university marched on the episcopal residence, as a sign of solidarity.

Because by now the bishops too are an “enemy” against whom the Maduro presidency is lashing out with vehemence. Especially after the failure at the outset of the attempt at mediation between the government and opposition groups supported at the end of last year by pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio through his envoys:

The stance adopted by the Vatican authorities to foster a reconciliation among the parties was that expressed by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, formerly the nuncio in Caracas before his appointment as secretary of state, in the letter he sent to the parties in mid-December, “in the name and at the behest of the Holy Father.”

In it, he identified four conditions for the opening of dialogue:

• humanitarian channels to guarantee the population food and medicine;

• restitution to the parliament (in which the opposition groups are in the majority) of the prerogatives stipulated by the constitution;

• the liberation of political prisoners;

• new free elections.

But the Maduro presidency has not wanted to meet any of these conditions. On the contrary, it has made additional decisions that have ramped up the repression.

And Pope Francis has been punctually informed about everything. Also through direct conversations with Venezuelan bishops, including the president of the episcopal conference, Cardinal Baltazar Porras Cardozo, archbishop of Mérida, who met with the pope in Rome on April 27, on the eve of his journey to Egypt.

So one can understand the disappointment and anger of many Venezuelans, including bishops, when two days later, on April 29, during the customary press conference on the flight back to Rome from Cairo, Francis said this about the crisis in Venezuela:

“There was an effort by the Holy See, but this did not produce results, because the proposals were not accepted, or were diluted with a ‘yes, yes, but no, no.’ We all know the difficult situation in Venezuela, which is a country that I love very much. I know that now there is insistence - I believe on the part of the four former presidents [of Colombia, Spain, Panama, and Santo Domingo - editor’s note] - to restore this facilitation. I believe that conditions have already been presented. Very clear conditions. But part of the opposition does not want this. Because it is curious, the opposition is divided. And, on the other hand, it appears that the conflicts are intensifying all the time. There is something astir, I am informed about it, but it is very much up in the air. But everything that can be done for Venezuela must be done. With the necessary guarantees. If not, we are playing ‘tintìn pirulero’ [where everyone wants to get out of paying the pledge - editor’s note], and this is no good.”

The next day, Sunday, April 30, speaking at the “Regina Caeli,” Francis moderated somewhat the dismissive words he spoke on the plane against the Venezuelan opposition groups, practically blamed for being the ones who ruined the agreement. He addressed “a heartfelt appeal to the government and to all the components of society that every further form of violence be avoided, human rights be respected, and negotiated solutions be sought for the grave humanitarian, social, political, and economic crisis that is devastating the population.” But this correction has by no means calmed the waters. Twelve hours later, in fact, the opposition groups wrote a letter to the pope in which “not divided but unanimous” they said that they agree to the conditions set by Cardinal Parolin - unlike the government, which has always rejected them - and indicated free elections as the only way out of the crisis.

The fact is that between Pope Francis and the Venezuelan bishops, concerning the crisis that is ravaging the country, there is an abyss. The bishops stand with the population that is protesting against the dictatorship, and are respected and listened to as authoritative guides. While Bergoglio is judged on a par with Pontius Pilate, unforgivably reckless with Maduro and Chavism, in addition to being incomprehensibly reticent on the victims of the repression and on the aggression that is striking the Church itself.

It is a fracture analogous to the one produced in Bolivia, where President Evo Morales has his biggest critics in the bishops, and instead a tireless supporter in the pope. Or that which was seen during the pope’s journey to Cuba, where Francis did not conceal his admiration for the Castro brothers, while not dignifying the dissidents with so much as a word or a glance.

Many see the root of the pope’s behavior in his invincible populist sentiment, typically Latin American, brought to light once again in recent days by one of the leading scholars of the phenomenon, Professor Loris Zanatta of the university of Bologna, in a long essay in “Il Foglio” of May 8:

“Reality, Bergoglio repeats, is greater than ideas. And yet, seeing his silence on the social drama in Venezuela, or in the country that with Chávez had set itself up as a model of anti-liberalism by invoking the stereotypes dear to the pope, the thought arises that he too, like many, prefers his ideas to reality.”

 

[Settimo Cielo] 2186.14a


CF News / World news

International gloria.tv.news

 

Play

 

[Gloria.tv] 2186.15


CF News / World news

International Some jihad headlines of the week

 

Australia : Teenager threatens to rape, murder prison-guards in name of Allah

Egypt : ISIS justifies killing women, children, by invoking Muhammad's example

Italy : Muslim destroys 9th-cent. statutes in Rome's San Martino ai Monti (video)

Play

Palestine : University names class after jihad mass murderer

Russia : Chechen police tell parents 'Kill your gay children or we'll do it for ou'

UK : ISIS calls for more truck attacks, 'killing, stabbing, slitting of throats' in London

USA : Imam praised as moderate by New York Times arrested for ISIS ties

USA : State Trooper shot dead by jihadis reciting Qur'an

USA : NY Education Department plans to teach students to sympathize with ISIS bombers

 

[CF News] 2186.16


CF News / World news

International The Prophet Voris

 

Play

 

 

[CMTV] 2186.17


CF News / World news

International The World Over with Raymond Arroyo

 

 

[EWTN] 2186.18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Newman

 

The real Victory to be won

ON ELECTION NIGHT in America, Bishop Mark Davies reflected on the Catholic view of history. He noted, with Blessed John Henry Newman, that the Catholic view encompasses both looking backwards at the long history of the Church and looking forward with confidence to the ultimate victory of Christ.

Rt Rev. Mark Davies is Bishop of the Diocese of Shrewsbury in the Province of Birmingham, England. Bishop Davies' talk 'The Real Victory To Be Won' was sponsored by the Catechetical Institute at Franciscan University of Steubenville.

 

 

 

[Franciscan University of Steubenville] 2186.19

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Media

Homeland

HomelandJOHN JALSEVAC writes for LifeSiteNews : 'For years everybody's been talking about the TV show Homeland, mostly in glowing terms. Sure, there's been some controversy about how the show treats some of the thornier issues of foreign policy and religious-based extremism. But Homeland is pretty much universally acknowledged as one of the best and most popular TV dramas available.

So, a couple Fridays ago, I decided to give it a try.

The first episode started out intriguingly enough. But then, a few minutes in, without any warning whatsoever, there were two naked people on the screen having sex.

The scene was extremely graphic, showing everything but for genitals. As mentioned, there was absolutely no leadup. The camera simply cut right into the middle of the scene, leaving me scrambling for the fast-forward button.

Everybody, it seems, has decided to play a game together, wherein we all pretend that viewing naked people simulating sexual intercourse on camera is as neutral an activity as watching the sun rise or contemplating the lotus flower.

Surprised at the explicitness of the scene, and how soon into the first episode it occurred, I looked up the 'parents' guide' for Homeland on IMDb. Turns out that similar scenes are routine, with roughly one sex scene or instance of nudity per every episode and a half.

In recent years, HBO has gained a reputation (and a lot of free press) for creating shows that deliberately push the boundaries of what's acceptable in terms of graphic nudity and violence (Game of Thrones, Westworld, etc). If it's an HBO show, you basically expect it at this point. Which is why I don't watch them.

Homeland, however, is not an HBO show. While broadcast on premium cable, it's comparatively mainstream, produced by Fox 21 Television Studios, and airing on Showtime. It's also available for streaming on Netflix - which is where I was watching it.

I didn't expect the graphic sexuality. Nobody has ever mentioned it, and I've never run across any articles warning about it. Depressingly, this isn't surprising. We are now at a point where the occurrence of graphic sexuality in mainstream TV shows and movies is so ubiquitous that it no longer merits comment, let alone outrage or controversy.

Occasionally, it's true, when a new show comes out that pushes the envelope just a little bit further (say, by depicting a sex orgy, a la Westworld), the newspapers feign shock and horror. But really, everybody knows they're just glad for the opportunity to run an article with a titillating headline, a barely blurred screenshot of the offending scene(s), and the suggestive trailer for the show.

These days, as long as the sex scene is vaguely germane to the story line, it is defended as 'artistic,' and to question its appropriateness is to invite inevitable accusations of prudishness.

If, on the other hand, you violate the rules of this game by confessing your unease, then the game dictates that everybody contemptuously dismiss your concerns with the barely concealed suggestion that your unease reveals a troubling lack of self-control and possible latent psychopathic sexual tendencies. After all, goes the game, if you can't watch people having sex with the coolly impassive objectivity of a seasoned gynecologist performing an annual exam, you're definitely not a well-adjusted, mature adult, and quite possibly a latent sex fiend.

Denying self-evident facts about human nature has become a bit of a cottage industry of late. And so I suppose that if people can successfully pretend that there's no intrinsic difference between boys and girls, they can also fool themselves into thinking that video footage of people having sex isn't an extremely powerful stimulus that, in the case of any healthy adult, involuntarily leads to certain predictable, potent and morally fraught responses in the person watching it.

Which is why the totally non-pornographic, and very artistic sex scenes from these mainstream TV shows inevitably end up on the big porn sites. Because, as high-brow as these TV shows consider themselves, there are few discernible differences between hardcore porn and the sex scenes these shows feature - beyond, perhaps, a half-hearted attempt at providing context, and a lingering hangup (in some cases, but not all) about showing the actual locus of the sexual act.

I'm just going to go out on a limb here, and suggest that maybe, just maybe, watching this kind of stuff isn't a good idea for anybody who takes seriously the call to live a life of virtue. I know, Jesus never did say, 'Thou shalt not watch hardcore sex scenes on TV,' but I'm guessing He took it for granted.

It's astonishing to think that a generation ago, even to suggest that married couples were sleeping in a common bed on TV was to invite the wrath of the censorship boards. Maybe that was an unreasonable extreme. But I'm pretty sure that the far more unreasonable extreme is to fill our movies and TV shows with graphic nudity, and then demand that everyone pretend that this is normal.

This past week, a production of a play put on by the Boston Children's Theatre was cancelled in the final days of its run due to the fact that the director had included a scene of full-frontal male nudity…in a children's play. Do that on the street, get arrested for indecent exposure (Unless, I suppose, you're marching in a gay pride parade…but that's another story for another day). Include it in a play, and it's 'art.'

How do we even get to the point where a play aimed at children featuring nudity actually goes to production without anyone in authority pausing and suggesting that maybe that's just not a good idea. The answer is the frog in boiling water: the absolute pervasiveness of graphic sexuality in our entertainment, and the unprecedented (to put it mildly) ubiquity of hardcore porn use, and the consequent death of the public conscience.

Netflix has a 'children's section,' which limits choices to kid-friendly material. But that section is aimed at very young children. Most teenagers who have a Netflix account won't be browsing the children's area. They will have access to any number of TV shows and movies, including Homeland, featuring pornographic content so graphic that, only a few years ago, it would have required a subscription to a hardcore porn channel, or a visit to the local porn shop to find.

That's not normal. We should stop pretending it is.

[LSN] 2186.20


CF News / Media

Film review : Voiceless

 

 

FIORELLA NASH writes for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) : 'There are few sounds that make my heart sink more deeply than a pro-life DVD dropping onto my doormat. I have sat through so many cringeworthy efforts to convert the world through film, that with one or two notable exceptions, I run a mile from any film billed as ‘pro-life.’ Almost inevitably, the production values will be clunky, the actors will be amateurs, the script cliched or the whole premise of the film so blatantly propagandist as to annoy even a convinced pro-life campaigner.

It is fair to say then that I watched Voiceless with sceptical eyes. Or rather, started watching the film with sceptical eyes. Ten minutes in, I had forgotten to be sceptical because I was so drawn into the gritty human drama unfolding before me. The story involves a young man, Jesse Dean, recently discharged from the army, starting a new job as an outreach worker at his father-in-law’s church. The church’s congregation is ageing and dwindling, with the pastor increasingly desperate to turn things around. The young couple are not without problems of their own; there are clearly tensions in their marriage and Jesse is seen receiving therapy for a traumatic incident in Afghanistan that has left him psychologically scarred. Jesse has plans to engage with young people and starts a boxing club in an old storage room, but his comfortable strategies are thrown into disarray when he notices the presence of an abortion facility across the street from the church.

What makes the film so engaging is the all-too-familiar scenario of the lukewarm Christian community and the very real characters that come to the fore as the story develops. The prayer meeting where the subject of the abortion facility is raised is particularly painful to watch, with the predictable stream of excuses coming out almost on cue - but some women in the congregation may have had abortions, we'll drive people away, we should be spreading the Gospel not getting involved in politics, you know the clinic does some good work, have you heard about those horrible protesters who harass women... Furthermore, the film avoids falling into the trap of creating impossibly dramatic situations. There are several very distressing and violent moments in the film but at no point does the film descend into sensationalism. The threats to the hero's livelihood and liberty are consistent with what genuinely does happen to campaigners who find themselves at odds with the management of abortion facilities and who refuse to back down.

The only unfortunate flaw was the elderly Scottish woman who forms the voice of conscience throughout the film and very much appears to epitomise Old World protestant values. She is an excellent character, at times both inspiring and comical, but she is no more a Scot than Dick Van Dyke was a cockney chimney sweep. Her accent is so off-putting that her early scenes lost much of their power for me because I was too busy trying to guess where precisely on God's earth she is supposed to come from. It is a pity because in every other way, the old lady's no-nonsense attitude to life acts as the perfect foil to the young couple's struggles and uncertainty.

The only note of caution that needs to be raised is that this is not a film that will appeal or work with every audience. It clearly has a very specific purpose – to appeal to evangelical communities to wake up, stand up to be counted and work to end abortion. The film is unlikely to cut much ice with secular audiences and may have limited success among other religious communities. However, when it comes to connecting with and inspiring insipid congregations who continue to shy away from controversy, I cannot think of a more persuasive or powerful film to perform such a mission.

 

[SPUC] 2186.20a


CF News / Media

CTS publications now available as e-books

IN ORDER to further their mission of evangelisation and reach more people in more ways, the CTS are delighted to be launching the first 35 of their new ebooks on 8 May 2017. Fergal Martin, General Secretary of the CTS, is clear that his team's priority is to make the teaching of the Catholic faith more accessible and respond to the needs of those searching to learn, love and live their faith.

Many classic and new titles will be available on Kindle, Kobo and iBooks, with the full list of ebook titles on the CTS website. More titles are being added all the time, with hundreds of titles being added over the summer, so keep an eye on your favourite Ebook Store or www.ctsbooks.org/ebooks to see when they launch new titles.

'I am delighted that the CTS are launching ebooks and continuing to find new ways of introducing people to the beauty of Catholicism with valuable resources for Catholics wishing to refresh their faith. Our mission to share and to renew the Catholic faith within our contemporary culture is well served by the CTS.' (Cardinal Vincent Nichols)

The Catholic Truth Society has published thousands of publications on all areas of the Catholic and Christian faith since 1868, covering every imaginable area: hot topic issues - helping Catholics and non-Catholics to understand the Catholic perspective; apologetics - teaching and informing on every aspect of the Catholic faith; biographies and testimonies of saints and holy men and women to inspire us on our journey; prayer and devotional aids and children's books to name but a few areas covered.

• 'CTS publications are more than just highly effective resources for evangelisation. They are trustworthy and credible sources for personal growth in faith'. (Edmund Adamus, Professional Advisor and Diocesan Schools Commissioner, Portsmouth)

• 'You are blessed with authors who consistently hit the nail on the head and give readers exactly what they are looking for and need. In short, CTS Books get right to the heart of the matter and are a wonderful stepping stone for further reading. The books on prayer, suffering, forgiveness, saints, spiritual warfare and angels are wonderful treasure troves of advice and guidance and are life affirming.' (Ruby Laurent)

For further information please contact Claire Dancaster, Head of Sales and Marketing.

Tel 020 7640 0042; Fax 020 7640 0046; c.dancaster@ctsbooks.org

Catholic Truth Society; 40-46 Harleyford Road; London SE11 5AY

www.ctsbooks.org

[CTS] 2186.21

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Comment from the internet

 

O L of Fatima

 

Pope Francis in Fatima

THOUSANDS ofpilgrims greeted Pope Francis on his brief visit to Fatima this week. 'Mary'sexample of believing and following Jesus is what matters most; she cannot be som e image “of our own making” who Christians barter with for mercy, Pope Francis said.

On the eve of the 100th anniversary of the Marian apparitions at Fatima, the Pope asked tens of thousands of pilgrims May 12 to reflect on “which Mary” they choose to venerate, “the virgin Mary from the Gospel” or “one who restrains the arm of a vengeful God?”

Is the Mary they honour “a woman blessed because she believed always and everywhere in God’s words or a ‘plaster statue’ from whom we beg favours at little cost?” he asked.

As the sun set at the shrine dedicated to Our Lady of Fatima, pilgrims held thousands of lit candles, filling the square with a fiery light before Pope Francis led them in praying the rosary

Our Lady of Fatima

PETE BAKLINSKI writes for LifeSiteNews: 'One hundred years ago, three shepherd children in Portugal saw a vision of hell that so terrified them they thought they would die.

They saw a great sea of roaring fire into which were plunged demons and countless souls who had opposed God and his ways while they lived. The damned souls were like red-hot burning coals that emitted searing flames from their burning human-like forms. They shrieked and groaned, consumed by pain and despair.

It was Our Lady of Fatima who showed the children the horrifying vision of hell, where she said the “souls of poor sinners go.” She told them that “more souls go to hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

Christians have always understood the sins of the flesh to be those actions which are a misuse and abuse of God’s gift of sexuality.

God created sexual relations to be between a man and woman united to one another in the faithful, exclusive, permanent, and life-giving relationship of marriage. Sins against the gift of sexuality include contracepted sex, adultery, fornication, prostitution, pornography, immodest dress, masturbation, homosexuality. Some sins of the flesh often give rise to other serious sins such as abortion, and can lead to unfaithfulness, marital breakdown, and divorce.

And worse yet, sins of the flesh can destroy one’s relationship with God, since the sinner in choosing them rejects God’s plan for sexuality, and in doing so, ultimately rejects God himself.
Perhaps more souls go to hell for sexual sins than any other kind because of how easy it is to fall into them, especially in today’s culture where sex is glorified as the main source of human happiness.

As a father of seven who is concerned about the salvation of my children, I become frightened when I observe the sexual lies with which the culture is trying to poison my children.

From the earliest ages, educational centers want to expose my children to sins of the flesh in sexual education courses, teaching them how to augment sexual pleasure with one’s self (masturbation) or with others (fornication, homosexuality) while removing the baby-making purpose of sexual activity (contracepted sex, abortion).

The entertainment industry wants to initiate my children, especially the older ones, into sins of the flesh by bombarding them with explicit sexual content (pornography, immodest dress). And it keeps adults addicted to sins of the flesh by giving them more of the same.

Governments have even used their political authority to enshrine in law certain sins of the flesh, making it illegal for anyone to speak out against such sins and to warn people of their danger (homosexuality).

As a reporter on the front lines of the pro-life movement who sees what’s happening every day in the battle for life and family, I often have to ask myself who I am really fighting, and what I am fighting for.

It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking I’m fighting against abortion providers, or the homosexual lobby, or corrupt governments. While these are capable of doing much evil and are responsible for doing much evil, they are not the real enemy. They’re just people, like everyone else, including me, who need to be saved from hell.

I love when St. Paul tells the Ephesians that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

It’s the devil and his legion of fallen angels who ensnare men and women by the sins of the flesh into the fires of hell.

Sister Lucia dos Santos, one of the seers who lived much longer after the other two, once wrote a letter to Cardinal Carlo Caffarra in which she spoke about a final battle between God and Satan.
She wrote: “The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid, because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue. However, Our Lady has already crushed its head.”

Those fighting for life, marriage, and the family must remember that on May 13, 2017 — the 100th anniversary of Our Lady appearing in Fatima — the ultimate fight is about saving souls from hell. This means saving those enslaved to sexual sins and those who profit from sexual sins, the abortionist, the pornographer, the brothel owner.

Our Lady of Fatima invited the children to help save souls through prayer and sacrifice.
The youngest seer, Jacinta Marto, was so moved by the vision of hell, and by the fact that she could do something to help people from going there, she began making sacrifices for the salvation of souls. She wouldn’t drink water so she could offer up her thirst. She would give away her afternoon snack so she could offer up her hunger. She would wear a rough knotted rope against her skin so she could offer up her discomfort.

Our Lady’s message about the reality of hell and the children’s example of what to do to help people from going there is something anyone fighting for life and family must take seriously.

 

Rabbi Mayer Schiller on Fatima

 

 

 

 

[Fatima Centre] 2186.21a

 

 

 

 

 


CF News / Comment from the internet

The dangers of focusing only on the negative in the Church

STEVE SKOJEC writes for OnePeterFive : 'The video below, taken from a talk by Fr. Chad Ripperger - a traditional priest, psychologist, and exorcist of some renown - has been making the rounds since last year. I've always intended to listen to it, but at an hour in length, I never seemed to make it all the way through.

This past weekend I had to make a long drive alone, so I finally fired it up and patched it into the car stereo.

I'm glad I did.

I think this talk touches on some important points. I think it's something we all need to hear. I keep mentioning that I want to highlight more of the positive aspects about the Catholic Faith, not just report on the seemingly endless wave of assaults on it from within. There is a reason for that. I know it's toxic. I can feel it. (Still, focusing on the positive is easier said than done these days.) It doesn't mean the bad news doesn't matter, or that we shouldn't be informed, or even that we here at 1P5 shouldn't cover those things.

But we must seek a balance. If we focus only and always on what's wrong, we habituate ourselves to seeing the bad in everything, and it becomes an impediment to our spiritual growth. As Fr. Ripperger says, we shouldn't stick our heads in the sand, but we should only pay as much attention to these things as the duties of our state in life demand.

I think there's a lot of food for thought here. If you can make the time to listen to the whole thing - and I do recommend that you hear all of it, to get the different pieces he covers throughout - it's worth your time.

Please remember that Father Ripperger's talks are licensed as 'Penanceware'. What does that mean? I'll let him explain:

These media files are PenanceWare, which require that you do one of the following: (1) $1.00 via Paypal, (2) offer up a decade of the Rosary, or (3) perform some form of penance for the intentions of Fr. Ripperger (for each individual media file downloaded). The same rule applies if you copy and distribute to friends. External links, e.g. the videos from Keep the Faith, etc. are not Penanceware.

If you'd like to hear more of his excellent talks and conferences, they're available at his website here. I've included the video below for convenience, but it's an unofficial copy, and you should treat it as though the same licensing applies. So grab a seat, have a listen, and fire up those rosaries and/or donations. It's for a good cause.

 

 

 

[Published on 16 Apr 2016. What are things that make people always look negative on things? Family, politics, the state of the Church are areas that can do that. What do we do about that to keep from being negative? For more please visit http://www.sentrad.org & remember to say 3 Hail Marys for the priest]

[1P5] 2186.22


CF News / Comment from the internet

Now Francis targets 'rigid' youth. But what does 'rigid' mean? And why does Francis never tell us?

Christopher FerraraCHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA writes for Fatima Perspectives : 'For the past four years, Pope Bergoglio has almost daily denounced the 'rigidity' of the rigid Catholics he seems to see everywhere at a time when moral, doctrinal and disciplinary laxity are rampant in the Church.

But the umpteenth denunciation of 'rigid Christians,' during a sermon at Casa Santa Marta, had a slightly different twist. Now it seems Pope Bergoglio perceives a growing threat of 'rigidity' among young Catholics. Speaking of the conversion of Saul of Tarsus as a 'rigid' young man who followed the Mosaic Law, Francis provided the usual twisting of Scripture into an indictment of present-day Catholics:

'They are rigid people living a double life: They make themselves look good, sincere, but when no one sees them, they do ugly things. On the other hand, this young man [Saint Paul] was honest. He believed that. I think, when I say this, of the many young people in the Church today who have fallen into the temptation of rigidity. Some are sincere, they are good. We have to pray that the Lord might help them to grow along the path of meekness.'

So, according to Pope Bergoglio, there are two types of 'rigid' people in the Church today: the hypocrites, whom he is quite certain 'do ugly things' when no one is looking, and then there are the sincerely rigid people who, like Saint Paul, 'are honest' in their rigidity. That is, they practice what they preach, but are still 'rigid.' And now we are expected to believe that even 'many young people have fallen into the temptation of rigidity,' although Pope Bergoglio allows that some are sincerely rigid like Saint Paul.

It would be easy enough to laugh off this endless j'accuse as rather puerile behavior unbecoming a Pope, and go about our business without paying it the least attention any longer. But there is a deeper and more sinister meaning to it all: Consider that the one thing Pope Bergoglio has failed to do in his endless demagogic attacks on the 'rigid' is to tell us what exactly - or even approximately! - he means by the word. The epithet always stands in rhetorical isolation without contextual support. What is to account for this glaring omission?

The answer, of course, is obvious, and everybody still paying attention to Pope Bergoglio knows it: By 'rigid' he means staunch adherence to the Church's doctrines on faith and morals and her related disciplines, including the traditional Latin liturgy, to which 'rigid' young people are being attracted in growing numbers.

By 'rigid' Bergoglio means, in essence, too Catholic for his liking, and thus not inclined to accept the tenets of Bergoglianism, including the notion that people engaging in sexual relations outside of Holy Matrimony, claiming that they have effected a 'second marriage' with someone to whom they are not married, should be admitted to Holy Communion if they 'discern' that they not guilty of adultery, despite what Our Lord said to the contrary. No other Pope has even countenanced such an atrocity, but not to approve it is a form of 'rigidity,' according to Bergoglio alone among all the Popes of history.

The not so obvious point, however, is that while everyone knows what Pope Bergoglio means by 'rigid,' few have focused on the significance of his failure ever - under any circumstances - to tell us what he means by it.

Why? The only reasonable answer is chilling: Pope Bergoglio knows that what he is constantly condemning is nothing other than sound Catholic orthodoxy and orthopraxis but that he cannot openly admit this without exposing himself as simply an opponent of what the Church has always believed and practiced. In other words, the Bergoglian campaign against 'rigid' Catholics is not motivated by a sincere conviction that they really are deviating from the Faith, for if that were his sincere conviction he would specify in all sincerity in what particular respects they have deviated - doctrinally, morally, liturgically or otherwise.

But this he cannot do for the simple reason that in his mind 'rigid' and 'traditional Catholicism' are equivalent, and he knows full well that he cannot state explicitly that essentially Modernist conviction. Thus he employs the ecclesial equivalent of 'virtue signaling' in politics, hurling the accusation of 'rigidity' to signal the accuser's moral superiority over Catholics who simply want to practice the faith of their fathers without Bergoglian alterations - including the 'many young people' he publicly humiliates because they seek the authentic religion that is their birthright as baptized members of the Mystical Body. Think of 'rigid' as the ecclesial analog of 'bigot' or 'racist' or 'homophobe' in the political sphere, where code words conceal what is really an attack on traditional values representing what little remains of the moral order of Christendom.

What a mystery confronts us as this pontificate continues its destructive course. Only God knows why the Church suffers this affliction; and only He knows when it will end with the triumph of Mary's Immaculate Heart. May it come soon.

[FP] 2186.23


CF News / Comment from the internet

Islamic criticism against Al-Azhar. The other side of Francis's journey to Egypt

SANDRO MAGISTER blogs from Rome : 'One week after the visit of Pope Francis to Egypt, much has been said about what he did. But little about what happened on the other shore, that of Islam.

What held sway here was the speech of the grand imam of Al-Azhar, the sheikh Ahmad Al-Tayyib, delivered in Arabic and presented in full in the official English version, on this other page:

> 'His Holiness Pope Francis of Vatican...'

Unlike Francis, who in his speech immediately afterward attributed the violence carried out in the name of religion to an 'idolatrous falsification of God,' with nonexplicit but transparent reference to terrorism and wars of Islamic origin, Al-Tayyib maintained that there is 'no one logical reason justifying these disasters' if not 'arms trade and marketing,' plus the oblivion that 'modern civilization' has cast over the 'divine religions and their invariably established ethics.'

Al-Tayyib therefore denied that there is any foundation in attributing to Islam the terrorist acts perpetrated in its name, solely for the reason that there are 'small groups of followers' that are carrying them out, because then, he added, the same accusation would hit Christianity and Judaism, they too with followers who sow death 'carrying the cross' or 'the teachings of Moses.'

Now, what is important to note is that these statements of the grand imam of Al-Azhar did not pass untouched by criticism from some of his coreligionists.

The most biting commentary came from an Egyptian Muslim intellectual, Islam Al-Behairy, sentenced to one year in prison for his previous criticism of Al-Azhar but then pardoned by President Abd Al-Fattah Al-Sisi, who also burst out two years ago into a resounding attack on what is the most famous university of Sunni Islam, which he had enjoined to undertake as soon as possible a 'religious revolution' capable of 'uprooting' the fanaticism of Islam in order to 'replace it with a more enlightened vision of the world.'

Al-Behairy presented his criticisms of the grand imam of Al-Azhar in an interview with 'Asia News,' the online agency of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions:

> For Islam Al-Behairy, pope's visit, a missed opportunity for Al-Azhar

For him, Al-Tayyib's explanations are pseudo-reasons, blaming Islamic terrorism on arms trafficking and postmodern thought:

'If the reasons for religious terrorism are postmodern ideas and arms trafficking, we live in the dream world. There are in fact texts in our classical jurisprudence that incite violence. We see people blowing themselves up, killing dozens of people, because they have read texts that give them carte blanche to kill anyone, and this for the simple reason that they have an unshakable faith that they are doing the right thing for God, immolating themselves and killing many other people along the way. This is not just about arms trafficking. I call upon the Egyptian government to review meticulously the views of Sheikh Al-Tayeb. Because according to his way of thinking, the State will never be able to put an end to the violence.'

And again:

'I call on Al-Azhar to stop showing to the world books written by certain medieval imams, which it sells as the legacy of true Islam. Because what is in these books is what Daesh does literally, to the last comma. If sheikh Al-Tayyib really wants to counter what is happening, he would listen to those who ask him to re-read these texts and say that what is in them does not correspond to the truth. Past imams hurt our people, the image of Islam, and even the relations of Islam with other religions. Bu

t the sheikh does not want to talk about a new interpretation. He is fiercely opposed it and goes after those who favour it. In fact, he is a source of perpetual contradiction. In a statement addressed to the West, he says that Islam does not call for killing apostates. But in Egypt, he lets himself say that Islam encourages to do so.'

There is an arresting similarity between these criticisms of Al-Behairy against Al-Azhar and those formulated in the run-up to Pope Francis's journey by two Egyptian Jesuits thoroughly familiar with this subject, Frs. Henri Boulad and Samir Khalil Samir, in two interviews with 'L'Osservatore Romano' and 'Asia News,'

both of them reprinted by Settimo Cielo.

Al-Tayyib's record is in effect full of contradictions.

He was in 2007 one of the signers of the famous 'letter of 138 Muslim scholars' to Benedict XVI in dialogical response to his lecture in Regensburg. But he is also the one who at the beginning of 2011 broke off relations between Al-Azhar university and the Holy See solely because Benedict XVI had publicly prayed for the dozens of victims of the new year's attack on the Coptic church of Saints Mark and Peter in Alexandria, Egypt.

He has repeatedly been an honored guest at the interreligious meetings for peace organized by the Community of Sant'Egidio. But he is also the one who in 2004, at one of these meetings, gave public approval of the terrorist acts carried out in Israel against civilians, including children.

He is the one who, when ISIS in 2015 killed a captured Jordanian pilot by burning him to death in the town square, condemned that act as 'not Islamic.' But in compensation he decreed that those assassins 'must be killed, crucified and amputated of feet and hands.'

Given these precedents, it comes as no surprise that Al-Behairy should declare himself skeptical over the international conference for peace organized at Al-Azhar by grand imam Al-Tayyib in conjunction with the pope's visit:

'This peace conference leads nowhere. There is nothing specific about the fight against terrorism. It is a comedy far from reality.'

Just as there is still nothing like acceptance - except by a few isolated pioneers - for the revolutionary proposal that Benedict XVI issued to the Islamic world in December of 2006, three months after Regensburg.

A proposal of extraordinary relevance, but one that has fallen too far into oblivion, even within the Catholic Church. One more reason to reread it in its entirety:

'The Muslim world today finds itself facing an extremely urgent task that is very similar to the one that was imposed upon Christians beginning in the age of the Enlightenment, and that Vatican Council II, through long and painstaking effort, resolved concretely for the Catholic Church. [...]

'On the one hand, we must oppose a dictatorship of positivist reasoning that excludes God from the life of the community and from the public order, thus depriving man of his specific criteria of judgment.

'On the other hand, it is necessary to welcome the real achievements of Enlightenment thinking - human rights, and especially the freedom of faith and its exercise, recognizing these as elements that are also essential for the authenticity of religion. Just as in the Christian community there has been lengthy inquiry into the right attitude of faith toward these convictions - an inquiry that certainly will never be concluded definitively - so also the Islamic world, with its own tradition, stands before

[the great task of finding the appropriate solutions in this regard.

'The content of the dialogue between Christians and Muslims at the moment is above all that of encountering each other in this effort to find the right solutions. We Christians feel ourselves to be united with all those who, precisely on the basis of their religious convictions as Muslims, struggle against violence and in favor of synergy between faith and reason, between religion and freedom.'

[Settimo Cielo] 2186.24


CF News / Comment from the internet

Metropolitan Hilarion on Episcopal Conferences

FR JOHN HUNWICKE blogs : 'Metropolitan Hilarion, the 'Foreign Minister' of the Russian Patriarchate delivered (8 November 2014) an important paper on Primacy and Synodality to the great American, Orthodox, seminary of S Vladimir.

Of course, a Catholic ecclesiologist might have, at many points, very different things to say. He might wish to suggest that too much is made in this paper of a normativeness discerned in a 'Conciliar' period supervised by the imperial power in New Rome; and too little of the function of the Petrine Primacy in the centuries before Caesaropapism was even invented. Journalists might dismiss Hilarion's masterly exegesis as being merely the establishment of political 'position' as between Moskow and Constantinople. And the Metropolitan has been, to put it mildly, tactless in what he says about the Ukrainian Catholic Church ... a martyred community by which all Catholics will loyally stand. But in each case, to use these judgements as an easy excuse to dismiss his detailed, lucid, and scholarly exposition would be unfortunate.

I will simply pick out two of his points which bear upon matters which are relevant to Catholic Church life at this particular moment.

(1) We sometimes read about 'intermediate primacies' and about the importance of local gatherings of bishops in particular regions. Metropolitan Hilarion makes absolutely clear that the local particular church, in communion with its bishop, is theologically fundamental; while regional primacies are merely a matter of convenience, without being rooted in an essential doctrine of the Church. 'The primacy of the diocesan bishop is clearly based on fundamental theological principles, such as the one famously emphasised by S Cyprian: 'The bishop is in the church and the church is in the bishop and ... if somebody is not with the bishop, he is not in the church.' Primacy at the regional level, a matter of canonical convenience, is based on church canons ...'.

Absolutely. This is why the Holy See, during the ascendancy of S John Paul II and Benedict XVI, was concerned that Episcopal Conferences should not usurp the primacy of the Bishop in his Particular Church, either theologically or practically.

(2) Synodality implies consensus, not majority voting. Indeed, Hilarion goes further: Conciliar decisions are to be agreed 'by consensus, not by vote; they will be approved by the entire assembly of bishops'.

This is important; it is one reason for deploring the proceedings of the Synods in Rome, after which paragraphs which had failed even to reach a two-thirds majority were, nevertheless, circulated with an indication of the number of votes cast for and against. In this, the Holy Father showed appallingly bad judgement. This action had an unfortunate appearance of the arbitrary. Catholics have always expected that Ecumenical Councils should 'morally unanimous'. It is well known that, after Vatican I, B John Henry Newman was concerned that 'an aggressive insolent faction' might have 'so practised on' the Fathers that 'there will be the gravest reasons for determining that the Definition is not valid'.

If, at some future time, there were to be Synodical or even Conciliar proceedings dominated by a particular will or faction determined to impose heterodoxy or heteropraxy, and if that faction secured a majority vote for their aims without securing the consensus of moral unanimity, and if they were to attempt forcefully to impose their 'majority decisions' upon the Church; such 'imposition' would be vis sine iure.

[http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.co.uk/] 2186.25


CF News / Comment from the internet

'I just don't get the whoopdeedoo about Luther this year in the Catholic Church'

FR JOHN ZUHLSDORF blogs : 'I received a note from priest friend. He included a PDF of an article to be published. Here is the synopsis:

Synopsis: A close analysis of Kasper's book on Mercy reveals a powerful embrace of Luther's theology of grace and mercy. But Luther had no moral theology since, in his eyes, human beings are incapable good, and God's mercy replaces his justice. Beneath a panegyric to divine mercy, Kasper's persistent theme is a diminution of divine justice against which mercy is revealed and illumined. The result is a trivialization of God's mercy, the enormity of Christ's sacrifice, man's freedom of moral choice and participitation in his own salvation, and by necessity, thereby, his dignity.

Look. I'm a former Lutheran. When I was in seminary, we had to read Kasper's Christology books, the best Lutheran Christology I ever read!

In his book on Mercy, Kasper pretty much says what the Council of Trent anathematized.

I just don't get the whoopdeedoo about Luther in the Catholic Church.

In the Lutheran churches (not real churches according to the CDF because they don't have Apostolic Succession, etc.), I get it completely. If they want to celebrate Martin Luther, great!

But… should we?

There are many things I don't understand about this.

Another thing I don't get is why lots of women and many Jews are not upset by the big celebration of Martin Luther. Just read Luther, for heaven's sake! Why are not feminists upset? Where are the women, for pete's sake? Is this an example of what McCarthy describes in The Grand Jihad? The enemy of my enemy is my friend? Luther didn't say exactly kind things about Jews. Where are they with this? I don't get it. Pope Francis used an analogy the other day about Syrians and camps and lots of people were upset. Read Luther on our Jewish elder cousins someday.

I don't see why we are suppose to celebrate the shredding of Christendom.

I know about the blah blah about things in the Church that needed reform in the 16th c and following, and even today. I'm a convert, remember?

Am I getting this wrong? Where am I wrong?

[wdtprs.com] 2186.26


CF News / Comment from the internet

Amoris Laetitia: How to disguise falsehood under the mantle of truth

Remnant Editor’s Note: Father Guy Castelain is the chaplain of the Marie Reine des Coeurs (Our Lady Queen of Hearts) Confraternity in France, which spreads True Devotion to Mary according to De Montfort. This article was published in the April 2017 edition of the Confraternity's bulletin (#144, April 2017). Again, we ask for prayers on behalf of our faithful translator of these important contributions from Europe. MJM
 
FR CASTELAIN writes : On the March 19 2016, Pope Francis' post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia on love in the family was published. Why speak of this pontifical document in a publication devoted to the spirituality of Saint Louis-Marie de Montfort? Because Father de Montfort casts a singular light on the problematic posed by this document.

To begin with, a little reminder. The leitmotif or the thrust of the Second Vatican Council was aggiornamento, or in Latin accomodatio renovata, that is, opening and adaptation to the modern world. Paul VI explained the meaning of this term in his opening speech to the second session (1963): “that the deposit of Christian doctrine be conserved and presented in a more efficacious manner” and that doctrine “be deepened and expressed following the research methods and presentation used by modern thought”.

Simply put, it was, therefore, a case of marrying Catholic doctrine with the Atheism, Evolutionism, Modernism, Liberalism and immorality of the modern world. And herein lies the basic problem: how can you express Divine Revelation, that is, Catholic Faith and Morals, using the thought of today's world? Strictly speaking, it is a case of trying to square the circle.

Now, to use terminology more proper to Saint Louis-Marie de Montfort, the problem of the Second Vatican Council was that of marrying Divine Wisdom with the wisdom of the world. Saint Louis Marie de Montfort dealt with this subject in The Love of Eternal Wisdom in Numbers 74 to 89. Father de Montfort explains that the world “subtly [uses] the truth to inspire falsehood, virtue to authorize sin, and the very maxims of Jesus Christ to authorize its own” (Number 79).

Father Grignon also points out that worldly wisdom is “a perfect conformity with the maxims and fashions of the world... not in a clumsy and blatant way, by committing some scandalous sin, but in a subtle, deceptive and political manner; otherwise it would no longer be wisdom in the eyes of the world, but license” (Number 75).

Finally, he defines the worldly person as someone “who makes a secret but deadly agreement between truth and falsehood, between the Gospel and the world, between virtue and sin” (Number 76). De Montfort is here describing Liberal Catholicism (which ended up triumphing at Vatican II and in its reforms) a full one hundred years before its existence (19th Century).

What does Amoris Laetitia contain? A reminder of the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage (in Numbers 52-53, 62, 77, 86, 123 and 178) and, at the same time, affirmations which grant divorced and remarried people the possibility of accessing the sacraments, that is to say Confession and Communion, without conversion, without contrition, without reparation for scandal, without ceasing to live in adultery and without ceasing their sin (in Numbers 243, 298-299, 301-305 and especially Note 351).

To be convinced of this, the reader can refer to two easily accessible publications: DICI Number 345 of November 25 2016 and Le Courrier de Rome Number 595 of January 2017.

De Montfort, with his eagle eye, saw the crux of the problem which currently occupies our attention: Conciliar wisdom consists in disguising falsehood under the mantle of truth, and vice under that of virtue. Thus, Amoris Laetitia, authorizes sacrilege under the pretext of being pastoral. Let it be said in passing that there is a good chance that the 2018 Synod will carry out the same sleight of hand with regard to ecclesiastical celibacy in order to permit the priestly ordination of married men.

De Montfort was truly a man in advance of his own time. This is so because he held to Catholic Doctrine, that of the Council of Trent, which in turn reiterates that of Saint Thomas Aquinas. In effect, history teaches us that, during this Council, two books were placed on the altar: The Bible or Sacred Scripture (Written Tradition) and the Summa Theologica of Saint Thomas Aquinas (representing Oral Tradition).

And in those days, this Catholic Doctrine was not expressed with the help of an atheistic philosophy which is opposed to the Catholic Faith, but with the help of sane Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy, known as the Philosophia Perennis, and which is “the Handmaid of Theology” (Saint Thomas Aquinas).

[Remnant] 2186.12a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Our Catholic Heritage

Site of the day : Faughart

 

SAINT BRIDGET is thought to have been born in Faughart, Co.Louth, which lies his village, some 4 miles north of Dundalk. There are remains of an ancient church on the site of a monastery which is associated with her.

 

 

[dundalkdemocrat]] 2186.27


CF News / Our Catholic Heritage

Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. Now, of course, supressed . . .

IN JULY 2013, the traditional young order, Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate was placed under the provisional administration of the Congregation of Religious with the approval of Pope Francis. One reason for this compulsion has not been mentioned to this day. Because of the direct attack against the religious charism, tradition and the traditional Rite, members of the Order tried to find ways out of the constraint. What was contemplated, among other things, was the new foundation as an old ritual Order, which would no longer be subordinated to the Congregation of Religious, but the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei . The Vatican, however, refused and forbade any to leave the Order.

Archbishop Arguelles offered the five Philippine Franciscans of the Immaculate, who had been suspended, a celebret in his archdiocese. He was by no means popular in certain Roman circles. Shortly after the incident in the Philippines Commissioner Volpi threatened Italian bishops, if they should dare to establish Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in their dioceses. At the same time, the Commissioner asserted in all seriousness that the Franciscans of the Immaculate wanted to 'overthrow' Pope Francis.

The premature end of his term of office is seen in the Philippines in the context of his attitude to the events of Lipa. A connection with the Franciscans of the Immaculate is not excluded. The Archbishop had not been popular in Rome.

According to reports from Messa in Latino, Archbishop Arguelles learned from the Internet of his dismissal. There would be no question of a resignation which the pope had 'accepted.' In Daily Bulletin there is an official version that says nothing about the background. Archbishop Arguelles would thus feel the 'merciful' arm of Pope Francis get as Bishop Rogelio Livieres of Ciudad del Este in Paraguay experienced it. Under a pretext, Msgr. Livieres had been lured to Rome, where Pope Francis let him stand in front of closed doors, while at home the locks of the bishop's residence were changed. In spite of the bishop's insistence, Francis refused to listen to the bishop who had been deposed. Bishop Livieres was neither given 'dialogue' nor 'mercy'. The 'guilt' of Bishop Livieres was that he was too traditional and had succeeded with his priestly seminary, which had almost three times as many seminarians as all the other dioceses of the country together. He had become the 'trouble maker' in a bishop's conference riddled indifferentism and liberation theology.

 

Play

[Gloria.tv] 2186.28


CF News / Our Catholic Heritage

Stabat mater

Stabat Mater for soprano, contralto, strings and basso continuo by Giovanni Battista Pergolesi (1710-1736)

 

 

[Terry Tirlipirli] 2186.29

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Quote

 

Fr.Hardon

 

Revelation

UNDOUBTEDLY the present age of introspection and social communication highlights the fact that God's word, once and for all revealed in Christ, may be better and more deeply appropriated by personal experience and interpersonal relationships among believing Christians. There is only one proviso, but it is of the essence of legitimate doctrinal progress. The new insights of what some have called continuing revelation cannot, on Catholic principles, contradict anything that the Church teaches has already been revealed.

Two canons of the First Vatican Council several reminders that the temptation we are describing is not an illusory one. The canons are definitions that censure the tia) llowing positions:

Human sciences (disciplinae) can be pursued with such liberty that that their assertions may be held as true, even though they are opposed to revealed doctrine, and that they cannot be condemned by the Church.

As knowledge (sciencta) progresses, it is sometimes possible for dogmas that had been proposed by the Church to receive a different meaning from the one which the Church understood and understands.

The logic of the Catholic stance is very simple. If we admit that Christ bequeathed his revelation to the apostles to be 'handed down' by their successors in the episcopacy, progress in faith's grasp of what Christ revealed is presumed. It would be unthinkable, however for Christ to neglect his Church by allowing what seems to be 'new insights' to become disclosures so that the supposed successors of the apostles become impostors who have misled the faithful into believing what, it now turns out, was positive error.

[Father John A. Hardon,SJ - The Catholic Catechism] 2186.30

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 


. CF NEWS

 

 

Podcasts

 

Microphone

 


EWTN Live Radio click click here

EWTN Live Television click here

EWTN Bookmark with Doug Keck click here

EWTN Catholic Heritage with Tim Matthews & Joanna Bogle click here

EWTN Live with Fr Mitch Pacwa click here

EWTN Mother Angelica Live Classics click here

EWTN The Journey Home with Marcus Grodi click here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 . CF NEWS

 

 

 

 

 

News

By courtesy of LifeSiteNews

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

This bulletin is published by the National Association of Catholic Families, UK Registered Charity No.298481. Our main website is at http://www.catholic-family.org   The reliability of the news herein is dependent on that of the cited sources, which may be paraphrased rather than fully quoted.  Links to our regular news sources include

 

Aid to the Church in Need at http://www.acn.org.uk
The Catholic Herald
at http://www.catholicherald.co.uk
CW News at http://www.catholicculture.org/news
LifeSiteNews at http://www.LifeSiteNews.com
NewsNow at http://www.newsnow.co.uk
PewSitter.com at http://www.pewsitter.com
SPUC at http://www.spuc.org  
The Wanderer at www.thewandererpress.com
Word on Fire at http://www.wordonfire.org
Zenit at http://www.zenit.org  

 

Right2Link

Right2Link

 

Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NACF. Please forward this bulletin to other interested parties. To unsubscribe, send an appropriate email to editor@catholic-family.org No appended files accepted, unless by prior arrangement.

 

Saint Francis de Sales, patron saint of journalists, pray for us

Saint Don Bosco, patron saint of editors, pray for us

 

 

***********************************************

 

GRANT US, Father a spirit of wisdom and insight, so that we may know the great hope to which we have been called.

Let peace and harmony reign among all the dwellers on the earth.

To those who exercise the ministry of authority in the service of their brothers, send a spirit of wisdom and humility.

May all those consecrated to you together devote themselves to constant prayer.

Grant us, O God, to fill up in our own flesh what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for his Church.

To our families and benefactors grant the blessing of everlasting life.

Be ever mindful of your mercy, exalt the lowly; fill the hungry with good things.

Both in life and death, let us be yours, O Lord.

Free the world from its slavery to corruption, to share in the glorious freedom of the children of God.