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.2194) posted at 2.53 pm on Sunday, July 16th, 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

 

Vatican watch

Pontifical Academy for Life appoints eugenicist continue reading
Pope Benedict XVI says Church is ‘on the verge of capsizing’ continue reading
'Outrageous' continue reading
Cardinal Schönborn: “All the [dubia] questions can be answered ‘yes'” continue reading
New Pontifical Academy Head promotes idea of children as 'change agents' continue reading
Francis is promoting 'a hidden schism' continue reading
Gay sex in Vatican has 'never been worse' continue reading
More on the sackingof Cardinal Müller continue reading
An A-Z list of concerns with Pope Francis continue reading
Vatican's intemperate assault on American conservatism continue reading

Humanae Vitae

Fidelity to God's Covenant with Man   VIDEO  continue reading

United Nations

World Population Day warns of overpopulation, population implosion continue reading

News from around the world

FRANCE Bishops praise abortion-legislating Simone Veil continue reading
GERMANY Muslims for same-sex 'marriage'? continue reading
MALTA Same-sex marriage legalised continue reading
UK Mind the (sanity) gap as TfL abolishes gender continue reading
UK Same-sex marriage in consulates worldwide continue reading
UK Institute of Christ the King given another church in Preston continue reading
UK Ofsted again fails Jewish for not teaching LGBT issues continue reading
UK Over 1 billion of aid money for family planning, abortion   VIDEO  continue reading
USA Transgender ideology has created widespread child abuse continue reading
USA Archbishop: Homosexuals must repent, change lifestyle continue reading
USA President Trump's Warsaw speech continue reading
INTERNATIONAL gloria.tv.news   VIDEO   continue reading
INTERNATIONAL Some jihad headlines of the week continue reading
INTERNATIONAL The Prophet Voris   VIDEO  continue reading
INTERNATIONAL The World Over with Raymond Arroyo   VIDEO   continue reading

Newman

Newman and his contemporaries   VIDEO   continue reading

Media

Remembering Joaquin Navarro-Valls   VIDEO   continue reading
Prayers for 'Mother Mushroom' continue reading

Book review

The sanctification of Sodomy continue reading

Comment from the internet

Dame Alice von Hildebrand ~ The Journey Home   VIDEO  continue reading
An example of Catholic resistance: Princess Elvina Pallavicini continue reading
In removing
Cardinal Müller, Pope Francis is sending a powerful message continue reading
Liberal hypocrite priests and bishops continue reading
An Essay on the Malaise in the Church continue reading
The Extraordinary Synod of 1985 continue reading
When waves break over the Barque of Peter continue reading

Our Catholic Heritage

Site of the day : Neath Abbey continue reading
Saint of the Day : St Helier continue reading
Mozart Mass   VIDEO  continue reading

Quote

Cardinal Sarah continue reading


ADDITIONAL  FEATURES

Translation

To TRANSLATE this bulletin,Click HERE and then enter the URL
http://www.cfnews.org.uk/CF_News 2194.htm

Recent editions

For last edition of CF News click 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

 

    

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

LINK TO VATICAN YOUTUBE SITE  HERE

 

Vatican watch

 

Vatican

 

Pontifical Academy for Life appoints eugenicist

BRADLEY ELI, M.Div., Ma.Th., reports for ChurchMilitant.com : 'The Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL) has added to its scandal by appointing a eugenicist involved in stem-cell research to its body of 45 ordinary members, along with a pro-abortion philosopher, another pro-abortion eugenicist and a pro-contraception priest, who also supports euthanasia by starvation.

Professor Katarina Le Blanc, professor of stem cell research at the pro-abortion Swedish Karolinska Institute was appointed last month to PAL under Abp. Paglia. Le Blanc carries out her research, using stem cells derived from aborted babies even though the same academy, under the watch of Pope St. John Paul II, condemned such work in 2000.

In condemning the practice of experimenting on embryonic stem cells, PAL remarked, '[It] is not hard to see the seriousness and gravity of the ethical problem posed by ... the production and/or use of human embryos.'

The academy added that obtaining embryos from a third party didn't make the research moral as it 'entails a proximate material cooperation in the production and manipulation of human embryos.' The whole process involves the creation and ultimate destruction of multiple human embryos in the laboratory, something the Catholic Church finds abhorrent.

There is evidence Le Blanc's has been involved in stem cell research for years. In 2013, she co-authored an article on stem cell research that included cells harvested from living human embryos. In 2016, Le Blanc co-authored a study, involving research on cells obtained from the lungs of aborted children.

Le Blanc isn't the only one at PAL who believes experimenting on human embryos is ethical, which is contrary to Church teaching. Shinya Yamanaka, a recent appointee, is open to such research. Avraham Steinberg supports stem-cell research, involving the destruction of human embryos.

There are other appointees to PAL with serious moral issues such as Fr. Maurizio Chiodi, who's supposedly a leading Italian moral theologian. He not only rejects the Church's ban on the use of artificial birth control but also believes it isn't obligatory to provide food and water to patients. Contrary to Fr. Chiodi's position, PAL stated in 2000 that food and water must always be provided to patients.

Nigel Biggar, one of 45 new ordinary members chosen to serve a five-year term on the Vatican's pro-life academy, believes it's morally acceptable to abort a person before 18 weeks of gestation. During an interview in 2011, Nigel, an Anglican minister and Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology at the U.K.'s University of Oxford, stated, 'I would be inclined to draw the line for abortion at 18 weeks after conception, which is roughly about the earliest time when there is some evidence of brain activity and therefore of consciousness.'

In spite of the fact that many of these appointments to the supposedly pro-life institute are manifestly not pro-life, the head of the institute, Abp. Paglia, defends the appointments.

 

Comment

RANDY ENGEL, US Coalition for Life, writes : 'Is there no end to the anti-life scandals at Pontifical Academy for Life? Or is it Death?

Karolinska Institute is NOT a "Medical University." It's a Big Auschwitz for unborn children.

In the selection of its members, the Vatican must also consider the institution that the member represents. In the case of Katarina Le Blanc that institution is the Karolinska Institute - one of the world's foremost promoters of abortion and abortifacients. The Institute also is involved in non-therapeutic foetal experimentation and the provision of fatal tissues from aborted babies. Its eugenic mind-set is illustrated by its pioneer promotion of human embryo preimplantation diagnosis and in-vitro Fertilization.

Either remove Le Blanc and all the other anti-life characters which infest the "academy" or just shut the growing hell-hole down! Enough is enough!



[CMTV / U.S. Coalition for Life]
2194.1


CF News / Vatican watch

Pope Benedict XVI says Church is ‘on the verge of capsizing’

POPE BENEDICT XVI sent a sobering message at the funeral of Cardinal Joachim Meisner yesterday, saying he was moved at the dubia cardinal's ability to 'live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even when the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing''

STEVE SKOJEK comments for OnePeterFive that 'In what has been characterized as a surprise — particularly considering his usual silence on matters facing the Church — the message from the Pope Emeritus himself was read by his Personal Secretary, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, who also serves as Prefect of the Papal Household for Pope Francis.

When one reads the message — particularly that moment where the Pope Emeritus speaks of how Meisner “learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even if the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing,” one cannot help but see in it a possible reflection on his own choice to step away from the papacy, and the crisis that even now engulfs the Church in his absence. This message, of course, of the Lord not abandoning His Church, cannot be read in isolation from the somewhat cryptic message the Pope Emeritus gave the five new cardinals at the ordinary public consistory last month: “The Lord wins in the end.” It would appear this is a theme very much on the mind of the former pontiff in recent days.

Below we provide the full text of Pope Benedict’s message on the occasion of the funeral of Cardinal Joachim Meisner, graciously translated by 1P5’s Matthew Karmel.

Vatican City 11. 7. 2017

At this hour, as the faithful of the church of Cologne and far beyond bid Cardinal Joachim Meisner farewell, my heart and my thoughts are with you, and I am pleased to fulfill Cardinal Woelki’s request to address a word of remembrance to you.

As I learned last Wednesday via telephone of the death of Cardinal Meisner, I initially couldn’t believe it. We had spoken on the telephone to one another just the day before. Gratefulness for finally being able to begin his vacation after having participated in the beatification ceremony of Bishop Teofilius Matulionis in Vilnius on the previous Sunday (25th June) was audible in his voice. Love for the churches in the neighboring countries to the East, which suffered under Communist persecution, as well as an appreciation for their holding fast amidst the suffering of those times made a lifelong impression upon him. And, thus, it is no coincidence that the last visitation of his life was paid in respect to a Confessor of the Faith from those lands.

What particularly impressed me from my last conversations with the now passed Cardinal was the relaxed cheerfulness, the inner joy and the confidence at which he had arrived. We know that this passionate shepherd and pastor found it difficult to leave his post, especially at a time  in which the Church stands in particularly pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship of the spirit of the age and who live and think the faith with determination. However, what moved me all the more was that, in this last period of his life, he learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even if the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.

Of late, two things caused him to become ever more joyful and confident:

For one, he repeatedly related to me how it filled him with profound delight to see how young people, especially young men, experienced the grace of forgiveness in the Sacrament of Confession – the gift of having truly found that life which only God can give them.

The other thing which always touched him anew and put him in a joyful mood was the quiet spread of Eucharistic Adoration. At World Youth Day in Cologne, this was a central concern of his: that there be Adoration – a silence in which only the Lord speaks to the heart. Some experts in pastoral work and liturgy were of the opinion that such silence in contemplation of the Lord could not be achieved with such a large number of people. A few even considered Eucharistic Adoration as such to be obsolete, as the Lord desires to be received in the Eucharistic Bread, and not examined. That, however, one cannot eat this Bread like some common aliment, and that to “receive” the Lord in the Eucharistic Sacrament makes demands upon every dimension  of our existence – that to receive must be to adore – has since become once again very clear. Thus, the interlude of the Eucharistic Adoration at the Cologne World Youth Day became an interior  event  which  remained,  not only for the Cardinal, unforgettable. This moment remained ever present, like a great light, within him.

When, on his last morning, Cardinal Meisner didn’t appear to Mass, he was found dead in his room. His breviary had slipped from his hands: he died praying, looking to the Lord, speaking with the Lord. The manner of death which was granted to him shows once again how he lived: looking to the Lord and speaking with the Lord. Therefore, we may with confidence recommend his soul to the benevolence of God. Lord, we thank Thee for the witness of Thy servant Joachim. May he be an intercessor for the church of Cologne and for the whole world! Requiescat in pace!

(Signed Benedict XVI)

 

 

[LSN/ 1P5] 2194.1e


CF News / Vatican watch

Vatican archbishop: I ‘don’t…need to defend’ Christian values, ‘they defend themselves’

PETE BAKLINSKI reports for LifeSiteNews : 'A high ranking Vatican archbishop who heads a pro-life Academy as well as a theological institute for marriage and family said that Christian values do not need to be defended because “they defend themselves.'

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia dismissed concerns that Pope Francis’ controversial reforms of the Pontifical Academy for Life and the Pope John Paul II Institute for Marriage and the Family, which the Archbishop heads, signify any reluctance to fight for Christian values. 

“My view is the exact opposite: I am so certain of the power of Christian values that I don’t feel a need to defend them, they defend themselves,' he said in an interview with Alfa y Omega published in English today.

Maria Madise of Voice of the Family called it “outrageous' to hear a high-ranking Vatican prelate with weighty responsibilities downplaying the need to defend Christian values. 

“Archbishop Paglia’s view that Christian values do not need defending in today’s society, that they defend themselves, would be a shocking statement from any Catholic. But coming from the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life in the face of an unprecedented degradation of human life, it is outrageous,' she told LifeSiteNews.

Paglia said those who question his commitment to defending life are “losing [their] minds,' and suggested that they themselves do not defend life becasue they are not "opposed to the death penatly" or speak of "gun-related homicides in the United States."

The Archbishop said that the challenge of preaching in the world of today’s complexities is exasperated by those who “compete with each other to see who is the most faithful to [Catholic] tradition.'

Paglia suggested in the interview that the Church’s teaching on life, marriage, and family prior to Pope Francis was inadequate in dealing with “human life in all its complexity.' He said that the Academy for Life has to “broaden its horizon' and undergo a “reform,' what he called a “widening of perspectives.'

“The Academy, which was focused on bioethical issues, has to broaden its horizons. It has to understand both life itself and the stages of life. The reform means taking the measure of human life in all its complexity, in all its aspects and conditions, in the context of the relationship between man and creation….All this requires a redesign, an [sic] widening of perspectives, more areas of study, a renewal,' he said. 

Paglia is the archbishop who was featured in a homoerotic painting he commissioned in his Cathedral and who oversaw the release of a controversial sex-ed program last year during World Youth Day in Poland. 

He called the reform currently being implemented by the order of Pope Francis in the institutions he oversees a “new strategy' and an “ambitious project.'

When asked if the “new strategy' involves the Church retreating from the fight for the right to life of the preborn, Paglia responded in the negative. But, he then immediately criticized those who hold “strongly held positions on this question,' saying that they wage what he called “ideological battles.'

Judie Brown, President of American Life League, called Paglia’s “new strategy' an “insult to Christ and His bride, the Church.'

“Today's culture is only lacking one thing: and that is acceptance of the truth that God and His laws are the beacon of light that saves souls,' she told LifeSiteNews. “Catholic teaching is not now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, deficient,' she added.

Brown said that by the Archbishop’s suggestion that the Church’s teaching on life, marriage, and family are somehow now deficient in answering the complexities of today amounts to a betrayal of the Church and the God he claims to serve. 

“What Paglia is saying betrays not only Church teaching but is exemplary of the mental picture I have of him spitting in the face of Christ himself. His words are an insult to truth,' she said. 
Michael Hichborn, president of the U.S.-based Lepanto Institute criticized Paglia’s “new strategy.' 
“The saints throughout history never plotted, planned, or strategized their way to making converts, but simply preached the truth in all places,' he told LifeSiteNews. 

“If Archbishop Paglia wants to try something novel, perhaps he should suggest that priests preach from all pulpits throughout the world in no uncertain terms that abortion, contraception, and sodomy are all condemned, and those engaged in these practices are in danger of Hell,' he added. 
Hichborn said that the “fastest way to distort a simple Truth is to write all over it.'
“The Church has been consistently clear in Her teachings on human life, sexuality and the family, and anyone saying otherwise either hasn't paid attention or has an agenda to the contrary,' he said. 

For his part however, Archbishop Paglia says, “Life in its fullest sense needs an approach that is more articulated than simply repeating a principle that is described as non-negotiable,' he said. 
But the Catholic Church has always taught that there are certain non-negotiables that faithful Catholics may never compromise. 

In a 2011 address on how Catholics should vote, Pope Benedict called the issues of life, family, and parental rights in education “not negotiable.'

“As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable,' he said. Benedict specifically mentioned that “protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death' is the first non-negotiable on the list. 

Paglia says however that the Church needs a “greater depth in our defense of life, greater effectiveness, and as many allies as possible.'

“That means a new strategy, one that is much more complex and broad,' he said. 

Voice of the Family’s Maria Madise said that Paglia’s responses in the interview give the impression that the Archbishop has no grasp of the Church’s teaching and does not understand the purposes of the institutions he heads. 

“Shifting the focus to the development of broad and complex strategies rather than defending ‘non-negotiable principles,’ gives an impression that Paglia does not understand the Catholic Faith nor the purpose of the Academy he heads,' she said. 

“At the time when the shepherds refuse to “preach the word: be instant (prepared) in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine,' inevitably more responsibility falls on lay people. We have the means of prayer and sacrifice, in particular, the Holy Rosary. We should work and pray ceaselessly for the authentic restoration of leadership in the Church that will defend unborn children and their families,' she said.

 

 

[LSN] 2194.1c

 


CF News / Vatican watch

Cardinal Schönborn: “All the [dubia] questions can be answered ‘yes'”

Card. SchonbornSTEVE SKOJEC reports for OnePeterFive : On Thursday, July 13, Cardinal Cristoph Schönborn — the pope’s chosen interpreter and advocate for his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia — addressed an audience at the “Let’s Talk Family: Let’s Be Family” conference in Ireland in anticipation of the World Meeting of Families in Dublin next year. According to Greg Daly of The Irish Catholic, Schönborn opened his talk by assuring those in attendance that both the exhortation and the pope responsible for it are Catholic:

Later, Daly tweeted that Schönborn said that all of the dubia questions can be answered with a “yes”:

If you don’t recall what the answers are supposed to be, let me remind you why this is such a problematic statement:

'The Roman Pontiff, whom St. Catherine of Siena famously referred to as “Our Sweet Christ on Earth”, also has the power to calm the raging storm now buffeting the Barque of Peter. It is not the battering of wind and waves that endangers the vessel, but confusion, error, and doubt — and worse, a rapidly metastasizing schism, spreading like a deadly poison throughout the Mystical Body of Christ.

'When it comes to the self-made crisis in the Church — the mounting battle over marriage, divorce, remarriage, sacraments for those in objective grave sin, and the question of the existence of objective sin itself — our Holy Father, like the very Christ he is duty-bound to serve, has at his disposal five simple words that would pacify the tempest:

“No. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.”


'These are, of course, the only answers that a Catholic could ever give to the dubia. There are no other options. No exceptions. No pastoral discernment. No need for verbosity or for yet more nuance.

'Distilled down to a crudely simple form, the dubia are essentially as follows:

1. Can the divorced and remarried who are still engaged in a sexual relationship receive absolution and communion without a change of life?  

2. Do absolute moral norms still exist?

3. Does objective grave sin still exist?  

4. Is the teaching still valid that however much circumstances may lessen an individual’s guilt, those circumstances cannot change an intrinsically evil act into a subjectively good act?

5. Does the Church’s teaching that an appeal to conscience cannot overcome absolute moral norms still hold true?


;These five questions are so simple, their answers so obvious, they require no more than 30 seconds of Francis’ time. (If it would make things easier, the five words could be spoken from the pressurized cabin of an airplane, an environment that seems to stimulate papal loquacity.')

So let’s examine that one “no” in a list of “yeses”. The full question as presented by the dubia cardinals was as follows:

'It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Amoris Laetitia (300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the sacrament of penance and thus to admit to holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person more uxorio without fulfilling the conditions provided for by Familiaris Consortio, 84, and subsequently reaffirmed by Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 34, and Sacramentum Caritatis, 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in Note 351 (305) of the exhortation Amoris Laetitia be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live more uxorio?

My distilled and simplified summary is, again:

“Can the divorced and remarried who are still engaged in a sexual relationship receive absolution and communion without a change of life?”

And Cardinal Schönborn — chosen for the job of explaining the exhortation by the pope himself — says that the answer to this question is yes.

The Austrian cardinal also had this to say about same-sex couples:

“Favouring the family does not mean disfavouring other forms of life – even those living in a same-sex partnership need their families”.

This is not the first time he has spoken favorably of unions that involve one of the sins that “cries out to heaven for vengeance”. In 2015, the Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna made shocking statements about such unions:

'On the issue of how the Church talks about gays and lesbians, Schönborn also has been a champion of more inclusive approach.

“The Church should not look in the bedroom first, but in the dining room!” he said in a September 2015 interview with Civiltà Cattolica, a Jesuit-run journal in Rome.

“We can and we must respect the decision to form a union with a person of the same sex, [and] to seek means under civil law to protect their living together with laws to ensure such protection,” he said in that interview.

'Schönborn spoke of a gay friend who, after multiple temporary relationships, now has a stable partner.

“They share a life, they share their joys and sufferings, they help one another,” he said. “It must be recognized that this person took an important step for his own good and the good of others, even though it certainly is not a situation the Church can consider ‘regular’.”

'During the 2014 synod, Schönborn also argued that the Church can find positive moral elements in other non-traditional relationships, such as cohabitation outside marriage.

In 2016, Schönborn’s Vienna Cathedral bulletin positively depicted a homosexual couple with an adopted son. Schönborn has also stated publicly that if his divorced mother had remarried, he and his siblings would have understood it.

During his talk Schönbornn also took aim at the dubia Cardinals:

'Asked about the reception of Amoris Laetitia within the Church and the “dubia” – a series of questions raised by four cardinals to clear up confusion – Cardinal Schönborn said the “process of reception is a long process” and needs negotiation and discussion.

'But he also criticised the cardinals over the manner in which they raised their concerns. “That cardinals, who should be the closest collaborators of the pope, try to force him and put pressure on him to give a public response to their publicised letter is absolutely inconvenient behaviour,” he said.

'He told journalists: “I fear those who have rapid, clear answers in politics and economy and also in religion. Rigorists and laxists have clear and rapid answers, but they fail to look at life. The rigorist avoids the effort of discernment, of looking closely at reality. The laxist lets everything possible go, and there is no discernment. They are the same but opposite.”

“St Gregory the Great said the art of the pastoral accompaniment is the art of discernment. It is an art and it needs training,” he added.

No reference was given as to where in his body of teachings Catholics could find St. Gregory’s admonition on “the art of pastoral accompaniment”.

 

[LSN] 2194.1d

 

 


CF News / Vatican watch

New Pontifical Academy of Sciences president promotes idea of children as 'change agents'

J vn  BraunDR MAIKE HICKSON reports for OnePeterFive :' As Vatican Radio reported on 22 June 2017, Pope Francis has named Professor Joachim von Braun as the new President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS). Professor von Braun is Ordinary Professor of Economics and Technological Change, as well as Director of the Center for Decvelopment Research at the University of Bonn, Germany. According to Vatican Radio, von Braun will “seek solutions to inequality and the destruction of the environment.' He also said that the “80 members composing the Academy are from different countries and religious backgrounds and many hold Nobel Prizes for their contribution to science.' According to a 8 July interview with Katholisch.de, the German bishops’ website, von Braun said that not all of the PAS members are Catholics or even believers, but that they have been chosen according to their scientific expertise. Professor von Braun, who is a Protestant, had first been appointed as a member of the PAS in 2012, by Pope Benedict XVI.

In November 2015, Professor von Braun participated in a Vatican Workshop as organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences under the leadership of Archbishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo which was dedicated to “Children and Sustainable Development: A Challenge for Education.' (Among the speakers were leading population control advocate Jeffrey Sachs and Courtney Sale Ross, the founder of a New Age school in the U.S., both of whom are continuing their collaboration with the PAS.)  Alarmed by the fact that von Braun had then spoken about “children as change agents,' I myself had undertaken some research into this matter and published my findings in April 2016 in Christian Order, a British traditional-Catholic journal. I then wrote, as follows:

' Among the speakers of this Vatican Workshop, there was, again, Jeffrey Sachs, close collaborator of George Soros, who is the third largest donor to Planned Parenthood. Soros is known for his success in making money in times of currency crises, as happened in England and in Russia. In his own talk at the Vatican Conference, Jeffrey Sachs spoke on “Education and Sustainable Development Goals.'

Also present was Professor Joachim von Braun. For many years he headed the International Food Policy Research Institute; a body funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, which in turn is known for its financial and ideological ties with Planned Parenthood since the founding of that pro-abortion organization. At the Vatican Workshop he [von Braun] spoke on the topic: “Children as Agents of Change for Sustainable Development.' Von Braun told me in an e-mail that he will only be able to finish his written manuscript in February (2016); the exact content of his talk is therefore still unknown at the time of writing [2016]. Thus, I asked him whether he could sum up the thesis of his talk and describe how he sees children as “change agents.' He responded:

“Looking at your further statements below, you seem to completely misunderstand the term ‘agency’ as used in scientific literature. Children should know about nature, technologies, rights, and sustainable development. This does not just relate to environment, but more broadly to health and wellbeing. Children need to be helped/educated to act responsibly in their families, and communities.'

I also wanted to know how he would respond to the possible reproach that he makes use of the children for his own intentions, and thereby indirectly undermines the parents and their authority by teaching children that they have to teach their own parents. The question from me also mentioned the analogy of the Hitler Youth Movement, which used the children for its own wider purposes, in order to re-educate the parents, to control them, and even to spy upon them. Von Braun answered:

“This strange thought of yours has never been raised to me before [sic]. It includes an insinuation about the intentions of my research work, to which I object. Children need to be respected. Of course they must be protected from oppressors.'
I pointed out that these cumulative concerns also arise due to the fact that it was the Catholic Church which organized this PAS Workshop, and that the Church teaches in the Fourth Commandment that children are to obey their parents, not the other way around. Additionally, the Catholic Church never bypassed the authority of the parents in order to approach children for the spreading of the Faith. Rather, the Church first sought the conversion of the adults themselves. Von Braun corrected me with regard to the Fourth Commandment, writing:

“May I remind you what the 4th commandment states: “Honor thy father and thy mother.' Honor is not the same as “gehorchen' [obey], but it means to respect. Christianity very importantly emphasizes protecting, respecting, and recognizing children’s spiritual role (Matthew 19:13-14, 18:2-5). Important is also Mark 9:35-37, where Jesus equates [sic] the child with his twelve followers.'

As can be seen from my e-mail exchange with Professor von Braun, he has obviously a limited understanding of the Fourth Commandment and seems to put children on the same level as adults, in this case the twelve Apostles. This same attitude can now be found in his published talk from that November 2015 Vatican workshop.

The general line of argument is that children, once informed about how to preserve nature, can help their parents and other adults to grow in that understanding, too, so that humanity may enhance the protection of the environment. While this approach in itself is highly problematic – for the very aspect of making children the purposive teachers of adults – a deeper look at the goals of these “Sustainable Development' discussions leads to the intentional change of social and cultural attitudes as well, as can be seen in the workshop’s explicit support of the 2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which promote the idea of contraception (or birth prevention) and “birth control.' (See here a promotion of this same idea on the website of International Planned Parenthood Federation.) The 2015 workshop explicitly spoke about our adequately recognizing that issues such as “violence, marginalization and exclusion should be considered as sustainability failures.' Expressions such as marginalization and exclusion often are applied to those groups of people who do not live, nor desire to live, according to the traditional moral law. (See here and here websites that promote this approach, commenting on the SDGs: “What matters now is how this text gets interpreted and applied going forward.' It can be shown, thus, that the SDGs imply the promotion of a whole interconnected set of social and cultural changes.

Let us consider now von Braun’s own words at that 2015 workshop. He says:

' Never before has the world had so many children. Children need protection, must have acce
ss to quality education to reach their potential, but children can also play critical roles as agents of change in their families and communities. […] Can children play a direct role even throughout childhood to address sustainability in its four dimensions, that is, socially, environmentally, economically and culturally? […] Children’s potential of making use of their right to participation can be constrained by several factors such as exclusion and inequality. […] This could mean that children become educators not only for their peers but also for adults

In this context, von Braun makes explicit reference to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which themselves point to children as “change agents':

' For the first time in the history of UN development goals, the so-called Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) make explicit reference to children’s agency:

“What we are announcing today – an Agenda for global action for the next fifteen years—is a charter for people and planet in the twenty-first century. Children and young women and men are critical agents of change and will find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite [sic] capacities for activism into the creation of a better world' (United Nations 2015, § 51).

It is here – in this context of expressions which resound Socialist ideas – that von Braun himself explicitly uses the highly loaded ideological words “gender inequality' and “children’s rights':

' The actual SDGs and their respective targets appropriately emphasize child health, education, gender inequality, and children’s rights—they do not comprise a concrete goal or target related to children’s agency. [emphasis added]
Von Braun makes again – as in his earlier personal e-mail to me – the claim that Jesus Christ Himself used children as “change agents':

'Different world religions and schools of ethics differ in their perspective on the role of children. Christianity emphasizes protecting, respecting, and recognizing children’s spiritual role (Matthew 19:13–14, 18:2–5). A quite remarkable statement can be found in Mark 9:35–37, where Jesus equates [sic] a child with his twelve followers, that is, with his agents of change. . [emphasis added]

Von Braun seems to propose that children’s malnourishment should be addressed especially so that they could better play their role as “change agents':

'There are, however, some basic preconditions that have to be met so that children’s agency can unfold (see bottom right of Fig. 2.2). Given that globally one in three children under the age of five are [sic – is] malnourished, improving children’s consumption of micronutrients, preventing and treating infections, and fighting stunting in general are basic preconditions for children’s agency that must be addressed.

In order to help with Sustainable Development, von Braun indicates that a re-definition of childhood might be needed:

'Throughout history the perception and role of children have been subject to change. It may, again, be time to redefine [sic] childhood and the role of children both in today’s society and for future generations. This does not necessarily mean breaking with long-standing religious and philosophical traditions of the meaning of “childhood'. However, with new and emerging technology and inter-connectedness among children, they themselves may be about to redefine their childhoods'.

In light of all these troubling statements and developments surrounding this Vatican Workshop, as well as von Braun’s own statements, I reached out, in 2016, to Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of St. Mary of Astana, Kazakhstan; and I requested from him a general comment about my findings, which he promptly and kindly provided:

'I have read your report on the seminar of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences of last November 2015. One can realize here with shock the extent to which the declared enemies of the Catholic Faith are given scope for their activities at such an event in the Vatican. One has to protest against it. With the help of these speakers whose publications clearly oppose the Faith, the Faith itself and the natural moral law are being mocked in a subtle way. God does not allow His Being to be mocked. At some point, He will intervene and one has to have compassion with those persons who are responsible for such a conference because they will one day answer for this before the Judgment Seat of God. People who at such a conference sell the Holy Faith so cheaply — also when they are priests or bishops — may not forget this warning of Holy Scripture: “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the Living God' (Hebrews 10:31). We have to wish it for those so-called Catholics, priests and bishops, and say: “Convert from your hearts to Our Lord, while  there is time left!'

 

[1P5] 2194.1b

 

 


CF News / Vatican watch

Pope Francis is promoting a 'hidden schism' with 'obstinate persistence,' warns Pope Benedict collaborator

AN ATHEIST PHILOSOPHER friend of Benedict XVI has strongly criticized Pope Francis, accusing the Holy Father of not preaching the Gospel but politics, fomenting schism, and issuing secularist statements aimed at destroying the West.

In a fiery interview published July 10 in Mattino di Napoli, Marcello Pera, who co-wrote the famous 2005 book Without Roots with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, said he cannot understand the Pope who, he said, goes beyond the bounds of "rational comprehension."

A philosophy professor, member of Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Italia party, and a former president of the Italian Senate, Pera said he believes the reason why the Pope calls for unlimited immigration is because he "hates the West" and is seeking to do all he can "to destroy it."

He added that he does not like the Pope's magisterium, saying it is "not the Gospel, only politics," and that Francis is "little or not at all interested in Christianity as doctrine, in its theological aspect."

"His statements appear to be based on Scripture," he said, but "actually they are strongly secularist."

Immigration has become a highly sensitive topic in Italy in recent months as thousands of refugees arrive every month, mostly from north Africa, placing considerable strain on local communities and services.

Pera's comments also come after another conversation between the Pope and the atheist Eugenio Scalfari in which Francis allegedly told Scalfari to be "very concerned" about the summit last week of the G20 group of industrialized nations because they have "very dangerous alliances" and a "distorted view of the world."

According to Scalfari, who is over 90 and doesn't record his interviews, the Pope also said the G20 worried him because of the issue of immigration, saying the problem is "unfortunately rising in today's world, that of the poor, the weak, the excluded, of which migrants are part." Some of the G20 nations have "few local poor but fear the invasion of immigrants," he said.

In the July 10 interview Pera, went on to say that he believes the Pope isn't concerned about the salvation of souls but only social well-being and welfare, and argued that if Europe were to follow the Pope's position, it would be committing suicide. "The Pope reflects all the prejudices of South America against North America, against the free market, liberty, and capitalism," Pera added.

On the issue of migration, the philosopher politician believes the Pope's approach is not from the Gospel, and his words are designed to win easy applause from the United Nations. His political vision on migrants and society, he continued, has "nothing to do with the Western tradition of political freedom and its Christian roots."

Pera's book with Cardinal Ratzinger, whose full title was Without Roots -The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam, warned of the dangers facing civilization if the West abandoned its moral and cultural history. The joint authors called on Western leaders to embrace a spiritual rather than political renewal, accepting the moral values of its Judeo-Christian heritage which would enable society to make sense of today's economic, political and social challenges.

In this week's interview, Pera said he believes the open doors approach to migrants that the Pope is advancing will lead to a "bad reaction" with no desirable solution. He said the Pope's positions underline that he is not in "perfect harmony" with "conservative Catholics and the rest of the Church."

He added that Francis is not only causing problems in politics over migration, he is also fueling a kind of schism within the Church.

Pera, whose 2008 book Why We Must Call Ourselves Christians contained a preface by Pope Benedict XVI, maintained that an "apparent hidden schism exists in the Catholic world" that the Pope is "pursuing with obstinate persistence and determination."

But he said this "new course" being pursued by Francis does not convince him at all, and argued that it is "exploding the Second Vatican Council in all its revolutionary radicality."

Pera further believes these ideas, which he thinks are devastating for the Church, have their origins in the Council. "That aggiornamento (updating) of Christianity secularized the Church, triggering a very profound change, even if it risked bringing a schism that was kept at bay in the years that followed," he said.

He credited Benedict XVI and Pope St. John Paul II for saving the Church, "resisting and trying to mediate the new with tradition." They did this in a "lofty way," he said, but now Francis has brought all back into discussion: "human rights, all without exception, have become the ideal point of reference and compass for the Church" while the "rights of God and of tradition have almost gone."

In an interview with the National Catholic Register in 2006, Pera warned against multiculturalism, saying it leads to the exact "opposite of integration, because it gives rise to separate communities, that are then reduced to a ghetto-like status and enter into conflict amongst themselves."

He also said then that his diagnosis for Europe's future was "not a happy one."

"If Europe goes forward with its relativist culture, with the refusal of its own tradition, with its low nativity rates, with indiscriminate immigration, then Europe is going to end up Islamized," he warned.

Referring to Benedict XVI's comments in Without Roots, he said "the impression today is that Europe resembles the Roman Empire at its fall."

[LSN] 2194.1a


CF News / Vatican watch

Top Vatican official: Homosexuality in Vatican has 'never been worse' than under Pope Francis

PETE BAKLINSKI reports for LifeSiteNews : 'Not only are gay-orgies happening in the Vatican, but the extent of homosexual activity in the Vatican under Pope Francis' watch has 'never been worse,' a reliable senior member of the Curia told National Catholic Register's Ed Pentin.

Pentin wrote earlier this week that this Vatican Curia member confirmed to him that 'multiple sources' within the Vatican, including another senior curial figure, say that the report of a drug-fueled gay orgy right next to St. Peter's is true.

'He said the extent of homosexual practice in the Vatican has 'never been worse,' despite efforts begun by Benedict XVI to root out sexual deviancy from the curia after the Vatileaks scandal of 2012,'Pentin wrote in his report.

News recently broke of a high-ranking monsignor, Luigi Capozzi, who was allegedly arrested some two months ago in the act of hosting a cocaine-fueled homosexual orgy in an apartment of the Holy Office, the same building in which the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith operates.

At the same time of the 2012 Vatileaks scandal - where leaked confidential Vatican correspondence allegedly revealed power struggles and intrigue at the highest levels of the Catholic church - a Polish priest released a paper in which he highlighted his discovery of what he called a 'huge homosexual underground in the Church.'

Fr. Dariusz Oko said he first began to do research about external threats to Christianity, but then gradually discovered that the 'enemy is not only outside the Church, but within it, as well.'

Oko said he uncovered homosexual cliques of clergy, even at the highest levels, that are formed by fear of exposure, lust for power, and money.

'They know well, however, that they may be exposed and embarrassed, so they shield one another by offering mutual support. They build informal relationships reminding [one] of a 'clique' or even 'mafia,' [and] aim at holding particularly those positions which offer power and money,' he wrote.

'When they achieve a decision-making position, they try to promote and advance mostly those whose nature is similar to theirs, or at least who are known to be too weak to oppose them. This way, leading positions in the Church may be held by people suffering from deep internal wounds,' he added.

Oko said that once homosexual clergy achieve a 'dominating position' in the Church's hierarchy, they become a 'backroom elite' with 'tremendous power in deciding about important nominations and the whole life of the Church.'

Among the rumors put forward at the time of Pope Benedict's decision to resign in 2013 was the revelation of the existence of an entrenched 'gay network' that orchestrated 'sexual encounters' and shady financial machinations within the Vatican. The Pope reportedly decided to resign the day he received a 300-page dossier compiled by three cardinals detailing the workings and sexual activities of a network of homosexual curial officials.

During his first Mass as Pope in April 2005, Benedict asked Catholics to pray for him that he would not flee from his office in the face of betrayal and persecution.

'Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves,' he said at that time.

Benedict's choice of animal was also used by the Lord in the Gospel of Matthew for describing how Christians, 'as sheep in the midst of wolves,' will be persecuted, hated, and even betrayed (Matt. 10:16-22).

Christine de Marcellus Vollmer, a founding member of the Pontifical Academy for Life and president of the Latin American Alliance for the Family, told LifeSiteNews that such 'disgusting behavior going on in the Vatican' indicates that the Barque of Peter with Pope Francis as steersman has gone off course.

'Evidently Paul VI was right, noticing that 'the smoke of Satan has infiltrated the Church.' This was obvious in 1968 when so many prelates rejected Humanae Vitae, whose logic was so evidently correct about what would happen if contraception were to be accepted,' she said.

'St. John Paul II also knew it would take a modern-day Hercules to clean out the 'stables,' but he knew his charism was to teach, and to inspire a new generation with a fresh and comprehensible way to see the human person and the beauty of virtue. Cardinal Ratzinger was aware of much of the vice in the Vatican and, as Benedict XVI, undertook a proper investigation, the product of which was the 300-page report,' she added.

Benedict stated in his February 2013 announcement to step down as pope that his 'strength' was 'no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry,' adding that 'in order to govern the barque of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary.'

Vollmer said that with Benedict's resignation, high-ranking Church leaders who were bent on 'fostering heretical sexual behavior and its acceptance by the Church - otherwise known as the St. Gallen 'Mafia,' a group of extremely powerful old Cardinals of the 1970's generation of liberals - saw that their outworn and immoral sexual relativism was soon to be exposed as false and the cause of so much social mayhem.'

'They were also likely afraid that their own depraved private lives and questionable finances were soon to be investigated. And so they turned the tables, managing the election of one of their own, who is fast ridding the Vatican of any who represent the ways and teaching of the popes who came before and [faithfully conveyed] Church moral Doctrine,' she said.

During Pope Francis' watch, some of the Catholic Church's most orthodox prelates have in one way or another been conveniently swept out of the way. Among these include Cardinal Raymond Burke, Cardinal Gerhard Muller, and now Cardinal George Pell.

Vollmer said that the time has come for 'young Prelates, young priests, and young laity' formed in the true teachings of the Church as faithfully expressed by previous popes to 'take steps to get the Barque of Peter back on its proper course.'

[LSN] 2194.2


CF News / Vatican watch

More on the sacking of Cardinal Müller: The staged demolition of the CDF

CHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA writes for Fatima Perspectives : 'In addition to everything else that is going on in the midst of the epoch of the Bergoglian Tumult, we are witnessing the unfolding of a clearly planned process by which the ground around Pope Bergoglio is systematically being cleared of all serious opposition in the curial dicasteries to the 'irreversible' reforms he intends to impose upon the Church in the short time he has left on this earth. The net result would be that the Vatican apparatus is effectively reduced to Pope Bergoglio and a tight circle of progressivist henchmen of his choosing, even if relative conservatives remain as powerless figureheads here and there.

The demolition of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) is a prime example of this modus operandi. As noted in my last column on this subject, the 'normalists' would have us believe that the appointment of the CDF's secretary Archbishop Luis Ladaria, a reputed conservative, as the replacement for the brutally sacked Cardinal Müller means that all is well for the defense of Catholic doctrine.

The renowned Vaticanist Sandro Magister, who knows well the ways of Rome under Modernist occupation, will have none of this obdurate naiveté. He warns us to look at Pope Bergoglio's appointment to the position of the CDF's undersecretary: one Monsignor Giacomo Morandi, 'called there from outside,' who was 'vicar general of the diocese of Modena'. And who advised Pope Bergoglio to bring Morandi aboard? None other than Cardinal Beniamino Stella, 'a former nuncio to Cuba and Colombia and now the prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, perhaps the closest to Bergoglio among all the cardinals of the curia.'

As Magister notes: 'It was on Morandi's advice that the pope summarily fired, a few months ago, three high-ranking officials of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith greatly esteemed by Müller' - a purge for which Pope Bergoglio refused to give Müller any reason other than his naked will as Pope, airily dismissing him from the audience he had granted. It is transparently obvious that the three were summarily removed on suspicion of orthodoxy.

Moreover, in another column on the demolition of the CDF (citing a report by Marco Tosatti), Magister notes that one of the three victims of the purge, the Dutch priest Christophe J. Kruijen, had been personally reprimanded on the telephone by Pope Bergoglio 'for having [privately] expressed criticisms against him, which had come to the pope's ear through an informant,' even though there is not a trace of criticism in any of Kruijen's writings or public statements.

So, writes Magister, 'all it took was a tattle lifted from one of his private conversations to bring [Kruijen] into disgrace with the pope, who brought the whip down. This too is part of the reform of the curia, by the orders and in the style of Jorge Mario Bergoglio.'

As things now stand, the situation at the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, headed by Cardinal Sarah, has been replicated at the CDF: a conservative Prefect is surrounded by Bergoglian collaborators and reduced to a head without arms to execute any decision - that is, any defense of orthodoxy - that Pope Bergoglio might not like.

Thus, in the Bergoglian curia there are now no effective defenders of doctrinal or liturgical integrity in the Church universal but only the adepts of Bergoglianism. The Bergoglian debacle is reaching its climax. Only God knows what the denouement will bring to the stage of history.

[FP] 2194.3


CF News / Vatican watch

 

An A-Z list of concerns with Pope Francis

JOHN-HENRY WESTEN writes for LifeSiteNews : 'The confusion caused by Pope Francis in the Catholic Church is out of control. There have been so many incidents over the last four years that the specifics, despite their grave damage, are often forgotten. In an effort to encourage prayer for an end to the confusion and disorientation in the Church, LifeSite presents the following A-Z list of concerns with Pope Francis.

Amoris Laetitia

The document so long awaited to bring needed clarification from the Pope served rather to increase confusion the world over as the Pope himself approved interpretations (Malta, Germany) which allowed for Holy Communion to be given to divorced and remarried Catholics.

Burke demotion

Cardinal Raymond Burke was removed from one of the highest offices in the Church, as the supreme justice of the Church's highest court. Instead he, one of the most faithful Cardinals, was given a largely ceremonial position with the Order of Malta and even there his role was stripped.

Cohabitation

Pope Francis said'cohabitations' with fidelity are 'real marriage' and 'have the grace of real marriage.' On another occasion when the Pope made similar remarks, papal confidante Fr. Antonio Spadaro tweeted a photo of the Pope greeting a couple who 'prefer to live together without getting married.'

Danneels

Cardinal GodfriedDanneels, the emeritus archbishop of Brussels, was a personal appointment by Pope Francis to the Synods of Bishops on the family. In addition to wearing rainbow liturgical vestments and being caught on tape concealing sexual abuse, Danneels said in 2013 of the passage of gay 'marriage': 'I think it's a positive development that states are free to open up civil marriage for gays if they want.'

Emma Bonino

Pope calls Italy's foremost abortion promoter one of nation's 'forgotten greats'. In an interview with Corriere Della Sera Pope Francis praised Italy's unrepentant leading abortionist and proponent of abortion, Emma Bonino, as one of the nation's 'forgotten greats,' comparing her to great historical figures such as Konrad Adenauer and Robert Schuman.

First synod interim doc

The scandalous mid-term relatio of the first Synod on the Family was seen and approved-for-release by the Pope according to Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, secretary general of the Synod of Bishops. 'The documents were all seen and approved by the Pope,' Baldisseri said. In a section titled 'Welcoming homosexual persons', the document states: 'Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community.' It then asks: 'Are our communities capable of providing [them a welcoming home], accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?'

Gender-confused couple at Vatican

On October 2, 2016, Pope Francis referred to a woman who underwent a sex-change operation as a 'man.' He referred to her as having 'married' another woman and admitted to inviting and receiving them to the Vatican in 2015, describing the couple as 'happy'. Clarifying his use of pronouns, the pope said, 'He that was her but is he.'

Holy See population control

Since shortly after the election of Pope Francis there has been a steady stream of population control pushers speaking at the Vatican. These include: Paul Ehrlich, the father of the population control movement; John Bongrts, vice president of the pro-abortion Population Council; pro-abortion U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon; and population controllers Jeffrey Sachs and John Schellnhuber. The head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Sciences, Bishop Marcelo Sorondo, who ran most of those conferences, is himself a population control advocate saying on camera at one such Vatican conference that limiting births was an obligation of the Church.

Irresponsible to have 8 children?

On January 19, 2015 while speaking of 'responsible' parenthood, the pope cautioned against Catholics being 'like rabbits.' The pope spoke about a woman he knows who he said was pregnant with her eighth child after having the first seven by C-section. He said he had 'rebuked' her, saying, 'But do you want to leave seven orphans? That is to tempt God!That is an irresponsibility. [That woman might say] 'no but I trust in God.' But God gives you methods to be responsible,' he said. 'Some think that, excuse me if I use that word, that in order to be good Catholics we have to be like rabbits.' He added, 'No. Responsible parenthood!'

Judge - Who am I to….

Despite the avalanche of evidence of harm to the Church from the Pope's first 'Who am I to judge' remark on his first plane interview in 2013, he repeated the line in June 2016 while misrepresenting the Catechism on homosexuality.

Kasper

A few days into his pontificate, Pope Francis praised one of Cardinal Kasper's books and then selected Kasper to deliver the controversial keynote address to launch the synods on the family. Kasper was selected as a personal appointee of the pope to the synods and regularly meets with Pope Francis. Kasper defended the vote of the Irish in favor of homosexual 'marriages', saying: 'A democratic state has the duty to respect the will of the people; and it seems clear that, if the majority of the people wants such homosexual unions, the state has a duty to recognize such rights.'

Luther, serious sin to convert

The Pope spoke to an audience before a statue of Luther in the Vatican just prior to his going to Sweden to help launch the 500th anniversary of Lutheranism. The Vatican issued a stamp featuring Luther and put out a document saying Catholics now recognize Martin Luther as a 'witness to the gospel'.

On another occassion he said it is a 'very grave sin' to try to convert Orthodox to Catholicism: 'There is a very grave sin against ecumenism: proselytism.'

Multiplication of loaves

During the Angelus of June 2, 2013, he spoke about Christ's miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes as taking place by 'sharing.This is the miracle: rather than a multiplication it is a sharing, inspired by faith and prayer,' he said. He was even more explicit about it in July 2015 in a homily preached in Christ the Redeemer Square in Bolivia. Pope Francis said, 'This is how the miracle takes place. It is not magic or sorcery. … Jesus managed to generate a current among his followers: they all went on sharing what was their own, turning it into a gift for the others; and that is how they all got to eat their fill. Incredibly, food was left over: they collected it in seven baskets.'

Name calling against faithful

Pope Francis has frequently castigated faithful adherents of the Catholic faith as 'obsessed,doctors of the law,neo-pelagian,self-absorbed,restorationist,fundamentalist,rigid,ideological,hypocritical,' and much more. In addressing faithful Cardinals at the Synod of the Family, in magazine interviews, book interviews, radio interviews, official church documents, and in homily after homily, he has used condemning language indicating they are 'idolaters and rebels who will never arrive at the fullness of the truth,'and 'heretics and not Catholics.'

Overhaul of Cardinal Sarah's dicastery

Cardinal Sarah, head of the Vatican's liturgical dicastery, called for the faithful to kneel for Holy Communion and priests to face ad orientem for Mass. Pope Francis reacted swiftly to counter the suggestion, having the Vatican press office issue a statement saying that there was no change and stressing the ordinary form is to be preferred. Shortly thereafter the Pope replaced most of Cardinal Sarah's collaborators in his dicastery with liberals.

Pontifical Academy for Life scandals

Archbishop Paglia | Depiction of Paglia in Cathedral mural clutching semi-nude man.

Pope Francis named controversial Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia to lead the Pontifical Academy for Life despite scandals such as the Vatican sex-ed program and the homoerotic mural he erected at his former cathedral. Thereafter all the members of the Academy were removed, the pro-life pledge discontinued, and a new list of members named that included anti-life advocates.

Queer selection of Cupich

In 2014 Pope Francis appointed Bishop Blase Cupich as Archbishop of Chicago despite his reputation for telling priests not to join 40 Days for Life. After he demonstrated his dissent to Catholic teaching on homosexuality, saying homosexual couples should be given Holy Communion, Cupich was nevertheless named a Cardinal.

Refusal to answer dubia

After massive confusion around the globe over Communion for adulterers, four prominent Cardinals sent Pope Francis a letter on September 19, 2016 asking for clarification to five key questions. Two months later with no answer received, they went public with their questions and humbly begged the Pope for an answer for the good of the Church. Despite the pleas of theologians and scholars worldwide, and tens of thousands of faithful and clergy, the Holy Father has steadfastly refused to answer. On April 25 the Cardinals formally asked the Pope for a meeting to discuss the matter, but after not even receiving the courtesy of a reply, they released their letter June 19.

Scalfari interviews: 'Annihilation' rather than hell?

In March 2015 in an interview with La Repubblica founder Eugenio Scalfari, the Pope suggested no person could go to hell, and proposed annihilation for those who fully reject God. The article says: 'What happens to that lost soul? Will it be punished? And how? The response of Francis is distinct and clear: there is no punishment, but the annihilation of that soul.'

There was some controversy over Repubblica's Scalfari interview. The Vatican would neither verify nor deny it in its specific parts, but nevertheless published it in the Vatican newspaper, and on the Vatican website. They later deleted it from the website, only to republish it again, then delete it again. Vatican watchers compared the most controversial part regarding the impossibility of people going to hell for all eternity to the statement from the Pope's latest exhortation Amoris Laetitia, in which he said, 'No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!'

Traditional youth bashing

'I always try to understand what's behind people who are too young to have experienced the pre-conciliar liturgy and yet still they want it,' the pontiff said in a November 2016 interview. 'Sometimes I found myself confronted with a very strict person, with an attitude of rigidity. And I ask myself: Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.'

He spoke similarly in May 2017 when in a homily he spoke 'of the many young people in the Church today who have fallen into the temptation of rigidity.' Speaking of those who are 'rigid' and insincere, he said, 'They are rigid people living a double life: They make themselves look good, sincere, but when no one sees them, they do ugly things.'

Universality destruction

In his 2013 Exhortation EvangeliGaudium, Pope Francis called for a 'conversion of the papacy' and expressed a need to give episcopal conferences 'genuine doctrinal authority.' Decentralization is a key demand of heterodox clergy in the Church. During the 2015 Synod on the Family, Pope Francis said he 'felt the need to proceed in a healthy 'decentralization'' of power to the 'Episcopal Conferences.' He discussed plans for decentralization with his College of Cardinals both in December 2015 and again in June 2017. In 2016 Pope Francis suggested decentralization as a way forward in the debate over Communion for adulterers.

Vatican doctrine chief dismissal

Cardinal Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, 69, was removed from his post despite all his contemporary predecessors remaining in office till their retirement. Several Cardinals told Pope Francis to remove Muller, who maintained doctrinal orthodoxy since he was opposing the Pope's agenda for change. Muller revealed that the Pope dismissed him in a one minute conversation. The move is widely seen as a punishment for opposing the Pope's agenda.

World Youth Day sex ed

At World Youth Day in 2016, the Vatican released a teen sex-ed program that neglected the parents' central role in such matters, failed to even mention mortal sin, and included sexually explicit photos and films.

X-rated speech

The dignity of the papacy took a hit when Pope Francis used the scatological terms coprophilia (love of excrement) and coprophagia (love of eating excrement) to bash the media for reporting on scandals within the Church.

Yayo Grassi

When the United States nuncio had pro-family hero Kim Davis meet with Pope Francis at the nunciature during his USA papal visit, Davis was refused permission to take photos of the meeting. When the media asked the Vatican about the meeting they first refused to confirm it, and after some time said that 'the only real audience granted by the Pope at the nunciature (embassy) was with one of his former students and his family.' The Pope's former student, Yayo Grassi, was there with his sister and mother and his homosexual partner. They took not only photos but also video in which Pope Francis can be seen embracing Grassi and his homosexual partner.

Zika (contraception)

Pope Francis was asked about 'avoiding pregnancy' in areas at risk of Zika virus transmission. 'Paul VI, a great man, in a difficult situation in Africa, permitted nuns to use contraceptives in cases of rape,' he said. 'On the other hand, avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil,' he added. 'In certain cases, as in this one, such as the one I mentioned of Blessed Paul VI, it was clear.' Asked for clarification, the Vatican confirmed that Pope Francis was approving use of contraceptives and condoms in grave cases. (A contradiction of Church teaching.)

[LSN] 2194.4


CF News / Vatican watch

An ignorant, intemperate Vatican assault on American conservatism

PHIL LAWLER reports for CatholicCulture.org : 'With a harsh denunciation of American conservatism, published in the semi-official Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica, the Vatican has plunged headlong into a partisan debate in a society that it clearly does not understand, potentially alienating (or should I say, further alienating) the Americans most inclined to favor the influence of the Church.

Why? Why this bitter attack (written by editor-in-chief Fr Antonio Spadaro and Argentine Presbyterian pastor Marcelo Figueroa), the on the natural allies of traditional Catholic teachings? Is it because the most influential figures at the Vatican today actually want to move away from those traditional teachings, and form a nwrew alliance with modernity?

The authors of the essay claim to embrace ecumenism, but they have nothing but disdain for the coalition formed by Catholics and Evangelical Protestants in the United States. They scold American conservatives for seeing world events as a struggle of good against evil, yet they clearly convey the impression that they see American conservativism as an evil influence that must be defeated.

While they are quick to pronounce judgment on American politicians, the two authors betray an appalling ignorance of the American scene. The authors toss Presidents Nixon (a Quaker), Reagan, Bush, and Trump into the same religious classification, suggesting that they were all motivated by “fundamentalist' principles. An ordinary American, reading this account, would be surprised to see the authors’ preoccupation with the late Rev. Rousas Rushdoony and the Church Militant web site: hardly major figures in the formation of American public opinion. The essay is written from the perspective of people who draw their information about America from left-wing journals rather than from practical experience.

The central thesis of the Civilta Cattolica essay is that American conservatives have developed an ideology, based on fundamentalist Protestant beliefs, that sees the US as morally righteous, with other people as enemies and thus justifies conflict and exploitation. Again and again the authors describe this attitude as “Manichean;' they insist on the need to “fight against' it. They insist on tolerance, but they have no tolerance for this attitude. Nowhere in the essay does one find a suggestion of the attitude, made popular by Pope Francis, that the Church should “accompany' sinners. No; the sins of American conservatism are unforgivable.

“Triumphalist, arrogant and vindictive ethnicism is actually the opposite of Christianity,' the authors tell us. So this is a heresy, then—the “Manichean' references were purposeful—and it must be condemned? The Vatican today lauds Martin Luther for his desire to reform the faith, but denounces Evangelical Protestants for—for what, exactly? The Civilta Cattolica essay speaks—in typically incendiary terms—of an “ecumenism of hate.' But it is not obvious, frankly, who hates whom.

As the authors round to their conclusion, they tell us that Pope Francis “wants to break the organic link between culture, politics, institution, and Church.' So the Pontiff intends to detach the Church entirely from public issues, even when moral principles are involved? Yes, the authors reply; in the realm of political affairs, “the Pope does not want to say who is right or who is wrong for he knows that at the root of conflicts there is always a fight for power.' So, for fear of becoming mired in a power struggle, should the Church step aside, eschewing involvement in moral debates—and, more than that, condemn those who do frame public issues in moral terms?

The ignorance and intemperance of the Civilta Cattolica essay are doubly troublesome because the authors are so close to Pope Francis. Journalists often overstate the influence of Vatican officials, identifying mid-level staff members as “key advisers' to the Roman Pontiff. Unfortunately the two authors of this essay really are among the closest advisers to Pope Francis. Father Antonio Spadaro, the editor of Civilta Cattolica, is a regular visitor to the Pope’s office in the St. Martha residence, described by one seasoned Vatican-watcher as the “mouthpiece of Pope Francis.' Marcelo Figueroa, a Presbyterian minister who was friendly with then-Cardinal Bergoglio in Argentina, was hand-picked by the Pontiff to launch a new Argentinean edition of the official Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano. And speaking of official publications, the Spadaro-Figueroa essay appeared in Civilta Cattolica, whose contents are cleared before publication by the Vatican Secretariat of State. It is not unreasonable, then, to assume that this essay reflects the Pope’s own thinking. That is frightening.

Father Spadaro

in comments to Church Militant, Michael Hichborn of the Lepanto Institute said: 'Father Spadaro, often described as Pope Francis' "mouthpiece," is an open critic of Tradition and orthodoxy. It was Fr. Spadaro who wrote a post on Twitter referring to the four Cardinal signers of the dubia as "witless worms." He then created a fake Twitter account to continue his attack on the four Cardinals anonymously. Father Spadaro was also the one who infamously claimed that Catholic theology is not mathematics because, according to him, in theology, sometimes 2+2=5. If Catholic priests are called to be lights unto the world, Fr. Spadaro's personal disposition to the Truth has made him about as relevant as a glow-in-the-dark T-shirt.

[CWN] 2194.4a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Humanae Vitae

 

Fidelity to Doctrine on Marriage, Fidelity to God's Covenant with Man ~ Fr. Alan Wharton, F.I

GOD's plan for human life centres on marriage and the family. The traditional Catholic doctrines are under attack both from without and from within the Church, a sign of 'the decisive battle between the kingdom of Christ and Satan' (Sr. Lúcia of Fatima in a letter to Cardinal Caffarra, 1983).

 

 

[franciscanfriars] 2194.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

United Nations

UN logo

 

World Population Day brings warning of overpopulation, population implosion

SUSAN YOSHIHARA, Ph.D., reports : 'During this week’s observance of World Population Day, global family planning proponents identified crises such as humanitarian emergencies and the global financial downturn to justify more funding to limit the world’s population. Meanwhile, their critics discredited population programs and raised awareness about rapid population decline and the crisis of global aging.

The primary argument family planning proponents used for more funding was the theory of a “demographic dividend,' by which fewer children would lead to more savings, higher education and better health per child, and more time for women to engage in work outside the home. As in years past, advocates pointed to the 1960s-1990s Asian Tigers as evidence that the theory works. The reference had the alternative effect of highlighting the fact that there are no other examples beyond the Tigers. Latin American and Middle Eastern nations, who enacted similar policies, did not get the same boost in economic growth. In Europe, industrialization was not the result of smaller families, but rather the opposite was true.

This week the governments of the same Asian nations released new figures showing the long-term negative economic effects of family planning programs.

The Bank of Korea warned that demographic trends could lead the country’s economy to generate near-zero growth in ten years. Japan’s population fell faster last year than any time since the government’s survey started in 1968. Last week, Tokyo said that despite measures to address its aging population and loss of economic power, the Japanese population contracted by 308,084 in 2016, its eighth consecutive year of decline. Japanese young people are abstaining from relationships in what some call an “epidemic of virginity.' China’s population is aging faster than anywhere, and the number of dependents upon each worker is expected to rise to as high as forty-four percent by 2050.

The UN Population Division’s biennial report, issued just before World Population Day, said fertility is falling globally and half the world’s nations have fertility rates below the replacement level of just over two children per woman. The number of people aged eighty or more is projected to triple by 2050, and European population to decrease by 25 million in that time.

Because of the rapid population decline in the West, the report characterized African fertility rates as high, although total fertility there fell from 5.1 births per woman in 2000-2005 to 4.7 in 2010-2015. Population advocates used the report as evidence of a crisis in India and Africa, especially in Nigeria, which the report projected would overtake the U.S. as the third most populous nation by 2050.

The UN Population Fund and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation called on Nigeria’s government to declare a state of emergency due to its projected high population. The groups convened with global family planning advocates in London this week to garner more government funding for African family planning.

Joachin Ulasi, the director of Nigeria’s National Population Commission in Anambra State, pushed back, saying that at 180 million-strong, Nigeria is not over-populated. “We are lucky to be middle-heavy,' Ulasi said. “If you go to Britain, you will notice that they have top-heavy population which means that they have more old people. In Nigeria, we have more young people who are productive and that shows that our population is of quality, and if we manage our population well, Nigeria will be able to produce what it needs as a nation.'

 

[C-FAM] 2194.UN1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Globe   

News from around the world

 

France Bishops praise abortion-legislating Simone Veil as 'Very Great'

S VeilTHE EPONYMOUS FLOWER writes : 'On June 30, Simone Veil died shortly before her 90th birthday. The French Bishops' Conference left a breathless Twitter message upon her death to praise her as 'very great'.

Simone Veil has held the highest political positions. She was French Minister of Health (1974-1979 and 1993-1995, at the time under the Socialist President Mitterand) and first president of the first directly elected European Parliament (1979-1982).

Veil, born in Nice in 1927 as a daughter of Jewish parents, by the architect André Jacob and by Yvonne Steinmetz, was taken to Auschwitz concentration camp in March 1944. Her mother did not survive the imprisonment. Even she herself appeared up to the 80's in databases also among the Holocaust victims. In reality, she had survived National Socialism and had studied law in Paris after the war. Since 1957, she has worked in the French Ministry of Justice, and in 1974 she became Minister of Justice in the government of Prime Minister Jacques Chirac. As such, she passed the notorious French Abortion Act, which had been engineered by her.

The French parliament voted on 29 November 1974 at 3:40 am for the Loi Veil. The voices of the Left opposition were decisive. In 1973, the bourgeois alliance was composed of Gaullists. Christian Democrats and Liberals which won parliamentary elections, and in May 1974 also presidential elections.The Liberal Giscard d'Estaing became president. The Left Alliance, led by François Mitterrand, of socialists, communists, and leftists had suffered a double defeat and was in the opposition. In the vote on Simone Veil's abortion law, however - as now in the German Bundestag in the vote on the 'homosexual marriage' - the faction was annulled. The bourgeois presidential majority held a large majority of 302 out of 490 seats in parliament. The liberals, to which Veil belonged, wanted, however, with no less vehemence the legalization of the killing of unborn children than the political left. The left-wing opposition, which voted unanimously for abortion, and one-third of the bourgeois coalition government created ad hoc and otherwise non-existent parliamentary majority. Simone Veil became the model of feminism that was internationally celebrated by the Left and the Liberals.

On January 17, 1975, the abortion law came into force and became the largest mass grave of all French history. According to the Historical abortion statistics - France by Robert Johnston, which is based on official data, Veil's killing laws have already claimed 33,454 unborn children in 1975. According to official data, the French Abortion Act has so far has demanded nearly the deaths of 7,500,000. The number of children killed per year is indicated by more than 200,000 by the competent authorities.

On March 3, 1975, shortly after the law came into force, Simone Veil told Times magazine:

'With a change of law it is basically possible to change the human behavioral model. I find that fascinating.'

Today, more than 95 percent of French gynecologists practice abortion or are prepared to do so. Less than five percent use a limited right to refuse conscientious objection. This is only for doctors, but not for pharmacists (morning after pill, etc.). Anyone who refuses on grounds of conscience have to bear serious professional disadvantages. He is consistently discriminated against during the search for job vacancies. The chances of a job as a primary are reduced to zero.

In view of the immense ocean blood that Simone Veil caused by her abortion law, from which she never distanced herself, but which she defended until the very end and celebrated for it, the Twitter message of the French bishops is an incomprehensible scandal. The French abortionist par excellence was uncritically offered incense. The abortion victims, who are almost 7.5 million innocent, unborn children (in reality, more likely, more) who have fallen victim to Veil's law were not mentioned. The bishops thus behave no differently than the abortion ideologists. The unborn children are nowhere to be seen.They simply do not exist. They must be dehumanized and reified in order to be able to eliminate them without a rebellion of conscience.

The bishops wrote: 'We salute your greatness as a woman of state, your will, to fight for a fraternal [Masonic?] Europe, your conviction that abortion is a drama.'

Mauro Faverzani wrote in the Corrispondenza Romana: 'The idea is simply paradoxical to think that someone who has done everything to legalize and liberalize abortion can really see it this way,' as the bishops have now claimed.

This distorted recounting of the bloody reality by the bishops is not really surprising. When Simone Veil was elected in November 2008 with 22 of 29 votes to chair the Académie française, founded in 1634, the Catholic hierarchy uttered not a word of disapproval, nor even a sign of indignation.

France's Socialist President Emmanuel Macron published a long statement on Veil's death. In it he wrote: 'Grieving France expresses its gratitude to Madame Simone Veil.'

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, a representative of the bourgeois Les Républicains, said: 'Simone Veil remains immortal.'

Their 'immortality' annually costs more than 200,000 children.

Simone Veil was the last to celebrate her 'work of life', whose only real 'achievement', which made her internationally known, was the abortion law. On April 8, 2016, she was honored by the Grand Orient of France, the largest and most powerful Freemasonry in France. In the presence of Senate President Gerard Larcher, Grand Master Daniel Keller personally presented Jacques France's 'Marianne' to Jean and Pierre-François Veil, her two sons who received the honors for Simone Veil.

On this occasion, Grandmaster Keller said that the Marianne was 'a testimony of the attachment and recognition of the Greater Orient of France to Simone Veil, our sister of our heart.' Keller praised Veil's 'Republican activism' and her 'struggle for women's empowerment, the daughter of secularism, which is the core of Masonic activity.' He also praised her abortion law as,

'The symbol of the improvement in man and the society in which the Freemasons work: this law remains a pillar of our society.'

The news agency Médias-Presse-Info wrote: 'Every day in France, killing hundreds of children in the womb of their mothers is thus a pillar of the society that the Masonic Sect wants.'

Mauro Faverzani wrote on the behavior of Catholic bishops:m'Nevertheless, the French church remained silent, always, and was distinguished only by its muteness. Only on the occasion of Simone Veil's death did it open its mouth.'

The case of Veil is reminiscent of the Bonin or Emma Bonino case, as Veil from a middle-class house, driven by a radical attitude, became the central figure in the enforcement of the abortion law in Italy. Like Veil, she was honored as a minister and with high offices at the European level. At the beginning of February 2016 Pope Francis praised Emma Bonino as 'very great'.

The bishops of France now offer Simone Veil the same praise.

[EF] 2194.6


CF News / World news

Germany Muslims for same-sex 'marriage'?

WILLIAM KILPATRICK, writing for The Catholic Thing, notes that the German parliament has just voted in favour of same-sex 'marriage,' and to the wonder of all, all six Muslim members of the Bundestag also voted in favor.

'Well, make that to the wonder of all the 'rubes.' Sophisticated people wouldn't be astonished. They've always contended that Muslims will have no problem assimilating into Western culture, even with all its oddities. For example, after the vote, activist Felipe Henriques tweeted, 'Most Germans and all Muslim MPs believe in equality. Who needs integration?'

'Who needs integration?' The implication is that Muslims are by and large already integrated into German society. In other words, they've learned to go with the flow. And the flow, judging by the 393-226 vote in the Bundestag, is in the direction of sexual license.

So according to one sophisticate, Muslim MPs voted for same-sex marriage because they believe in equality. That's one way of looking at it. But is it possible that they could have had another motive?

Did the 387 non-Muslim MPs stop to think that the legalization of same-sex 'marriage' is just a step on the way to the legalization of polygamy? The arguments that are used to justify SSM can just as easily be used to justify multiple-partner marriages. If marriage is no longer to be confined to one man and one woman, why not allow one man and four women?

Italy's largest Muslim umbrella group, the Union of Islamic Communities and Organizations, has already demanded the legalization of polygamy on the grounds that Italian law permits same-sex civil unions.

Could it be that the Muslim MPs in Germany who voted 'for' had something else in mind besides equality for gays and lesbians? In the long run, the decision will work to the advantage of Muslims, even those Muslims who are adamantly opposed to same-sex 'marriage.'

Some believe the advantage is a demographic one. For instance, the founder of the aforementioned Italian Islamic union has stated that polygamy will increase the population. That's not necessarily so, because polygamy for some men acts to squeeze other men out of the marriage market altogether, thus potentially cancelling out the higher birth rates of polygamous families. Whatever the case, there are other more subtle advantages that will accrue to the Muslim community if polygamy is legitimized.

It's not so much that polygamy will accelerate Muslim population growth, but that its introduction will be one more victory for the Islamic way of doing things. Although societies that allow polygamy do have higher fertility rates, it's not clear that polygamy is the reason.

Der Feindvor den Toren.

What is increasingly clear, however, is that the more cultural markers Muslims are able to lay down, the more difficult it will be to prevent Islamization. Halal-only meals in public schools? Prayer services blocking public streets? The call to prayer broadcast by loudspeakers over entire neighborhoods? Burqas everywhere? Parallel sharia courts? Blasphemy trials in European courts for those who dare criticize Islam?

This is the new normal in Europe, and the old European norms are more and more being made to submit to the new ones.

It's the Islamic version of 'We're here, we're queer. Get used to it.'So when polygamy comes to Germany, it may not make a great difference population-wise, but it will be one more significant step on the way to turning Western culture into an Islamic one.

Just as the counterculture of the 1960s in America became the established culture by the end of the century, so the Islamic counterculture in Germany seems destined to become the dominant culture within a couple of decades. Polygamy may or may not increase the birth rate, but cultural confidence does.

People who have strong beliefs and a sense of mission tend to have children. People who lack strong beliefs tend to put off childbearing - sometimes indefinitely. And people who 'marry' people of the same sex seem uninterested in procreation.

Which brings us back to the same-sex 'marriage' vote in the Bundestag. When the measure was approved, rainbow-colored confetti filled the chamber, and hundreds of MPs gave a standing ovation. But what were they celebrating? Gay marriage may have a future in Germany, but there is no future in gay marriage.

By their very nature, same-sex unions don't produce future generations. That's why all societies up until recent times declined to put homosexual relationships on a par with heterosexual ones. German maternity wards are not going to be filled with the progeny of gay and lesbian couples. But it looks very much as though they will be filled with the children of those who believe not in a Master Race but a Master Religion.

The Muslim MPs who voted for same-sex 'marriage' most likely don't want it for themselves or their kin. They want it for the Gutmenschen of Germany because they correctly perceive that marriage equality is one more way for the Germans to commit cultural suicide.

Most probably, the vote of the Muslim MPs was a tactical maneuver. The game of chess was developed in Muslim lands and this looks very much like a chess move: one sacrifices a pawn now so that one can capture a queen later.

If Germans and other Europeans don't wake up, all their queens, kings, rooks, knights, and bishops will eventually end up in the hands of another and very different culture. And same-sex 'marriage' will be nothing but a distant memory.

[The Catholic Thing] 2194.7

 


CF News / Vatican watch

Malta Same-sex marriage legalised

LAWMAQKERS passed a measure on Wednesday to make Malta the latest European country to legalize same-sex marriage.

Parliamentarians voted 66-1 in favor of a marriage equality bill, marking a major step for LGBTI rights in the predominantly Catholic country.

Nationalist party MP Edwin Vassallo was the only lawmaker to oppose the vote, citing his Christian faith. The marriage equality measure had been expected to pass after MPs voted in its favor last week.

On Wednesday night, a government-sponsored celebration was organized with Malta's LGBTIQ Consultative Council -- a government body representing the country's lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and questioning organisations -- in front of the capital's historic Auberge de Castille.

There, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, a vocal proponent of marriage equality, celebrated the results, posting a photo from Valletta's Pjazza Kastilja, which was lit up in the colors of the rainbow flag and the phrase "We Made History.

 

Comment

 

CHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA comments for Fatima Perspectives : 'Elevated to the status of Archbishop of Malta by Pope Bergoglio in October of 2014, Charles Scicluna has done nothing effective to oppose the collapse of public morality in that once staunchly Catholic nation but rather has facilitated it, while pretending — yes, pretending — to offer opposition. 

According to the resolutely “normalist' Catholic News Agency, in late 2013, when he was still an auxiliary bishop in Malta,  Scicluna was reputedly “encouraged' by Pope Bergoglio to “speak out' against proposed laws by which the newly elected socialist government would legalize “same-sex unions' and adoptions by “gay' couples. 

That’s a joke. Both laws passed after Scicluna and the Archdiocese offered a feeble, mealy-mouthed opposition that can be summed up in Scicluna’s own self-defeating comment to the press at the time, that Malta’s bishops have expressed their concern about the bill, “referring to Catholic doctrine that itself is clear, while insisting at the same time [on] pastoral closeness to everyone, including homosexual people.'

Even more laughable is Scicluna’s claim at the time that, as reported by Edward Pentin, during a mere “private conversation' with Scicluna, Pope Bergoglio “reiterated his view that same-sex ‘marriage’ is an ‘anthropological regression’' and that he was “saddened' by news of the proposed laws. 

A private conversation about how the Pope was “saddened' by an “anthropological regression' hardly constitutes serious Church opposition to an utter abomination that cries out for divine retribution because it grants legal dignity to relations based on sodomy, including the “right' of those engaging in that abominable vice to adopt and corrupt innocent children.
Having done next to nothing to rally serious opposition to “same-sex' civil unions and “gay' adoption, Scicluna was next confronted with a move in the Maltese parliament to grant full legal status to “homosexual unions,' officially designating them as “marriages' rather than civil unions.  In response, Scicluna gave a homily in which he did the Modernist two-step, appearing to oppose that which he was tacitly accepting. Quoth Scicluna:

“We can do what we like in our laws. I can decide that a carob and an orange should no longer be called by their name. We call them trees. But a carob remains a carob and an orange remains an orange, whatever the law says. And marriage, whatever the law says, remains an eternal union exclusive to a man and a woman.'

We can do what we like with our laws? Whatever the law says?  Just who did Scicluna think he was kidding with this homily?  No, we cannot “do what we like with our laws.'  No human law can transgress God’s law, and such laws are no laws at all, as Saint Augustine famously observed. Every Catholic worthy of the name has a duty of vigorous and unequivocal opposition when confronted with attempts by legislators to defy the law of God, and also the duty of conscientious civil disobedience to all attempts to implement such laws.  This has always been the teaching of the Church, and during the pontificate of John Paul II it was affirmed as Church teaching particularly in respect to any attempt to legalize or enforce “homosexual unions' or “gay marriage.'

That teaching is what the faithful Catholics of Malta were defending when they ran a full- page ad on May 21, 2017 which declared to the legislators of Malta:

“Same-sex marriage is unnatural. It runs against natural law as designed by God and handed down to us through every generation in our Maltese history….


“This is why we take a stand for marriage as a union between husband and wife. If we don’t take a public stand about what marriage is, our political parties will corrupt its meaning and enforce what it shouldn’t be. The main electoral programs are glorifying sin, and no sin should be placed in the spotlight and glorified….

“Don’t vote for gay marriage… Don’t compromise your faith at the altar of a diabolical political system.  Call the Devil for what he truly is and embrace God instead.'

And what was Archbishop Scicluna’s response to this courageous Catholic call to action?  Incredibly, he denounced it on his Archdiocesan website:

“The Archdiocese of Malta categorically states that, while respecting the right of freedom of expression of every person or any other entity, it is not in any way involved with the propaganda by the Maltese Catholics United for the Faith.'

The same notice refers Catholics to the Maltese bishops’ useless “Pastoral Letter for the General Elections 2017.'  What does that letter say about the positive duty of Catholics to oppose “gay marriage' by voting against candidates for Parliament who support it? Not one word. There is only a generic call for “vot[ing] according to our conscience, which means that in front of God we recognize what is right and true, and therefore choose what is truly beneficial for the common good and for a just society.' And what is right and true regarding “gay marriage'?  Scicluna’s “pastoral letter' offers not a clue.

Worse, there is also an appeal to the “spirit of dialogue, with deep respect for truth and for each other, including those persons who hold different opinions from our own.'  Thus not only is there no application of Church teaching to the issue at hand — “gay marriage' — nor any instruction on how to vote in light of that teaching, but the Church’s infallible doctrine on the natural law, rooted in the will of God as expressed in the Sixth Commandment that is binding on all men, is presented as a mere opinion different from the opinion of others with whom the Church “dialogues.'

And so, on July 12, 2017, “gay marriage' became the law of Malta. Archbishop Scicluna may fool the people with his phony opposition to this abomination, but he has not fooled God.  The prelate who has also imposed — literally imposed — the administration of Holy Communion to any public adulterer in Malta who persuades himself he is “at peace with God' in his adultery, will have his day of reckoning before the Judgment Seat of Christ, as every one of us will. What will he say to Our Lord when asked to give an accounting of his stewardship of the souls entrusted to his charge?

This indeed is the final battle over marriage and family of which Sister Lucia warned Cardinal Caffarra in light of the Third Secret of Fatima. And, as terrible as it is to contemplate the reality of our situation, the human element of the Church has largely either surrendered or given aid and comfort to the enemy.  May God deliver His Holy Church from the grips of mere hired hands who have abandoned the flock (John 10:12) and, worse, the ravening “wolves' seen and feared by Pope Benedict XVI as he ascended to the Chair of Peter.

 

[CNN] 2194.7a

 


CF News / World news

United Kingdom Mind the (sanity) gap as TfL abolishes gender

COALITION 4 MARRIAGE reports : 'The Mayor of London has pledged to stop the use of the term 'ladies and gentlemen' on the capital's public transport because the idea that people are either male or female is offensive.

Sadiq Khan says that he has banned staff from using any gendered language when addressing the public after a transsexual was told '[you] didn't sound like a 'miss'' by a telephone operator at Transport for London.

Many Government-funded bodies continue to push transsexual ideology in the public space. Recently Vishnitz Girls School in Hackney, a Jewish school for girls aged 3-8, was sanctioned by Ofsted for refusing to teach about gender reassignment and sexual orientation. This is despite inspectors admitting that the pupils are making good progress and that teachers are performing well.

Unfortunately Ofsted remains largely unaccountable. Last year not a single school succeeded in challenging the overall result of an inspection, creating pressure to teach gender ideology (which is harmful to children) because teachers in England are fearful of being reprimanded by Ofsted.

Traditional marriage is based upon recognising that the differences between men and women allow them to complement one another in marriage. Redefining gender from its biological basis into a matter of personal choice undermines real marriage by confusing what it means to be a man or a woman.

Last week the President of the American College of Paediatricians, a group of medical professionals concerned about the impact of transsexual ideology in classrooms, wrote that teaching gender ideology to children and pressurising them to impersonate the opposite sex was a form of 'institutionalised child abuse'.

Publicly-funded bodies like Transport for London and Ofsted should not be using taxpayers' money to further this harmful trend.

[C4M] 2194.8


CF News / World news

United Kingdom The Foreign Office providing same-sex marriage in consulates worldwide

THE Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) is providing same sex marriage services at its consulates around the world ostensibly as a way of pressuring other nations to recognise the unions in law.

The FCO has been boasting of performing these ceremonies since the introduction of The Consular Marriages and Marriages under Foreign Law Order 2014, often taking to social media during LGBT+ Pride days, weeks, or months in order to promote their work.

But while the list of countries now numbers 26, up from 23 in 2014, it appears the FCO is not being completely truthful about the services it is providing. Nor are they particularly challenging the nations where LGBT+ people are most severely targeted.

In other words, the FCO appears to be using same sex marriage and their embassies that provide it as a virtue-signalling, or marketing, tool.

The rules contained within the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 dictate that in order to receive British consulate marriage services for LGBT couples, the following must apply:

(a) at least one of the people proposing to marry is a United Kingdom national,

(b) the people proposing to marry would have been eligible to marry each other in such part of the United Kingdom as is determined in accordance with the Order,

(c) the authorities of the country or territory in which it is proposed that they marry will not object to the marriage, and

(d) insufficient facilities exist for them to enter into a marriage under the law of that country or territory.

In other words, the embassies are providing UK marriages to couples that are at least 50 per cent UK nationals with the caveat that the host nation of the consulate in question 'will not object'. This is far from how their public relations efforts make it seem, where they simply claim to provide same-sex marriage services in 26 countries.

Furthermore, while the FCO provides same sex marriage services to UK nationals in two Muslim majority nations - Kosovo and Albania - they do not do so in places where Islamic rules (Shariah) constitute or form the backbone of law and society, opening them up to allegations of hypocrisy and opportunism.

Benjamin Harris-Quinney, chairman of the Bow Group, Britain's oldest conservative think-tank, told Breitbart London: 'Over the past 5 years the Conservative leadership, against the party membership and Parliamentary Party's wishes, have pursued a bizarre and shrill campaign to win the favour of LGBT lobby groups who have spent vast sums of money lobbying in Westminster. All it has achieved is the decimation of the membership base of the Conservative Party.

'What the FCO has set out is an attempt to continue this window dressing, without actually doing anything to improve people's lives. What they miss is that most ordinary people who are gay have no interest in whether they can get married in the UK Embassy in Chad, and are far more concerned about the imprisonment and execution of gay people in nations where we do business.

'I think most conservatives are of the view that people's private lives should remain private, and it is not the role of the FCO, or any facet of government, to virtue signal off the back of any citizens' sexual preference at home or abroad. It is a fundamentally un-conservative andun-British thing to do.'

Another noteworthy point is that while Russia is often charged with gross LGBT 'intolerance' or persecution, it seems the FCO can conduct same sex marriages in the country without objection from the Russian authorities.

Former FCO Minister Chris Bryant said of the matter: 'I hope that when [Russians] start seeing gay and lesbian couples getting married in the British consulate in Moscow they will celebrate rather than denigrate and persecute' and the LGBT+ website Queerty concluded their article promoting the FCO's position with the line: 'Take that, Putin', clearly unaware the host nation would have to tacitly approve of the process.

In 2014, the list of nations included Australia, Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Cambodia, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Japan, Kosovo, Latvia, Mongolia, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Peru, Philippines, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, and Vietnam.

Since then, Colombia - which now recognises same sex marriages - has dropped off the list. But so too have San Marino and Azerbaijan. The FCO has not yet responded to a request for comment on the matter.

Other countries now on the list are: Albania, Germany, Lithuania, Malta, Mozambique, and Panama.

The FCO has not yet responded to the question of why they do not attempt to provide these services in countries such as Saudi Arabia - where over 31,000 Britons reside - or Iran, Qatar, the UAE, or elsewhere.

The FCO did however state: 'It is a matter for individual countries to decide whether nor not they recognise consular or other UK same-sex marriage. From a UK perspective, all consular marriages are valid as if they had taken place in the relevant part of the UK.

Consular marriages are performed by members of our staff with consular responsibilities as part of their daily duties.

The United Kingdom introduced Same Sex Marriage in 2013 under 'Conservative' Prime Minister David Cameron who has called the legislation one of his proudest achievement

[Breitbart] 2194.9


CF News / World news

United Kingdom The Institute of Christ the King is given another church in Preston

THE HISTORIC and landmark (Grade II Listed) Catholic Church of St Thomas of Canterbury & the English Martyrs on Garstang Road, Preston (known simply as English Martyrs) has been given a promise of a sustainable future following an announcement made by the Bishop of Lancaster, the Rt Rev Michael G Campbell OSA.

Bishop Michael Campbell and Monsignor Gilles Wach, Prior General of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, together with Rector, Canon Adrian Towers, have agreed that, as from the autumn, the Institute will assume the administration of the church.

This move will enable the church to be open each day to become a vibrant shrine of devotion to and promotion of the English Martyrs under the care of the Institute who already have the administration of St Walburge's Shrine Church, Weston Street, Preston. The new shrine will specifically provide for the celebration of Holy Mass and the other Sacraments in the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite.

[LMS] 2194.10


CF News / World news

United Kingdom Jewish school fails its third Ofsted inspection for not teaching LGBT issues

THE DIGNITATIS HUMANAE INSTITUTE reports : 'A London school with an excellent academic record is being threatened with closure for its apparent lack of sufficient enthusiasm indoctrinating children between the ages of 3 and 8 in the concepts of 'gender reassignment'...

This is the lesson learnt by Britain's hounded faith schools, most recently Vizhnitz Girls' School, an Orthodox Jewish school in Hackney, London.

The Office of Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) has threatened to close this high-performing school not for any academic transgression, but for failing to prioritise the Education department's equalities charter over the school's teaching of the Jewish faith. Among the accusations, Ofsted claims the school does not adequately promote LGBT and gender reassignment.

Vizhnitz Girls' School, a private Haredi school with 212 students, has been praised for its high academic standards. Ofsted's admissions of the excellence of the school go further, noting the high-quality classroom resources, the quality of teaching and good subject knowledge. Elsewhere in the report Ofsted begrudgingly admits that: 'the school's culture is, however, clearly focused on teaching pupils to respect everybody, regardless of beliefs and lifestyle'.

How then, after recognising this, can Ofsted castigate the school for being disrespectful to alternate orientations and lifestyles? Ofsted claims that schools are not expected to 'promote' certain ideas over orientation or gender fluidity, but to 'respect' them. By Ofsted's own admission however, Vizhnitz Girl's School has a culture of 'teaching pupils to respect everybody.'

This contradiction in Ofsted's report has led some parents from Vizhnitz School to suggest they are being unfairly targeted by the educational authorities. Indeed, the school has already been inspected three times in just one year; far more often than many of the poorly performing schools of Britain's widely-derided education system. Despite being the 6th largest economy in the world and having a much higher education budget than most nations, Britain has slipped to 21st in reading and 27th in maths worldwide (OECD rankings).

This comes at a particularly troubling time for Britain's Jewish community, which has seen anti-Semitism rise in recent years. In April this year, four British universities opposed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of anti-Semitism, the standard definition most UK institutions adhere to. This follows increasing academic boycotts of Jewish speakers on campuses and an 11% rise in anti-Semitic incidents in the UK.

In spite of the recognition from Ofsted that the Vizhnitz school has made improvements in areas like safeguarding children and leadership, the school is now threatened with closure, unless the school surrenders and effectively renounces its Jewish beliefs in favour of the beliefs of the secular liberal establishment.

Ofsted's defence of this situation is that they are not imposing secularism but promoting 'fundamental British values.' This is ironically a new, ham-fisted imposition on schools in the wake of radical home-grown radical religious terrorism. Supposedly teaching the 'fundamental' British value of gender fluidity to a five-year old Jewish schoolgirl will prevent the next terrorist killing dozens of people with a nail bomb at a pop concert.

One wonders how energetically Ofsted is imposing the LGBT agenda on the UK's 156 Muslim schools (in recent months, of the 95 persons killed in British terrorist attacks, 92 were victims of Islamic terrorism - a total of zero from Jewish orthodoxy).

Regardless of the facts (or common sense), Ofsted chief Amanda Spielman seems intent on using the shabby disguise of counter-terrorism to enforce the LGBT agenda upon schools. When asked exactly what were the success/failure parameters for the promotion of 'British values' Amanda Spielman failed to give an explanation. This allows Ofsted to arbitrarily dictate on an ad hoc basis, guided only by its own prejudices.

Ultimately it will be the schoolgirls of Vizhnitz who will suffer most when their school is closed, their education halted and their future thrown into chaos.

It is now increasingly clear, that for the liberal institutions that rule over us, tolerance is segregated into whom they consider to be the deserving and the undeserving. For those who don't have the good fortune to fall into one of the liberal establishment's officially-designated victim classes, religious freedom is the most disposable of all rights. Vizhnitz is not the first school to fall victim to this - the Christian-ethos Durham Free School was shut down in 2015 for failing to help students understand 'British values' or 'prepare them for life in modern Britain' - and it certainly won't be the last.

Can Jewish and Christian schools exist in any meaningful sense under Ofsted? The evidence suggests not - and some might suggest that is perhaps the intention.

[http://www.dignitatishumanae.com] 2194.11


CF News / World news

United Kingdom Over a billion pounds of overseas aid money to be spent on family planning and abortion

THE DEPARTMENT for International Development (DFID) has announced that the UK will spend over a billion pounds on family planning in the next five years, including access to 'safe abortions'.

International Development Secretary Priti Patel said at a Family Planning Summit being held today in London that the UK Government's spending on family planning will be an average of £225 million per year until 2022 - an additional £45 million a year for 5 years. Ms Patel later confirmed this sum would include the provision of 'safe abortion' in developing countries.

Britain is already the second biggest funder of family planning programmes in the world - in the last five years it has given Marie Stopes International alone £163.01 million. This is despite a recent ComRes poll showing that 65% of the public oppose UK taxpayer money being spent on abortions overseas.

The London Summit is co-hosted by Ms Patel, Melinda Gates (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) and Natalia Kanem (UN Population Fund - UNFPA).The summit is focusing on providing contraception, but last week bpas insisted that 'the answer to unsafe abortion is not contraception, it is safe abortion...Family planning is contraception and abortion.'

Who's asking for family planning?

The summit has been using the figure of 214 million women who are in need of contraception. However, as ObianujuEkeocha of Culture of Life Africa told BBC World News, there is a difference between unmet need and unmet demand. She also talks about how Western countries funding abortion and contraception as a means of alleviating poverty is a form of 'ideological colonisation'.

 

 

[SPUC] 2194.12


CF News / World news

United States Pediatrician: 'Transgender' ideology has created widespread child abuse

MICHELLE A. CRETELLA, President of the American College of Pediatricians.writes for LifeSiteNews : 'Transgender politics have taken Americans by surprise, and caught some lawmakers off guard.

Just a few short years ago, not many could have imagined a high-profile showdown over transgender men and women's access to single-sex bathrooms in North Carolina.

But transgender ideology is not just infecting our laws. It is intruding into the lives of the most innocent among us - children - and with the apparent growing support of the professional medical community.

As explained in my 2016 peer reviewed article, 'Gender Dysphoria in Children and Suppression of Debate,' professionals who dare to question the unscientific party line of supporting gender transition therapy will find themselves maligned and out of a job.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can't be done alone.

I speak as someone intimately familiar with the paediatric and behavioral health communities and their practices. I am a mother of four who served 17 years as a board certified general pediatrician with a focus in child behavioral health prior to leaving clinical practice in 2012.

For the last 12 years, I have been a board member and researcher for the American College of Paediatricians, and for the last three years I have served as its president.

I also sat on the board of directors for the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity from 2010 to 2015. This organization of physicians and mental health professionals defends the right of patients to receive psychotherapy for sexual identity conflicts that is in line with their deeply held values based upon science and medical ethics.

I have witnessed an upending of the medical consensus on the nature of gender identity. What doctors once treated as a mental illness, the medical community now largely affirms and even promotes as normal.

Here's a look at some of the changes.

The New Normal

Paediatric'gender clinics' are considered elite centers for affirming children who are distressed by their biological sex. This distressful condition, once dubbed gender identity disorder, was renamed 'gender dysphoria' in 2013.

In 2014, there were 24 of these gender clinics, clustered chiefly along the east coast and in California. One year later, there were 40 across the nation.

With 215 pediatric residency programs now training future pediatricians in a transition-affirming protocol and treating gender-dysphoric children accordingly, gender clinics are bound to proliferate further.

Last summer, the federal government stated that it would not require Medicare and Medicaid to cover transition-affirming procedures for children or adults because medical experts at the Department of Health and Human Services found the risks were often too high, and the benefits too unclear.

Undeterred by these findings, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health has pressed ahead, claiming - without any evidence - that these procedures are 'safe.'

Two leading pediatric associations - the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Pediatric Endocrine Society - have followed in lockstep, endorsing the transition affirmation approach even as the latter organization concedes within its own guidelines that the transition-affirming protocol is based on low evidence.

They even admit that the only strong evidence regarding this approach is its potential health risks to children.

The transition-affirming view holds that children who 'consistently and persistently insist' that they are not the gender associated with their biological sex are innately transgender.

(The fact that in normal life and in psychiatry, anyone who 'consistently and persistently insists' on anything else contrary to physical reality is considered either confused or delusional is conveniently ignored.)

The transition-affirming protocol tells parents to treat their children as the gender they desire, and to place them on puberty blockers around age 11 or 12 if they are gender dysphoric.

If by age 16, the children still insist that they are trapped in the wrong body, they are placed on cross-sex hormones, and biological girls may obtain a double mastectomy.

So-called 'bottom surgeries,' or genital reassignment surgeries, are not recommended before age 18, though some surgeons have recently argued against this restriction.

The transition-affirming approach has been embraced by public institutions in media, education, and our legal system, and is now recommended by most national medical organizations.

There are exceptions to this movement, however, in addition to the American College of Pediatricians and the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice. These include the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the Christian Medical & Dental Associations, the Catholic Medical Association, and the LGBT-affirming Youth Gender Professionals.

The transgender movement has gained legs in the medical community and in our culture by offering a deeply flawed narrative. The scientific research and facts tell a different story.

Here are some of those basic facts.

1. Twin studies prove no one is born 'trapped in the body of the wrong sex.'

Some brain studies have suggested that some are born with a transgendered brain. But these studies are seriously flawed and prove no such thing.

Virtually everything about human beings is influenced by our DNA, but very few traits are hardwired from birth. All human behavior is a composite of varying degrees for nature and nurture.

Researchers routinely conduct twin studies to discern which factors (biological or nonbiological) contribute more to the expression of a particular trait. The best designed twin studies are those with the greatest number of subjects.

Identical twins contain 100 percent of the same DNA from conception and are exposed to the same prenatal hormones. So if genes and/or prenatal hormones contributed significantly to transgenderism, we should expect both twins to identify as transgender close to 100 percent of the time.

Skin color, for example, is determined by genes alone. Therefore, identical twins have the same skin color 100 percent of the time.

But in the largest study of twin transgender adults, published by Dr. Milton Diamond in 2013, only 28 percent of the identical twins both identified as transgender. Seventy-two percent of the time, they differed. (Diamond's study reported 20 percent identifying as transgender, but his actual data demonstrate a 28 percent figure, as I note here in footnote 19.)

That 28 percent of identical twins both identified as transgender suggests a minimal biological predisposition, which means transgenderism will not manifest itself without outside nonbiological factors also impacting the individual during his lifetime.

The fact that the identical twins differed 72 percent of the time is highly significant because it means that at least 72 percent of what contributes to transgenderism in one twin consists of nonshared experiences after birth-that is, factors not rooted in biology.

Studies like this one prove that the belief in 'innate gender identity'-the idea that 'feminized' or 'masculinized' brains can be trapped in the wrong body from before birth-is a myth that has no basis in science.

2. Gender identity is malleable, especially in young children.

Even the American Psychological Association's Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology admits that prior to the widespread promotion of transition affirmation, 75 to 95 percent of pre-pubertal children who were distressed by their biological sex eventually outgrew that distress. The vast majority came to accept their biological sex by late adolescence after passing naturally through puberty.

But with transition affirmation now increasing in Western society, the number of children claiming distress over their gender - and their persistence over time - has dramatically increased. For example, the Gender Identity Development Service in the United Kingdom alone has seen a 2,000 percent increase in referrals since 2009.

3. Puberty blockers for gender dysphoria have not been proven safe.

Puberty blockers have been studied and found safe for the treatment of a medical disorder in children called precocious puberty (caused by the abnormal and unhealthy early secretion of a child's pubertal hormones).

However, as a groundbreaking paper in The New Atlantis points out, we cannot infer from these studies whether or not these blockers are safe in physiologically normal children with gender dysphoria.

The authors note that there is some evidence for decreased bone mineralization, meaning an increased risk of bone fractures as young adults, potential increased risk of obesity and testicular cancer in boys, and an unknown impact upon psychological and cognitive development.

With regard to the latter, while we currently don't have any extensive, long-term studies of children placed on blockers for gender dysphoria, studies conducted on adults from the past decade give cause for concern.

For example, in 2006 and 2007, the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology reported brain abnormalities in the area of memory and executive functioning among adult women who received blockers for gynecologic reasons. Similarly, many studies of men treated for prostate cancer with blockers also suggest the possibility of significant cognitive decline.

4. There are no cases in the scientific literature of gender-dysphoric children discontinuing blockers.

Most, if not all, children on puberty blockers go on to take cross-sex hormones (estrogen for biological boys, testosterone for biological girls). The only study to date to have followed pre-pubertal children who were socially affirmed and placed on blockers at a young age found that 100 percent of them claimed a transgender identity and chose cross-sex hormones.

This suggests that the medical protocol itself may lead children to identify as transgender.

There is an obvious self-fulfilling effect in helping children impersonate the opposite sex both biologically and socially. This is far from benign, since taking puberty blockers at age 12 or younger, followed by cross-sex hormones, sterilizes a child.

5. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks.

From studies of adults we know that the risks of cross-sex hormones include, but are not limited to, cardiac disease, high blood pressure, blood clots, strokes, diabetes, and cancers.

6. Neuroscience shows that adolescents lack the adult capacity needed for risk assessment.

Scientific data show that people under the age of 21 have less capacity to assess risks. There is a serious ethical problem in allowing irreversible, life-changing procedures to be performed on minors who are too young themselves to give valid consent.

7. There is no proof that affirmation prevents suicide in children.

Advocates of the transition-affirming protocol allege that suicide is the direct and inevitable consequence of withholding social affirmation and biological alterations from a gender-dysphoric child. In other words, those who do not endorse the transition-affirming protocol are essentially condemning gender-dysphoric children to suicide.

Yet as noted earlier, prior to the widespread promotion of transition affirmation, 75 to 95 percent of gender-dysphoric youth ended up happy with their biological sex after simply passing through puberty.

In addition, contrary to the claim of activists, there is no evidence that harassment and discrimination, let alone lack of affirmation, are the primary cause of suicide among any minority group. In fact, at least one study from 2008 found perceived discrimination by LGBT-identified individuals not to be causative.

Over 90 percent of people who commit suicide have a diagnosed mental disorder, and there is no evidence that gender-dysphoric children who commit suicide are any different. Many gender dysphoric children simply need therapy to get to the root of their depression, which very well may be the same problem triggering the gender dysphoria.

8. Transition-affirming protocol has not solved the problem of transgender suicide.

Adults who undergo sex reassignment-even in Sweden, which is among the most LGBT-affirming countries-have a suicide rate nearly 20 times greater than that of the general population. Clearly, sex reassignment is not the solution to gender dysphoria.

Bottom Line: Transition-Affirming Protocol Is Child Abuse

The crux of the matter is that while the transition-affirming movement purports to help children, it is inflicting a grave injustice on them and their nondysphoric peers.

These professionals are using the myth that people are born transgender to justify engaging in massive, uncontrolled, and unconsented experimentation on children who have a psychological condition that would otherwise resolve after puberty in the vast majority of cases.

Today's institutions that promote transition affirmation are pushing children to impersonate the opposite sex, sending many of them down the path of puberty blockers, sterilization, the removal of healthy body parts, and untold psychological damage.

These harms constitute nothing less than institutionalized child abuse. Sound ethics demand an immediate end to the use of pubertal suppression, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgeries in children and adolescents, as well as an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and legislative policies.

It is time for our nation's leaders and the silent majority of health professionals to learn exactly what is happening to our children, and unite to take action.

[LSN] 2194.13


CF News / World news

United States Archbishop: Active homosexuals must repent, change lifestyle before receiving Communion

Archbp. SampleAN AMERICAN ARCHBISHOP has released guidelines upholding the Church's constant teaching that Catholics in 'serious sin' - including active homosexuals and those in adulterous unions - must repent before receiving Communion.

The new guidelines from Archbishop Alexander Sample of Portland, Oregon are intended to implement Pope Francis's Exhortation Amoris Laetitia in a way that he said is 'compatible with Church teaching.'

The guidelines state that those in 'serious sin,' including divorced and civilly-remarried persons living unchastely as well as persons in an active same-sex relationship, must 'sacramentally confess all serious sins with a firm purpose to change, before receiving the Holy Eucharist.'

Sample wrote in his May 2017 guidelines that Amoris Laetitia 'calls for a sensitive accompaniment of those with an imperfect grasp of Christian teaching on marriage and family life, who may not be living in accord with Catholic belief, and yet desire to be more fully integrated into Church life, including the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist.'

But true accompaniment, he said, can only take place within the 'tradition of the Church's teaching and life.'

'In fact, pastors must always convey Catholic teaching faithfully to all persons - including the divorced and remarried - both in the confessional as well as publicly. They should do this with great confidence in the power of God's grace, knowing that, when spoken with love, the truth heals, builds up, and sets free (cf. Jn 8:32),' the guidelines state.

The Archbishop said that there have been 'misuses' of the Pope's Exhortation 'in support of positions that are not compatible with Church teaching.'

Among these is the notion that an individual's conscience has, after Amoris Laetitia, become the final judge in moral matters. Such a position is taken by Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich, who has argued that the civilly-divorced-and-remarried as well as active homosexuals should be able to receive Communion if they came to the decision 'in good conscience.'

But, following what the Church has always taught, the Archbishop's guidelines state: 'Catholic teaching makes clear that the subjective conscience of the individual can never be set against the objective moral truth, as if conscience and truth were two competing principles for moral decision-making.'

They continue: 'As St. John Paul II wrote, such a view would 'pose a challenge to the very identity of the moral conscience in relation to human freedom and God's law. . . . Conscience is not an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what is good and what is evil' (VeritatisSplendor 56, 60). Rather, 'conscience is the application of the law to a particular case' (VeritatisSplendor 59). Conscience stands under the objective moral law and should be formed by it, so that '[t]he truth about moral good, as that truth is declared in the law of reason, is practically and concretely recognized by the judgment of conscience' (VeritatisSplendor 61).

Archbishop Sample said that in view of Catholic teaching on conscience, 'priests must help the divorced and civilly remarried to form their consciences according to the truth.'

'This is a true work of mercy,' he said.

'Divorced and civilly-remarried Catholics wishing to return to a sacramental life within the Church must either ''regularize' their marital status in the Church' (receive a declaration of nullity for first union and then marry within the Church) or, if this cannot be done, 'refrain from sexual intimacy' by living 'as brother and sister.'

'Undertaking to live as brother and sister is necessary for the divorced and civilly-remarried to receive reconciliation in the Sacrament of Penance, which could then open the way to reception of the Holy Eucharist. Such individuals are encouraged to approach the Sacrament of Penance regularly, having recourse to God's great mercy in that sacrament if they fail in chastity,' the guidelines state.

They continue: '[W]here pastors give Holy Communion to divorced and remarried persons trying to live chastely, they should do so in a manner that will avoid giving scandal or implying that Christ's teaching can be set aside. This is left to the prudential judgement of the pastor involved. In other contexts care must also be taken to avoid the unintended appearance of an endorsement of divorce and civil remarriage; thus, divorced and civilly remarried persons would not hold positions of responsibility in a parish (e.g. on a parish council), nor would they carry out liturgical ministries or functions (e.g., lector, extraordinary minister of Holy Communion).

The guidelines specifically address what pastors must do when a same-sex couple presents themselves openly in a parish.

The Church welcomes all men and women who honestly seek to encounter the Lord, whatever their circumstances. But two persons in an active, public same-sex relationship, no matter how sincere, offer a serious counter-witness to Catholic belief, that can only produce moral confusion in the community. Such a relationship cannot be accepted into the life of the parish without undermining the faith of the community, most notably the children.

'Those living openly same-sex lifestyles would not hold positions of responsibility in a parish, nor would they carry out any liturgical ministry or function until they are reconciled with the Church and are living in accord with the Church's moral teaching,' they add.

Sample said that while the guidelines may be a 'hard teaching for some' they 'correspond[] with our belief about the nature of the Holy Eucharist, marriage and the Church.'

The Archbishop said that guidelines are to be 'considered normative for the Archdiocese of Portland, and they are to be carefully and faithfully observed.'

'The sanctity of marriage and God's plan for a joy filled marriage require all those engaged in pastoral ministry to exercise the tremendous responsibility entrusted to them with complete fidelity to Catholic teaching coupled with mercy and compassion,' he said.

[Archbishop Alexander Sample's Amoris Laetitia Guidelines, May, 2017]

[LSN] 2194.14


CF News / World news

United States President Trump's Warsaw speech

Fr RutlerFATHER GEORGE W. RUTLER writes for Crisis Magazine : 'In the mid-nineteenth century, the poet and playwright Adam Mickiewicz dramatized the theme of his suffering Poland as the 'Christ of Nations' and, deprived of its national identity for two centuries, the agony worsened when, in an image borrowed by many, Poland was crucified between the two thieves of Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. It was not the West's proudest moment when President Roosevelt complained to Stalin at the Yalta Conference that 'Poland has been a source of trouble for over five hundred years.' The same Roosevelt had found it convenient to accept the Soviet propaganda attempt to blame the Katyn Forest massacres on the Germans. Pope John Paul II lamented Yalta in the encyclical CentesimusAnnus. That will resonate in the annals of papal teaching more than recent magisterial concerns about the responsible use of air conditioning and the like. For those who have been crucified by tyrants, acquiescence to evil is more consequential that what can or cannot be done about ozone.

On July 6 in Warsaw, in Krasinski Square, the president spoke of a culture with which a generation of 'millennials' have be unfamiliar: 'Americans, Poles, and the nations of Europe value individual freedom and sovereignty. We must work together to confront forces, whether they come from inside or out, from the South or the East, that threaten over time to undermine these values and to erase the bonds of culture, faith, and tradition that make us who we are.'

Armchair journalists, for whom the 'Christ of Nations' is an enigma, resented 'a tiny speech, a perfunctory racist speech,xenophobic' and 'a catalogue of effrontery' and a comparison was made with Mussolini. In 1978, Solzhenitsyn once was pilloried for similar themes during a commencement address in Cambridge, Massachusetts: First Lady Rosalynn Carter, with limited experience of Gulags, said he did not know what he was talking about. Reagan was advised by his Chief of Staff Howard Baker and National Security Advisor Colin Powell not to tell Mr. Gorbachev to take down the Berlin Wall. They thought it was 'extreme' and 'un-presidential.' Such commentators might have called the Funeral Oration of Pericles 'bellicose' and Queen Elizabeth's speech at Tilbury 'demagogic' and Washington's 'Farewell Address' in Fraunces Tavern 'lachrymose and exploitive.' While not making rhetorical comparisons between the Warsaw Speech and what Lincoln said at Gettysburg, for times change and with it their demotics, in 1863 the Harrisburg Patriot & Union mocked 'the silly remarks of the President' and sniffed: '… for the credit of the nation we are willing that the veil of oblivion shall be dropped over them and that they shall be no more repeated or thought of.'

The Warsaw speech mentioned three priests: Copernicus, John Paul II and Michael Kozal. The latter was the bishop of Wloclawek who was martyred by the Nazis in Dachau along with 220 of his priests in 1943. After lengthy torture, the Nazi doctor Joseph Sneiss injected him with a dose of phenol 'to make easier' his way to eternity. St. John Paul II beatified Bishop Kojal two days after Reagan's Berlin speech. Dr. Sneiss has his disciples now in much of Europe and he would have a busy practice today on our own Golden Shores, in California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and the nation's very capital.

Among the irritations in the Warsaw speech were these words: 'We put faith and family, not government and bureaucracy, at the center of our lives.' As that was being said, the parents of a gravely ill child, Charlie Gard, were tussling with government officials in London who did not want to release their infant to them.

A Polish philosopher, ZbigniewStawrowski, has written:

The fundamental cleavage is not the West v. Islam or the West v. the rest, but within the West itself: between those who recognize the values of Judaeo-Christian Graeco-Roman culture and those who use terms like 'democracy,values,rights' but pervert the latter. So it means democracy of the elites, values of secularism, rights to kill Charlie Gard, marriage that has nothing to do with sex, sex that … is a 'private' matter to be funded by the confiscatory state and your duty to support this incoherence…

The Polish king Jan III Sobieski rescued Christian civilization at the gates of Vienna in 1683. That was one of the 'troubles' that Poland has caused in the past five hundred years. We survive because of such troublesome behavior.

Just before the Warsaw speech, former president Obama teased the cautions of the Logan Act by making a foreign policy speech in Indonesia, in which he warned against 'an aggressive kind of nationalism.' He was never guilty of that in his many contrite speeches to foreign countries Muslim and other. At the same time, in an interview with the French journal La Croix, the new Cardinal Archbishop of Newark, New Jersey, denounced 'an exaggerated patriotism in the United States,' and alleged that, 'President Trump appeals to the dark side of Americans. He speaks to fears, to insecurities.' The throngs of Poles who cheered the president in Warsaw did not think that he was appealing to their dark side, for their national experience had tutored them harshly in what really makes darkness dark. Busy as they were preparing picnics and fireworks, few people in New York and New Jersey seem to have read La Croix and the torch carried by 'Liberty Enlightening the World,' the State of Liberty, which is near Newark, was not unplugged.

Over the July 4 weekend, a large conference of invited Catholic leaders was held in Orlando, Florida, organized as 'an ongoing initiative of the Bishops' Working Group on the Life and Dignity of the Human Person.' Undaunted by the failure of countless conferences and 'renewal programs' over recent decades to accomplish their stated purpose, the organizers cannot be faulted for a lack of optimism in thinking that a new missionary zeal may be born from several days of speeches, seminars, 'dialogues' and an occasional performance of soporific 'Christian' elevator music. The tone was upbeat, and one does not want to squelch the Spirit, but the general tone was of human optimism rather than supernatural hope, and not altogether more reassuring than Captain Smith telling the passengers on the top deck of Titanic to ignore any pieces of ice.

Orlando is not Warsaw and Orlando's Disney World is not Krasinski Square, which was a buffer between the Warsaw Ghetto and the rest of the city. Sleeping Beauty's castle is safe in Orlando, but the Nazis demolished the Badeni Palace facing Krasinski Square. If Catholics in the United States would learn about zeal for the Faith, they might consider a trip to Krasinski Square where, in place of Mickey Mouse, is a monument to the Warsaw Uprising. It is a silent instruction about 'the dignity of the human person' without cool entertainers and smiling clergymen preaching with 'face microphones.'

On the 150th anniversary of the editorial in the Harrisburg Patriot & Union disdaining Lincoln's remarks at Gettysburg, the editors of that newspaper's successor, The Patriot News very gentlemanly, and indeed nobly, rescinded those earlier articles:

…a grateful nation long ago came to view those words with reverence, without guidance from this chagrined member of the mainstream media. The world will little note nor long remember our emendation of this institution's record-but we must do as conscience demands. In the editorial about President Abraham Lincoln's speech delivered Nov. 19, 1863, in Gettysburg, the Patriot & Union failed to recognize its momentous importance, timeless eloquence, and lasting significance. The Patriot News regrets the error.

There is latitude of opinion and taste for assessing the 'timeless eloquence' of any modern oratory, of which our nation has been bereft during the last administration despite all sorts of efforts to convince us that Demosthenes haunted the Potomac, even if the presidential speeches were inchoate in logic and blighted in diction. But it would be much in the order of natural virtue, let alone Christian justice, to ask an apology from those numerous savants who said in 2016 that the man who spoke with lasting significance in Warsaw on July 6, 2017 is 'manifestly unfit to be president of the United States.'

[Fr. George W. Rutler is pastor of St. Michael's church in New York City. He is the author of many books including Principalities and Powers: Spiritual Combat 1942-1943 (South Bend, IN: St. Augustine's Press) and Hints of Heaven (Sophia Institute Press). His latest book is He Spoke To Us (Ignatius, 2016).

[Crisisagazine] 2194.15


CF News / World news

International gloria.tv.news

 

[gloria.tv] 2194.16


CF News / World news

International Some jihad headlines of the week

 

Costa Rica : Jihad terror attack at Ariana Grande concert foiled

Egypt : Islamic jihadis murder two German tourists, five policemen

Egypt: Churches halt all activities for the rest of July because of the jihad terror threat

Germany : Sharia police using force to enforce Islamic laws

Germany : Jihad massacre planned with money extorted fromVatican

International : ISIS online ad : 'Deflowered slave for sale, age 13, slim, tall, $9,000'

Kashmir: : Muslims attack Hindus on pilgrimage, murder seven

Kenya : Christians required to 'recite Islamic dogmas'; killed if they can't do so

Nigeria : Eight murdered as 'apostates who have left the fold of Islam'

Pakistan : Ad for sewer-workers - 'only for non-Muslims'

Sweden : Muslima infiltrates church to report on converts to Christianity

UK ; Five jihad attacks thwarted in last few weeks; one within minutes of being carried out

UK : Burger vendor fined by sharia court for criticizing Islam

UK: Muslim teen plotted jihad massacre at Justin Bieber concert

UK :Muslim radio station broadcasts 25 hours of speeches calling for jihad

USA : Muslim pleads guilty to aiding jihad terrorists, paying to have judge murdered

 

[CF News] 2194.17


CF News / World news

International The Prophet Voris

 

 

[CMTV] 2194.18


CF News / World news

 

International The World Over with Raymond Arroyo

 

 

 

[EWTN] 2194.19

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Newman

 

Newman and his contemporaries

Fr Groescheltalks with Edward Short

 

 

[EWTN] 2194.20

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Media

 

Remembering Joaquin Navarro-Valls

 

 

[EWTN] 2194.21


CF News / Media

Prayers for 'Mother Mushroom', jailed Vietnamese Catholic blogger

Mother MushroomFR TIM FINIGAN blogs : 'Say a prayer for Vietnamese Catholic blogger Mary Magdalene Nguyen Ngoc Nhu Quynh (37) aka 'Mother Mushroom' who was sentenced to ten years in prison on 29 June. She was charged under the Article 88 of the 1999 penal code for 'spreading propaganda against the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.' (See the full story at the Asian Catholic News Service UCA News.)

Among other causes, Mother Mushroom has campaigned against the killing of civilians by police, a Taiwan-owned steel plant Formosa Ha Tinh which has killed thousands of fish in Vietnam by releasing toxic wastewater, government land confiscations related to a Chinese-backed bauxite mine, the suffering of poor people waiting at hospital because they were unable to bribe officials,

Mother Mushroom received the Civil Rights Defender of the Year award in 2015 and the 2017 International Women of Courage Award.

Mary Magdalene Nguyen Ngoc Nhu Quynh has already spent nine months in prison awaiting trial. During the first seven months, she was only allowed a diet of anchovies and spinach soup and, in a cruel and barbarous humiliation reminiscent of the reign of terror, was denied female sanitary products and underwear.

In response to the sentence which has caused shock across the world, Catholic lawyer Le Cong Dinh said. 'I did not realize what a state of panic the ruling party is in.' He added, 'It is certain that in her lifetime she will witness the death knell of the regime that sentenced her.'

Let us pray that this is true. The treatment of Mother Mushroom, Mary Magdalene Nguyen Ngoc Nhu Quynh brings shame to the good people and the beautiful country of Vietnam. They deserve better than a government that cannot bear criticism and has to survive by persecuting good and honest citizens who have won international admiration for their courage and humanity.

[http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.co.uk] 2194.22

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Book review

Building a Bridge

 

The sanctification of Sodomy

Building a Bridge. How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter Into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion and Sensitivity. Fr James Martin (HarperCollins), Amazon. £15.99

CHRISTOPHER A.FERRARA writes for Fatima Perspectives : 'Father Gerald E. Murray is a two-fisted defender of the Faith with an Ivy League pedigree (Dartmouth College) and a doctorate in canon law. He is a major asset to EWTN in its increasingly important 'mainstream' commentary on what I call the Bergoglian tumult. He is the ecclesial opposite of this character . . .

Fr Martin

. . . Father James Martin, a media darling on account of his revolting promotion of the 'gay priesthood' and its imaginary right to 'come out' precisely as the 'gay priesthood,' as well as his support of 'gay marriage.'

A telling indication of the parlous state of the Church under Pope Bergoglio is that Martin has not only suffered no consequences for his work of subversion but has been made a consultant to the Vatican's Secretariat for Communications. Evidently, Martin's relentless 'pro-gay' campaign sits well with a Vatican apparatus that now involves, as Edward Pentin reported for EWTN's National Catholic Register,

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/the-drug-fueled-homosexual-scandal-allegations-at-the-holy-office

a homosexual orgy in a luxury apartment located in the same building as is the very headquarters of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that Pope Bergoglio is in the process of taking out of commission.

Father Murray makes short work of Martin's abominable book - lauded by the media - on 'How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter Into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion and Sensitivity.'

First of all, notes Father Murray, there is no 'LGBT Community.' There is, rather, a 'lumping together of those who reject the natural order of human sexuality in different ways, and who thus share a common interest in seeing that laws and societal norms and customs that support that natural order be proscribed.'

With the bracing clarity that characterizes his commentary in general, Father Murray cuts to the heart of the evil of Martin's book:

'The point of this book is not to suggest ways in which the Church, in fidelity to the teaching of Christ, can improve her outreach to those persons who feel attracted to commit the sin of sodomy in the hope that they will reject this wrongful tendency and embrace chastity…. The real purpose of this book is to advocate for a relaxation of the Church's teaching that sodomy is gravely immoral and that any attraction to commit acts of sodomy is an objective disorder in one's personality.'

The sin of sodomy! How many clerics these days are willing to call this sin what it is? Only a courageous few who refuse, like Father Murray, to cower before the tyranny of political correctness.

As Father Murray further notes, confirming what I have also contended, Martin simply 'rejects the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church that the 'inclination' to 'homosexual tendencies' is 'objectively disordered''' and prefers that people inclined to commit sodomy be called 'differently ordered.' But, Father Murray warns, if that terminological trickery were to succeed, it would signal that the inclination to commit sodomy 'is simply different, and not disordered' and '[h]omosexual activity would simply be natural behavior for 'differently ordered' people.'

Indeed, Murray observes, 'The thesis of this book is that lesbians, gays, bisexual persons and transsexual/transgendered persons have been made to be such by God, and thus they should gladly live and express their God-given, differently ordered sexuality in a differently ordered way. The truth is very different.'

In his usual forthright manner, Father Murray concludes with the simple truth: 'Inclinations or tendencies toward sexual acts that are neither procreative or unitive, and thus inherently immoral, do not represent who we are or how we were made by God. They are deficits, ultimately traceable to original sin, which need to be dealt with by God's grace and our willingness to believe firmly that God's law is good and will produce the greatest happiness in our lives.'

Priests like Father Gerald Murray represent the hope for restoration in the Church. Priests like Father Martin represent an accelerating decadence that makes clearer by the day that this restoration cannot be long in coming, and that it will come with a divine intervention of the most dramatic sort.

[FP] 2194.23

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Comment from the internet

 

Dame Alice von Hildebrand ~ The Journey Home

 

 

[EWTN] 2194.24


CF News / Vatican watch

An example of Catholic resistance: Princess Elvina Pallavicini

Pr. PallaviciniROBERTO DE MATTEI writes for Rorate Caeli : 'Forty years ago a historical event took place: Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre held a conference on June 6th 1977 at the Pallavicini Palace in Rome, on the subject “The Church after the Council'. I  think it is worthwhile to recall that event, on the basis of notes and documents I have kept.
           
Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X (1970), after the priestly ordinations of June 29th 1976, was suspended a divinis on July 22nd of the same year.  Informed Catholics however, had serious doubts as to the canonical legitimacy of these measures and in particular, incomprehension with regard to the behavior of Paul VI who seemed to reserve his censorships for only those who said they wanted to remain faithful to Church Tradition.  In this climate of disorientation, in April of 1977, Princess Elvina Pallavicini (1914 -2004) decided to invite Monsignor Lefebvre to her palace in the Quirinal, to hear his reasoning.

Princess Pallavicini was 63 years old at the time and the widow of Prince Guglielmo Pallavicini who had been killed on his first war mission in 1940.  For many years she had been in a wheelchair as a result of progressive paralysis, but she was a woman of indomitable spirit. She had a close group of  friends and advisors around her, among whom were Marquis Roberto Malvezzi Campeggi (1907-1979), Colonel of the Papal Noble Guard at the time of the corps’ dissolution in 1970, and Marquis Luigi Coda Nunziante di San Ferdinando (1930-2015), former Commander of the Italian Navy. Initially, news of the conference circulating during the month of May did not stir up any concern from the Vatican.  Paul VI thought it would have been easy to convince the Princess to desist from her idea and entrusted the task to one of his closest collaborators, “Don Sergio' Pignedoli (1910-1980) whom he had made a cardinal in 1973. 


The prelate called the Princess and first of all asked kindly about her illness. “I am happy –Elvina Pallavicini noted ironically - about your interest [in my physical well-being] after such a long period of silence'. After about an hour of pleasantries the cardinal’s question at last arrived: “I heard you will be receiving Monsignor Lefebvre. Will it be a public or private conference?' If it is at my home it can only be private', the princess replied. The cardinal then ventured: “Wouldn’t it be opportune to postpone it? Monsignor Lefebvre has made the Holy Father suffer quite a lot. He is very grieved about this initiative…' Princess Elvina’s reply chilled Cardinal Pignedoli “Your Eminence, I think I can receive anyone I like in my own home.'  

Faced with this unexpected resistance, the Vatican turned to Prince Aspreno Colonna (1916-1987), who still occupied, ad personam, the office of Assistant to the Papal Throne. When the head of this historic household asked to be received, the Princess told him she was busy. Prince Colonna asked to visit the next day at the same time, but the noblewoman’s reply was the same. While the Prince withdrew quietly, the Secretary of State thought of getting through in another way.  Monsignor Andrea Lanza Cordero di Montezemolo, who had just been consecrated Archbishop and named Nuncio to Papua-New Guinea, asked for an audience with the Princess. The prelate was the son of Colonel Giuseppe Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo (1901-1944), head of the Monarchic Resistance in Rome and shot by the Germans at the Fosse Ardeatine. During the German occupation, the young Princess Elvina had collaborated with him, meriting a bronze medal of honor.  I also took part in the meeting, but my presence really irritated the future cardinal, who, in vain, appealed to the memory of his father to avert the upcoming conference. The Nuncio was told that it was the same resistance of many soldiers to National Socialism, and how it was necessary at times, to disobey unjust orders from superiors in order to respect the dictates of one’s conscience. 

At this point the Secretary of State played his last card, by turning to the King of Italy, Umberto II, in exile in Cascais. Marquis Falcone Lucifero, Minister of the Royal Household, telephoned the Princess to let her know that the Sovereign had strongly urged her to postpone the conference. “I’m astonished at how His Majesty allows himself to be intimidated by the Secretary of State, after everything the Vatican did to the monarchy', she replied decisively, confirming that the conference would be duly held on the date established.  Marquis Lucifero, being the elderly gentleman he was, sent the Princess a bouquet of roses.

At this point the Vatican decided to use tougher tactics. A real campaign of psychological terrorism then began in the major daily newspapers presenting the Princess as an obstinate aristocrat, surrounded by a handful of “nostalgics' in a world destined to disappear.  In private, it was made known to Donna Elvina that, if the conference was to take place, she would be excommunicated.     

On May 30th, with a press release to Ansa, the Princess specified that “her initiative was not motivated by any intention of challenging ecclesiastic authority, but rather by love and fidelity to Holy Mother Church and the Magisterium.' “The contrasts in the conciliar Church – continued the communiqué – unfortunately exist, apart from the person of Monsignor Lefebvre, and in Italy to no lesser degree, even if less evident than in the rest of the Catholic world. We intend with the conference on June 6th to offer Monsignor Lefebvre the possibility of voicing directly his theses in full freedom, precisely with the aim of clarifying the problems which disturb and grieve the Catholic world so much, in the certainty that peace and serenity can be brought back again through a restored unity to the truth:'

On May 31st, on the front page of the daily newspaper “Il Tempo', a declaration from Prince Aspreno Colonna appeared where we read “The Roman Patriciate dissociates itself from the initiative', deploring it as “completely inopportune'. The bombshell was dropped however, on June 5th by the Cardinal Vicar of Rome, Ugo Poletti (1914 1997). With a  aggressive statement in the Italian Bishops’ daily newspaper Avvenire, Poletti attacked Monsignor Lefebvre and “his aberrant followers', defining them as “a handful of class nostalgics,  prisoners of traditional habits'. He further expressed, “astonishment, pain and sorrow, but the firmest disapproval for the offence made against the Faith, the Catholic Church and Her Divine Head, Jesus' , Monsignor Lefebvre having placed in doubt “fundamental truths of the kind relating to the infallibility of the Catholic Church founded on Peter and his successors, in matters of doctrine and morals'.

From the Princess’ headquarters there came an immediate reply: “It is difficult to understand how the private expression of theses which have been those of all the bishops of the world until a few years ago, can disturb the security of an authority to such an extent, as it has on its side the strength of doctrinal continuity and the evidence of its positions.' The Princess declared: “I am a more than convinced Apostolic Roman Catholic, seeing that I have reached the true sense of Religion through the refining of  physical and moral suffering: I owe nothing to anyone, I have no honours nor prebends to defend, and I thank God for everything. Within the limits that the Church allows, I may dissent, I may talk, I may act: I have to talk and I have to act: it would be cowardice not to. And allow me say, that in our Home, also in this generation, there is no room for the cowardly.' 

Finally the fateful day of June 6th arrived. The conference was carefully reserved for four hundred invited guests, controlled by “private security' provided by the “Alleanza Cattolica' youth, but there were more than a thousand who filled up the staircases and the garden of the historical Rospigliosi-Pallavicini Palace, famous all over the world for its works of art.  Monsignor Lefebvre arrived accompanied by his young representative in Rome, Don Emanuele du Chalard.  Princess Pallavicini went to meet him in her wheelchair, pushed by her Lady-in Waiting, Donna Elika Del Drago. Princess Virginia Ruspoli, widow of Marescotti, one of the two hero-princes at the Battle of  El Alamein, gave Monsignor Lefebvre a relic of St. Pius X which had been given to her personally by Pius XII.

Despite [the fact] that the Grand Priory of the Order of Malta in Rome had expressed “a binding necessity' to abstain from intervening at the conference, Prince Sforza Ruspoli, Count Fabrizio Sarazani and some other courageous aristocrats defied the censures of the institution and were there in the front row, right beside Monsignor François Ducaud Bourget (1897-1984), who had led the occupation of the Church Saint-Nicolas du Chardonnet in Paris on February 27th.

Princess Pallavicini introduced Monsignor Lefebvre and he took his place under the red baldachin with the coat of Arms of Pope Clement IX, Rospigliosi. The Archbishop after some moments of prayer, began with these words: “I respect the Holy See. I respect Rome. If I am here it is because I love this Catholic Rome.'  The Catholic Rome that he had before him interrupted his speech repeatedly with thunderous applause. The hall was filled to overflowing and a crowd had gathered on the great staircases of the palace.

The “Council of aggiornamento' – explained Monsignor Lefebvre – in reality wants a new definition of the Church. To be “open' and be in communion with all religions, all ideologies, all cultures, the Church should change its excessively hierarchal institutions and break up into many National Episcopal Conferences. The sacraments will insist on initiation and the collective life, more than the driving out of Satan and sin. The leit-motiv of change will be ecumenism. The practice of the missionary spirit will disappear.  The principle that “every man is Christian and doesn’t know it'  will be proclaimed, so it doesn’t matter whatever confession is practiced - it is seeking salvation.

The liturgical and ecumenical changes – continued Monsignor Lefebvre in the hushed silence of all those present – cause the disappearance of religious vocations and make for deserted seminaries. The principle of “religious liberty' sounds outrageous to the Church and Our Lord Jesus Christ, as it is nothing other than “the right to public confession of a false religion with no interference from any human authority'.

Monsignor Lefebvre then lingered for a bit on the post-council’s caving-in to Communism, referring to the repeated audiences given to Communist leaders by the Holy See; the agreement not to condemn Communism during the Council;  the contemptuous treatment reserved for more than 450 bishops who asked for this condemnation. On the contrary, dialogue with Communism was encouraged by nominating pro-Communist bishops like Monsignor Helder Camara in Brazil, Monsignor. Silva Henriques in Chile and Monsignor Mendez Arceo in Messico.

It is a fact, added Monsignor Lefebvre in conclusion, that numerous Dominicans and many Jesuits who profess heresies openly are not condemned and bishops who practice inter-communion, who introduce false religions in their dioceses and churches, who even end up blessing concubinage, are not even placed under inquiry. Only faithful Catholics risk being thrown out of churches, persecuted, condemned. “I have been suspended a divinis because I continue to form priests as they were once formed.'

Turning to a listener touched by his words, Monsignor Lefebvre concluded his conference saying: “Today the most serious obligation for a Catholic is that of conserving the Faith. It is not licit to obey those who are working to diminish Her or make Her disappear. With Baptism we asked the Church for the Faith because the Faith conducts us to eternal life.  We will continue to our very last breath to ask the Church for this Faith.'

The meeting ended with the singing of the Salve Regina.

The Vatican reporter, Benny Lai in La Nazione of June 7th, commented: “Those who expected a tribune found themselves in front of a man of meek bearing, who, before inviting those present to recite the Salve Regina, concluded [his speech], with these worlds: “I don’t want to form a group of any kind, I don’t want to disobey the Pope, but he must not ask me to become Protestant.'

The conference was a strategic victory for those who were inappropriately called traditionalists, as Monsignor Lefebvre managed to make his theses known on the international level, without [suffering] canonical consequences.

Paul VI died a year later, devastated by the death of his friend Aldo Moro.

The name of Cardinal Poletti is still linked to the murky business of  the nulla osta he granted on March 10th 1990, for the entombment of the Banda della Magliana Boss “Renatino' De Pedis, in the Basilica of Sant’Apollinare.

Princess Pallavicini came out a winner from this “challenge'. Not only was she not excommunicated, but in the following years her palace became the point of reference for many cardinals, bishops and Catholic intellectuals. She and her Roman friends were not “phantoms from the past', as the Corriere della Sera defined them on June 7th 1977, but witnesses to the Catholic Faith who were preparing the future.  Forty years later, history has proven them right.

 

[RC] 2194.24a


CF News / Comment from the internet

The Pope is making clear there is now only one centre of power at the Vatican

FR ALEXANDER LUCIE-SMITH writes for The Catholic Herald 'There is an incident in the greatest film ever made, The Godfather, where a body turns up, and someone correctly says that it is a way of sending a message. It is a phrase that comes to mind in the wake of the removal of Cardinal Gerhard Müller: this is an act that constitutes a message. But what exactly?

The Pope has told Cardinal Müller that from now on all heads of dicastery will serve five years only. So, that is the first message, directed to other Vatican chiefs – watch out, your time is short, and you can and will be removed at the end of your term. No longer will heads of dicastery stay in post for decades, as did, for example, Cardinal Ratzinger. From now on, expect to be moved around like pieces on a chessboard, because in the Vatican there is only one centre of power that counts, and it is not yours.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) has traditionally been regarded as “la suprema”. Once upon a time, everything that emerged from the Vatican had to be passed first by the CDF. By dismissing the head of the most important department of the Vatican, the Pope is reminding everyone who is really supreme.

The demotion affects not only Cardinal Müller but the entire CDF, for the entire department is being cut down to size. Indeed, as has been apparent in this papacy so far, the CDF is not what it was, but has been repeatedly sidelined.

The Pope has not moved a big hitter in to take Cardinal Müller’s place, but rather moved up Cardinal Müller’s number two, who has been in post for some time, and who could have had no ambitions of promotion, being 73 years old (two years off retirement age), besides being a rather humble and self-effacing character. Archbishop Luis Ladaria Ferrer, though a competent theologian, is a low-key appointment who is never going to rock the boat, or cause any embarrassment to the Pope. His appointment means the virtual neutralisation for the foreseeable future of the CDF as a possible hotbed of opposition.

Long gone are the days when the supreme ruler of Rome could have those who had lost his confidence thrown from the Tarpeian Rock, and gone too are the days when the Pope’s enemies were discovered floating in the Tiber. Cardinal Müller lives on and will do so in Rome, aged 69, a relatively young and very underemployed Cardinal. This may not be such a good idea from the point of view of those who want to crush all opposition.

Neither should it be forgotten that Cardinal Müller has friends. His departure is a message to them. Chief of Cardinal Müller’s friends is, of course, his mentor, Benedict XVI. The cardinal’s passing is surely a sign that the old regime is now gone forever and that the changes wrought by Pope Francis are irreversible. Other friends of the cardinal may well tremble at that thought.

 

[CH] 2194.24b


CF News / Comment from the internet

Liberal hypocrite priests and bishops

FR JOHN ZUHLSDORF blogs : 'For the record, I endorse the following in its entirety.

From Fr. Dwight Longenecker (alas, still at Patheos) from some time ago, 2015, but recently spotted on Facebook - with my usual treatment:

Blowing the Whistle on Liberal Hypocrites

On various websites and papers 'Catholic' writers discuss 'spirituality' in reverent tones and say how much they love the church while they support abortion, same sex marriage, women's ordination and the whole progressive agenda. They're hypocrites. [Do I hear an 'Amen!'?] As Pope Francis has pointed out, a Cafeteria Catholic is not a Catholic. They say they believe one thing-the Catholic faith-but they publicly and formally renounce the Catholic Church's teachings and they think they're just fine in doing so. [Remember the last part of the classic Act of Faith? 'I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because Thou hast revealed them, Who canst neither deceive nor be deceived.' God cannot be deceived. These people are in serious peril.]

It gets worse. The real snakes in the grass are the liberal hypocritical priests and bishops. [Do I hear an 'Amen!'?] You know there's a sort of media darling priest who smiles and writes clever books and goes on TV to give seemingly sage spiritual advice who then turns around and supports the LGBT agenda. [I have one or two in mind, yes.]

Only these priests are cagey. [That's one word.] They know how the church works. They pose their points as 'compassionate questions' and 'observations' They are very smart and know how to walk the tightrope-never going too far, but all the time undermining true Catholic teaching with their talk about 'listening' and 'dialogue' and 'acceptance' and 'accompanying'.

They're hypocrites, and the worst kind of hypocrites because they assume the outward form of being good, faithful and true Catholics better than anybody else.

They're not true and they're not faithful. They're wolves in shepherd's clothing and Our Lord spoke clearly about the rustler who comes in to the sheepfold to rob and kill.

It's time to blow the whistle on these hypocrites and call them what they are.

But do you know what will happen if you do? [Ohhhh yes. I surely do. I've been stabbed in the back by these types more than once.]

They'll play the passive aggressive game. [Which is not how real men deal with conflict.] If you blow the whistle and declare that the emperor is naked they'll come over all offended and hurt.

They'll put out their bottom lip and assume the spanked puppy dog look and say, 'How could you be sooo judgmental and harsh? How could you be so unaccepting?'

They'll sneak back in with their serpentine smiles and say, 'Come, let's be friends! Let's forgive one another! Let's talk. We need to listen to one another more!' Which means 'You listen to me. I'm going to filibuster this debate until you give in. I'm going to talk and talk and use false logic and human reasoning and emotional blackmail and spiritual bullying until I wear you down and you change your mind.'

Don't be taken in by them. They're hypocrites and usually they are not only hypocrites but heretics. They divide and destroy Christ's church and imperil souls.

Here endeth the rant.

I'm Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, and I endorse this message.

[wdtprs.com] 2194.25


CF News / Comment from the internet

 

An Essay on the Malaise in the Church

From Casuistry to Mercy, Towards a New Art of Pleasing? - An Essay on the Malaise in the Church by Msgr. Michel Schooyans

Msgr. SchooyansEDWARD PENTIN blogs : 'Here below, by kind permission, is an essay by the respected Msgr. Michel Schooyans, Professor Emeritus at the University of Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, on what he sees as the underlying causes of the current malaise in the Church and in wider society.

Msgr. Schooyans has a doctorate in philosophy and theology and lectured at the UniversitéCatholique de Louvain, as well as being a visiting professor at various American universities. He has written many books on political philosophy, contemporary ideologies, population policies, and conducted numerous missions in the Third World. A native of Belgium, he is also a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences of the Vatican, of the Royal Institute of International Relations in Brussels, the Institute for Demographic Policy in Paris, and the Population Research Institute in Washington.

Introduction

One might think that casuistry is dead and buried. The controversies of the XVIIth-century should be over once and for all. Rarely do any of our contemporaries still read the LettresProvinciales [Provincial Letters] and the authors whom Pascal (1623-1662) attacks therein. These authors are casuists, that is to say, moralists who seek to resolve matters of conscience without succumbing to rigorism. On rereading the famous Lettres, we were struck by the similarity emerging between a controversial document written in the XVIIth-century and the positions today defended by pastors and theologians aspiring to effect radical changes in the Church's pastoral teaching and doctrine. The recent Synod on the Family (October 2014 - October 2015) has revealed a reforming pugnacity of which the LettresProvinciales give us a better understanding today. Hence Pascal comes to be known in an unexpected light! The intention in the pages which follow is simply to whet the appetite of the reader, and help him/her to discover a new art of pleasing.

The treasure of the Church

The Synod on the Family has revealed - even assuming this was necessary - a profound malaise in the Church. A crisis of growth without doubt, but also recurrent debates on the question of ' remarried' divorced persons, ' models' for the family, the role of women, birth control, surrogate motherhood, homosexuality, euthanasia. It is futile to close our eyes: the Church is challenged in its very foundations. These are to be found in the entirety of the Holy Scriptures, in the teaching of Jesus, in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, in the announcement of the Gospel by the Apostles, in an ever finer understanding of the Revelation, in the assent of faith by the community of believers. The Church has been entrusted by Jesus with the mission of receiving these truths, casting light on their coherence, commemorating them. The Church has not been given by the Lord either a mission to modify these truths, or a mission to rewrite the Credo. The Church is the guardian of this treasure. The Church should study these truths, clarify them, deepen man's understanding of them and invite all men to adhere to them through faith. There are even discussions - on marriage for example - which were brought to a close by the Lord himself. It was specifically to conceal these historical truths that descendants of the Pharisees have denied the historicity of the Gospels (cf. Mark 10, 11).

Since the Acts of the Apostles, the Church has recognised and proclaimed itself to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic. These are distinctive ' characteristics'. The Church is one because it has only one heart, that of Jesus. The Church is holy in the sense that it invites conversion to the Lord, to prayer, to contemplation of the Lord. Man does not have the power to sanctify himself, but all are called to respond to the universal call to sanctity. The Church is catholic in the sense that it has received the gift of languages from the Holy Spirit: it is universal. The understanding of languages signifies unity in diversity, a fruit of the Holy Spirit. The Church is also apostolic in the sense that it is founded on the apostles and prophets. The apostolic succession signifies that an uninterrupted link binds us to the very source of the doctrine of the Apostles.

To offer the world the Good News he came to bring, the Lord wanted to recruit for his work the men he chose to remain with him and go forth and teach all nations (cf. Mark 3, 13-19). These men bear witness to the words they received from the very mouth of Jesus and the signs manifested by Him. These witnesses were called by the Lord to guarantee, from generation to generation, fidelity to the teaching which He himself presented. It is incumbent on them to deepen the understanding of the testimonies concerning this teaching and authenticate its tradition.

The teaching of the Lord has an exacting moral dimension. This teaching certainly urges us to a rational adherence to the golden rule, on which mankind's great sages have meditated for centuries. Jesus brings this rule to its perfection. But the Church's tradition has its own precepts of conduct, prime among which is love of God and one's neighbour. ' In everything, do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.' (cf. Matthew 7, 12). This double commandment is the fundamental benchmark for the actions of the Christian. The Christian is called to be open to the inspiration of the Spirit, which is love, and to respond to this inspiration through faith, which acts through love (cf. Ga 5, 6). Between the one, love, and the other, faith, the link is indissoluble. If, in the teaching of the Church, this link is broken, Christian morality sinks into various forms of relativism or scepticism, to the point of contentment with subjective and fluctuating opinions. A severance is created between truth and action. There is no longer any reference to the truth, nor to the authority which guarantees it. Transgression is ultimately abolished, because the moral reference points imparted by God to man are rejected. Man, it will even be suggested, no longer needs to love God in order to achieve salvation, or to believe in His love. Morality is fatally split, and the door is open wide to legalism, agnosticism and secularisation. The rules for living taught by the Prophets, , by the Lord, by the Fathers of the Church, are methodically dismantled. What then prevails are the dictates of the new jurists, heirs to the scribes and Pharisees. Morality hence becomes a form of gnostic positivism, a knowledge reserved for the initiates. This knowledge only acquires ' legitimacy' in the purely voluntaristic decisions of those who claim the privilege of announcing a new morality, severed from the founding reference to the revealed truth.

In his teaching, Saint Paul urges us to avoid the snares of a morality devoid of roots in the Revelation. This is how he exhorts Christians:

'You must not fall in with the manners of this world. There must be inward change, a remaking of your minds, so that you can satisfy yourselves what is God's will, the good thing, the desirable thing, the perfect thing.' (Rm 12, 2). ' And this is my prayer for you: may your love grow richer and richer yet, in the fullness of its knowledge and the depth of its perception, so that you may learn to prize what is of value.' (Ph 1, 9 s.; cf. 1 Th 5, 19-22).

The return of casuistry

Here one perceives the return of casuistry, believed to allow moralists to examine and resolve matters of conscience. Certain moralists intend to offer solutions which please those who have recourse to their superior knowledge. Among the casuists of yesterday and today, the fundamental principles of morality are eclipsed by the (frequently divergent) opinions pronounced by these grave spiritual advisors. The disinterest with which fundamental morality is now viewed leaves the way open for the introduction of a positive law, which removes standards of conduct from any remaining reference to the fundamental rules of morality. The casuist, or neo-casuist, has become legislator and judge. He cultivates the art of confusing the faithful. Concern for the truth, revealed and accessible to reason, is now of no interest. Ultimately, the only interest will be in ' probable' positions. Through probabilism, one proposition is open to contradictory interpretations.

Probabilism will make it possible to blow first hot, then cold, for and against. Forgotten is the teaching of Jesus: ' Let your word be 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from the evil one.' (Mt 5, 37; Jc 5, 12 ; cf. 2 Co 1, 20). However, each neo-casuist will go with his own interpretation. The tendency is towards a confusion of propositions, duplicity, double or triple truth, an avalanche of interpretations. The casuist has a divided heart, but intends to be a friend to the world (cf. Jc 4, 4-8)

Progressively, the rules of behaviour proceeding from the will of the Lord and handed down by the Magisterium of the Church are languishing in decline. The moral assessment of acts can therefore be modified. Not content with toning down this assessment, the casuists wish to transform the moral law itself. This will be the task of casuists, confessors, spiritual advisors and, on occasion, bishops. All must have a concern to please. They must in consequence resort to compromise, accommodate their arguments to the satisfaction of human passions: no person must be rebuffed. The moral assessment of an act no longer depends on whether it conforms to the will of God, as made known to us by the Revelation. This depends on the intention of the moral agent and this intention can be modulated and moulded by the spiritual advisor who ' supports' his followers. In order to please, the spiritual advisor will have to soften the rigour of the doctrine handed down by tradition. The pastor will have to adapt his words to the nature of man, whose passions are naturally lead into sin. Hence the progressive relegation of references to original sin and grace. The influence of Pelagius (a monk of British origin, see s.) is evident: man must save himself and take his destiny into his own hands. Telling the truth forms no part of the role of the casuist, who must captivate, present a line of argument which