The National Association of Catholic Families


This edition of CF NEWS (No.2197) posted at 10.15 am on n Sunday, August 6th, 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





TODAY IS THE FEAST OF THE TRANSFIGURATION. After the Muslims took Constantinople in 1453 after a 53-day siege, Sultan Mehmed II went next for Hungary, first attacking Belgrade.  It didn’t go well for Mehmed.  The siege turned into a counterattack which overran the Muslim camp. The Islamic invaders were forced to retreat. In 1456 Pope Callixtus III made the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord a feast of the universal Church in honor of the defeat of Islam at Belgrade. [wdtprs.com]


Vatican watch

Papal prayer intentions for August continue reading
Paglia : Go right ahead and receive Holy Communion continue reading
Another Vatican population control conference with pro-abortion speakers continue reading

Humanae Vitae

Gay parenting and the conjugal ideal   VIDEO  continue reading

United Nations

Did International Law kill Charlie Gard? continue reading

News from around the worl

COLOMBIA Is the Vatican coddling Communists? continue reading
IRELAND Hundreds leaving Islam for Christianity continue reading
GERMANY How ISIS pushed me to make a video continue reading
HUNGARY Prime Minister warns that Europe's being deliberately de-Christianised continue reading
IRELAND Minister prepares legislation before referendum is confirmed continue reading
SWEDEN Agency to cut funds from charities that don't support abortion continue reading
UK Advertising agency rejects pro-life poster continue reading
UK Over 1 billion of aid money for family planning, overseas abortion continue reading
UK Bishop Davies : Christians could be treated as extremists continue reading
UK BPAS to Boots: 'Push the morning after-pill or else' continue reading
UK Nietzschean transgender proposals continue reading
INTERNTIONAL gloria.tv.news
  VIDEO  continue reading
INTERNTIONAL Some jihad headlines of the week continue reading
INTERNTIONAL The Prophet Voris
  VIDEO   continue reading
INTERNTIONAL The World Over with Raymond Arroyo
  VIDEO  continue reading


Fr Ian Ker   VIDEO  continue reading


YouTube move to block videos with controversial religious content continue reading

Comment from the internet

Interview with James Bogle   VIDEO continue reading
The Three Musketeers of the Court of Pope Francis continue reading
The Galat Case: A lesson in prudence for Papal critics continue reading
Next Stage in the Bergoglian debacle continue reading
Protestantism in the Church has failed ~ let's try Catholic Tradition continue reading
The Church of the Vatican II renewal is on life support. Here's why continue reading
Saint Ignatius on heresy, and the capsizing boat continue reading
Remembering St. Padre Pio's words on abortion continue reading
The Trojan Horse of Population Control continue reading
The Philosophical Key to Bergoglianism continue reading
The Second Vatican Council and the Message of Fatima continue rading
Gerhard Cardinal Mueller continue reading

Our Catholic Heritage

Site of the day : Quin Abbey   VIDEO  continue reading
Saint of the Day continue reading
Relics of St Cuthbert at Durham Cathedral continue reading
Teach me, O Lord, the way of your statutes
  VIDEO  continue reading


A Carthusian monk continue reading continue reading



To TRANSLATE this bulletin,Click HERE and then enter the URL
http://www.cfnews.org.uk/CF_News 2197.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


For podcasts click here








































Vatican watch


Prayer intentions for August




[CTV] 2197.1b



CF News / Vatican watch

Paglia to public adulterers: Go right ahead and receive Holy Communion

CHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA writes for Fatima Perspectives : 'No one, not even a Pope, can alter the constant teaching and integrally related discipline of the Church on the 'intrinsic impossibility' of absolution and Holy Communion for public adulterers in 'second marriages' who intend to continue their adulterous relations.

Recall what Pope Benedict XVI said about the function of the papacy in his first sermon as the newly elected Roman Pontiff:

'The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: the Pope's ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God's Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.'

Consider God's word concerning divorce: 'Every one that putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her that is put away from her husband, commmitteth adultery.' (Luke 16:18)

Based on God's word, and the constant teaching and discipline of the Church in obedience to it for 2,000 years, both John Paul II and Benedict XVI - acting as a Pope must - reaffirmed the Church's bimillenial teaching that public adulterers, by the very fact of their state in life, cannot partake of the Blessed Sacrament.

But now, thanks solely to Amoris Laetitia (AL), we are told by the very prelate Pope Francis has put in charge of the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for the Study of Marriage and Family that this teaching has, in practice, been overthrown. Archbishop Vincenzio Paglia (of obscene mural infamy), openly declares in a recent interview that those living in 'irregular' unions are now to be 'integrated' into ecclesial life just as they are, with no prior amendment of life:

'Those who live in irregular situations, if they accept being accompanied in a shared faith journey in the Christian community (especially if the process is promoted and guided by the bishop), will be able to encounter various and gradual forms of integration, not excluding sacramental integration.'

The meaningless verbiage­ - 'being accompanied in a shared faith journey in the Christian community… gradual forms of integration' - is merely a fig leaf that hides a naked permission for those living in various states of habitual and public adultery to receive Holy Communion without a prior amendment of life. And that is exactly what the bishops of Germany, Sicily, Malta and elsewhere have authorized, while bishops in other countries, such as Poland, continue to defend the Church's bimillenial teaching and discipline, as did Francis' two immediate predecessors on the Chair of Peter.

The headline at Life Site News says it all: 'Vatican archbishop: Pope Francis opened Communion to adulterers.' And this is the prelate who has been made the head of John Paul II's institute on marriage and family!

We are witnesses to a growing catastrophe. Willful blindness to the facts is not an option here. All we can do in the face of that reality is precisely what Our Lady of Fatima requested of all Catholics, which includes praying for the Pope. Pray as well for the divine resolution that will surely follow upon the Consecration of Russia to Mary's Immaculate Heart.

Our Lady of Fatima, intercede for us!

[FP] 2197.1


CF News / World news

Vatican to host another population control conference with pro-abortion speakers

THE PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (PAS) has announced another population control conference, “Health of People, Health of Planet and Our Responsibility: Climate Change, Air Pollution and Health” will be held November 2-4 at the Vatican.

The conference’s benevolent title obscures the questionable personal ideologies and professional objectives of a number of its slated participants.

Participants include:

Professor John Schellnhuber

John Schellnhuber is founding director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and chair of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU). He is considered one of the world’s leading climate scientists and one of the strongest advocates of the theory that the earth is undergoing catastrophic global warming.

Schellnhuber is also known for his advocacy of a one-world government. In order to avoid his catastrophic predictions for unchecked climate change, Schellnhuber proposes the need for indispensable forms of world governance – or in his own words, a “global democratic society” – to be organized within the framework of the United Nations. Schellnhuber says in his 2013 article “Expanding the Democracy Universe” that “global democracy might be organized around three core activities, namely (i) an Earth Constitution; (ii) a Global Council; and (iii) a Planetary Court.”

This one-world climate guru has little patience for those who do not accept his scientific theories and conclusions. In a May 2014 interview with musician Pierre Baigorry, Schellnhuber claimed that sometimes politicians have to take citizens to task “with coercion” to overcome their own resistance to change.

Sir Partha Dasgupta

Dasgupta is a proponent of population control, lauding China’s Human Development Index despite that country’s brutal “family planning” policy. He is also a patron of Population Matters, formerly known as the Optimum Population Trust, that lobbies for a “sustainable population size,” including the “reversing of population growth” in many countries.

Dasgupta said, “We need to unravel the processes that led to the ills we are now facing. That is why the Vatican symposia involve natural and social scientists, as well as scholars from the humanities. That the symposia are being held at the Papal Academy is also symbolic. It shows that the ancient hostility between science and the church, at least on the issue of preserving Earth’s services, has been quelled.”

Peter Raven

Peter Raven is a biologist who specializes in plants, butterflies, and evolution. At the last PAS symposium, Raven said, 'We need at some point to have a limited number of people, which is why Pope Francis and his three most recent predecessors have always argued that you should not have more children than you can bring up properly.'

Raven was incorrect to claim that the three popes before Pope Francis agree with him on the 'need at some point to have a limited number of people' so they can be raised 'properly'.

Jeffrey Sachs

Columbia University’s Jeffery Sachs, who co-hosted the Vatican’s 2015 conference on climate change, believes that abortion is a legitimate way to reduce the population.

Sachs made a plea for legalizing abortion as a cost-effective way to eliminate “unwanted children” when contraception fails in his 2008 book Commonwealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet.

He describes abortion as a “lower-risk and lower-cost option” than bringing a new human life to the world.

He also wrote that the “legalization of abortion reduces a country’s total fertility rate significantly, by as much as half a child on average,” and criticized former U.S. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush for denying groups that provide and promote abortion any U.S. funding through the Mexico City Policy.

Sachs is listed as an author of the background note to a declaration adopted by scientists and religious leaders at the 2015 Vatican conference that validated the theory that human activity is changing the Earth’s climate. Unlike the declaration, the background note with a Vatican emblem at the head speaks of the world’s population as a problem.

U.S. politicians participating at the upcoming Vatican conference

A few political figures from the United States will also participate. All hail from California: U.S. Congressman Scott Peters; state Senator Kevin de Leo´n, president pro Tempore of the California State Senate; and California Gov. Jerry Brown, who will deliver a keynote address on the closing day of the event.

All three are strong supporters of Planned Parenthood.

Archbishop Marcelo Sa´nchez Sorondo

Presiding over the event will be the head of the Pontifical Academy of Science, Archbishop Marcelo Sa´nchez Sorondo.

Sorondo has an anti-capitalist worldview and is opposed to traditional Church doctrine.

Sorondo’s connection to population control elites is clear, not only from his bringing them to the Vatican but also their feting him and having him sit on the Leadership Council of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, an organization launched by then-U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. On the leadership council, alongside Sorondo, are Sachs and Ted Turner, two of the best-known promoters of coercive population control in the world. Turner held an event at the posh Harvard Club in New York City to celebrate Sorondo’s work on Sept. 25, 2015.

At the Biological Extinction Symposium, the Archbishop’s confounding statements regarding procreation were disconnected from Church principles. He said, 'Many times, we don’t know exactly what is the doctrine of the Church.”

Past performance indicative of future behavior?

The last few PAS conferences have caused pro-life critics to point out that no strong orthodox Catholic voices have been present, and so views antithetical to church doctrine have been categorically asserted without anyone presenting Catholic corrections to their statements.

At one, Archbishop Sorondo himself promoted reducing family sizes, saying that “when you have education” women will only have one or two children instead of seven.

One of the conference experts replied that “without having access to birth control, she will have more children than she wants.” “And that’s why it is not just education alone, it is a combination of education and birth control that brings fertility down.”

Nobody present at the conference contradicted him.


[LSN] 2197.1a



























Humanae Vitae


Gay Parenting and the Conjugal Ideal: Implications for Research

FR. D. PAUL SULLINS, Associate Professor of Sociology at Catholic University of America, on 'Gay Parenting and the Conjugal Ideal: Implications for Research'. Fr. Sullins' talk was part of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists Conference.



[Franciscan University of Steubenville] 2197.2























United Nations

UN logo


Did International Law kill Charlie Gard?

STEFANO GENNARINI, J.D., reports : 'Gard’s tiny body was deprived of life two weeks before his first birthday, his ventilator was switched off after his parents, Chris and Connie, put up a fierce fight against the UK National Health Service that shocked the country and the world.

“I don’t think parents understand how few rights they have,” Paul Diamond told the Friday Fax. The well-known UK barrister who works religious freedom cases said Charlie’s story exposed a “gaping hole” in UK and European law, that is, the absence of parental rights.

When the hospital sued Charlie’s parents to switch off the ventilator of their disabled boy in March, it claimed it was in Charlie’s best interest to die. His parents, who never left his side, said Charlie was responsive, and the hospital admitted they had no indication that he might be in pain. The UK courts sided with the hospital.

Charlie suffered from a genetic disorder so rare it has only been diagnosed 16 times. The condition leads to muscular degeneration and brain damage, and is considered always to be terminal.

Since November last year, Charlie’s parents said they wanted to try a new experimental treatment. After stalling for months, the hospital said it was in Charlie’s best interests to die and eventually the hospital took the parents to court. The judge who heard the case said it was his duty to decide Charlie’s best interests, not his parents, and that Charlie should be left to “die with dignity.” The European Court of Human Rights agreed.

The “best interests” standard invoked by the hospital and judges to switch off Charlie’s ventilator is from the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the most widely ratified UN human rights treaty. It states that “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.”

Diamond said the standard was de facto incorporated in UK law through a 1989 Act of Parliament and allows doctors in the National Health Service, as well as judges and other government bureaucrats, to challenge parental decisions on health care and other matters.

The British judge asked, “Some people may ask why the court has any function in this process; why can the parents not make this decision on their own? The answer is that, although the parents have parental responsibility, overriding control is vested in the court exercising its independent and objective judgment in the child’s best interests.”

Diamond explained that as a result of the “best interests of the child” standard there is no “deference to parental views” in the United Kingdom. “There is no concept that custodially fit parents can make decisions for their children. Even decisions that courts and experts disagree with.”

The United States alone has declined to ratify the UN treaty and efforts to pre-empt the UN standard include the Parental Rights Amendment, recently re-introduced in the U.S. Senate by Sen. Lindsey Graham. When the Holy See ratified the treaty it made a reservation that affirmed the “primary and inalienable rights of parents.”


[C-FAM] 2197.UN1



























News from around the world


Colombia (and Venezuela) Is the Vatican Coddling Communism?

OnePeterFiveEditor's note: The following comes from Domingo Caro, a contributor well versed in politics and the Church in South America.

COLOMBIA has been terrorized and turned into a drug-dealing country by communist subversion for decades. The worst force in this regard has a name: the 'Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia' (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), or FARC. After President Uribe (2002-2010) struck them hard, they decided to change their strategy and secure power through elections, as Hugo Chávez himself did in neighboring Venezuela.

Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos has played an active role in this strategy. Last year, he signed a 'peace' agreement with FARC and proposed a referendum to approve it. The campaign for the approval was relentless; all the polls were manipulated to show huge support. The pope got involved in favor of the agreement, which had been promoted by him and Raúl Castro, but the people of Colombia refused to be deceived and voted 'no.'

Pope Francis's intervention was harshly criticized, and with weighty reasons, by Spanish-American Catholics. The blog El Quijote Siglo XXI pointed out the following: the 297-page agreement was the surrender of Colombia to a form of communism designed by Raúl Castro. In those pages, the State agrees to impose on children's education and on a variety of policies the ideology of gender [1], to give a salary for years to members of the guerrillas, to forgive the abundant crimes against humanity committed by FARC, to allow FARC to own radio stations to promote '21st-century socialism,' and to have some seats in Congress and to keep the money gained from drug-dealing.

When the agreement was signed, Pietro Cardinal Parolin said, '[T]he Holy Father has followed with attention the efforts of past years in search for reconciliation and harmony, and he has encouraged such efforts, without taking part in the concrete solutions[.]' But Francis went beyond this. He declared, 'I promise that when this agreement is approved and protected by the referendum, then I will visit Colombia in order to teach peace.' He was so sure that the Colombian people would approve the agreement in the referendum!

The pope had reasons to be sure. He had pressed with his papal authority for its approval, and the proposed public question was deceitful: 'Do you support the Final Agreement for the end of the armed conflict and the construction of a stable and lasting peace?' Was not Francis taking part in a fraud, an attempt to drag a Catholic people into approving its own destruction?

The story does not end here. The people were not deceived by propaganda and papal cajoling. However, Santos went on with the application of the agreement, and so did Raúl Castro, FARC, and Francis. Next September 1, FARC will become a political party, and next September 6, Francis will go to bless the ensuing 'reconciliation' and 'harmony.' The Conference of Bishops has promoted this visit and so has accepted the papal blessing of the deception of the Colombian people.

Such has been the Vatican diplomatic line in Colombia under Cardinal Parolin and Pope Francis.

In neighboring Venezuela, the Vatican has followed exactly the same line. The Christian people in both countries are confused. But in Venezuela, where the perversity of this diplomatic line is more visible because of the genocide the people are suffering - a catastrophe Francis and Parolin have ignored - the confusion is being expressed boldly. Even José Luis Rodríguez, a famous popular singer, threw a challenge to the pope: 'The silence of the pope is astonishing and turns him into an accomplice in the recent deaths and the deaths to come in this drug-dealing regime. What is wrong with you, Bergoglio?' Also: 'The pope is closer to the communist left than to Christ. Define yourself, Bergoglio!'

The Vatican has criticized the opposition more than the government. Pope Francis has never condemned the tyrannical repression in Venezuela; instead, he has always called 'the government and all members of Venezuelan society to avoid any new form of violence and to search for negotiated solutions.' He has therefore ignored the oppression to which the Communist government has submitted the people and has ignored the classical doctrine of the right of the people to defend themselves from tyranny. Pope Francis and the Vatican have been promoting 'dialogue' and 'negotiations' with a totalitarian tyranny, which has used the authority of the Vatican to gain time to overcome several crises (in 2014 and in 2016).

Does Pope Francis not know that the tyranny has full power and is oppressing a defenseless people?

In the recent crisis, the one that started in April, the Vatican followed the same path. I have already quoted a public statement made by Francis in April. In his Easter Message, he insisted on the same line. And there is indubitable evidence that Cardinal Parolin is directly responsible (as he was in 2014 and 2016) for the disastrous course followed in the last month by the opposition leaders, associated under an organization called MUD (Mesa de la Unidad Democrática, the Democratic Unity Roundtable). These leaders have tried to reach a 'negotiated solution,' in the apparent conviction that Cardinal Parolin's support will move the officials of the Venezuelan tyranny to negotiate with them. This appears clearly in a letter sent by one of these MUD politicians, Julio Borges, the president of the Venezuelan Congress, to officials in the Venezuelan government. Borges speaks of the dialogue Cardinal Parolin has proposed in a recent letter from the Vatican. Don't the Vatican officials and the opposition leaders know that communist tyrannies do not abandon power through persuasion [2]?

On July 28, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, José Miguel Vivanco, gave some statements to the Chilean press that are worth contrasting with the Vatican's attitude:

'[T]he crisis in Venezuela is not the result of the lack of dialogue. … It is not the result of polarization and a potential clash between two equivalent forces that demand mediation. … [T]he crisis is due to a dictatorial record of a regime that commits extremely grave and massive violations of human rights with total impunity and does not give accounts to anybody.

'We are facing a dictatorship, a tyranny that concentrates the whole power, and which holds on to power. In this context, the president of Chile refuses to name things as they are and states that this regime was democratically elected[, which] is inconsistent with Chile's position in the Organization of American States[.] …

'The gravest issue is that she suggest a dialogue between government and opposition. This is a grave mistake, and at this moment, a head of state well informed of Venezuela's situation should not make such a grave mistake. …

'The 30th of July, the regime will try to protect itself with a little varnish (they cannot get more than that) of a democratic popular exercise but with a clearly fascist structure, which is going to make even harder a democratic, negotiated, and reasonable solution in the short term to this situation, in which the Venezuelan people are absolutely defenceless'.

So it seems that we have come to the situation in which a popular singer and the executive director of Human Rights Watch are a moral authority more credible than Pope Francis and Parolin's Vatican. No wonder Colombian Catholics are upset, saying Pope Francis is not welcome and that he and the bishops who support him are outside the Catholic Church.

Recently, a well respected Catholic, Don José Galat, who is the founder of a TV channel (Teleamiga) and the president of a university (de la Gran Colombia), broadcast a set of TV shows in which he showed what he understands as Pope Francis's departures from the Catholic Faith in matters of the Sacrifice of the Mass (which has been called by Francis a 'memorial') and of the respect for the Commandments (see one episode here). The bishops of Colombia have reacted by forbidding priests to appear on Galat's channel. At this point, a radio station interviewed Galat aggressively, calling him 'proud' and schismatic. His reaction went beyond his previous more meditated positions, and he stated that Francis is not pope because his election was null - and that even if he were pope, he is a heretic. The reaction of the bishops was instant: they declared immediately that Don José Galat is excommunicated latae sententiae. Would that the bishops reacted with such exemplary speed when the central teachings of our faith are denied and the central tenets of Catholic morality are questioned by priests, religious, and laity!

Don José Galat has, I think, gone beyond what canonists think to be right concerning the papal election. However, can one really be surprised that a good Catholic who loves divine Truth and the people of God is upset and now is stating that Pope Francis is not welcome in Colombia?

Schism is brewing in the Church, not harmony and peace. How could it not grow when the Vatican shows such partiality toward the archenemies of Catholics - no less than well known communists, FARC and Raúl Castro included?

[1] See the final peace agreement, Preamble, pp. 3; sections 2.2.4; 2.3.5; 3.4.1; 3.4.2;;; 5, p. 126;;;; 5.1.2.I; 5.2; 6; and the Protocol about monitoring and verifying the application of the agreement, p. 233, July 31, 2017)

[2] There is the belief that in the Soviet Union, the communists did relinquish power peacefully. But this is false. There was a coup d'état against Yeltsin, which failed. This failure is what led the communists out of power for a while in Russia.ommunists?

[1P5] 2197.3

CF News / World news

Finland Hundreds leaving Islam for Christianity

HUNDREDS of Muslim migrants are abandoning Islam for Christianity in Finland.

National broadcaster Yle reported last week that hundreds of arrivals from Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq are leaving Islam behind to embrace the Christian faith.

The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church is setting up confirmation classes to accommodate migrant requests. Vesa Julin, pastor of a church northeast of Helsinki, launched a Dari-language Christian catechetical program after asylum-seekers began attending church services of their own accord.

Some migrants express the hope that conversion will help them assimilate into Finnish society. But the majority say their embrace of Christianity stems from discontent with Islam.

'They understand that there are different rules in Finland and that people should be treated with respect,' explained Lauri Perälä, head of the Imatra reception center.

'I have not been baptized yet, but look forward to it, and I am sure I will be a good Christian,' said Aliraza Hussaini.

The phenomenon in Finland mirrors a trend, developing elsewhere in Europe. Converts from Islam are bringing new life to dying churches.

Germany, which has admitted more than one million Muslim migrants since 2015, has reported a small but growing wave of conversions.

In Berlin and Hamburg last year, migrants were baptized en masse in municipal swimming pools. 'The motive for the change of faith,' observed pastor Albert Babajan, 'is the same for many. They are disappointed with Islam.'

Since 2014, Trinity Lutheran Church in Berlin has grown from roughly 150 congregants to more than 700, with most new converts leaving Islam. Some were first exposed to Christianity in Germany, while others were attracted to the faith while still in their home countries.

'There is a Christian awakening among Iranians and Afghans on a large scale,' Trinity Pastor Gottfried Martens observed. 'That's something that these German atheists can't understand at all.'

In Austria, during the first quarter of 2016, the Catholic Church received 300 applications for adult baptism, with almost three-quarters of applicants hoping to convert from Islam.

One Iranian migrant, identified as 'Johannes,' left Tehran for Vienna after he began to question Islam while in college. 'I found that the history of Islam was completely different from what we were taught at school,' he told The Guardian in 2016. 'Maybe, I thought, it was a religion that began with violence.'

'A religion that began with violence cannot lead people to freedom and love,' he said, explaining the rationale behind his conversion. 'Jesus Christ said 'those who use the sword will die by the sword.' This really changed my mind,' he continued.

In response to the wave of conversions, the Austrian Bishops' Conference has issued new guidelines for priests, urging them to be wary of migrants who seek baptism for the sake of expediency. Today, anyone asking to be received into the Church in Austria must first complete a year-long period of preparation and assessment.

'There has to be a noticeable interest in the Faith that extends beyond merely the wish to obtain a piece of paper,' cautioned Friederike Dostal, a representative of the archdiocese of Vienna.

'We are not interested in pro forma Christians. You have to be able to register some kind of process of change in people.' But, she noted, nine out of ten applicants complete their preparation course and are baptized.

[CMTV] 2197.4

CF News / World news

Germany This is how ISIS pushed me to make a video claiming responsibility'

HOWdoes ISIS recruit its attackers in Germany? What are the last instructions before the terrorists strike and kill as many innocent people as possible?

For months, BILD reporter Björn Stritzel pretended to be an Islamist willing to carry out an attack (always in consultation with the security authorities).

'Abu K. is my guide at ISIS. He wants to assist me in the lead-up to my attack - my death. But we are not there yet. First, we deal with my video that is intended to be published online shortly after the attack. My business card of death. It is also the cynical, inhuman point of the attack, as I now realize.

'Abu K. is very keen on my affirmation of ISIS. He keeps explaining to me what kind of text I am supposed to read out in the martyr's video.

'Don't say: 'I'm doing this because you attack us' or 'If you stop, we will also stop'. More vigour is better,' Abu K. writes to me and formulates: 'I am doing this, because the caliph has instructed me to attack the crusaders and their citizens.'

Abu K. unambiguously states what ISIS is about: 'The whole idea that this is merely a political war, is wrong. We kill them, because Allah told us to, and not because they attack us. The only way out for them is to convert or to pay a head tax.' The guidelines provided by Abu K. correspond with the martyr's videos by the Würzburg and Ansbach attackers (both in July, 2016). For ISIS, it is primarily the recognition value of the messages that counts. Everybody is supposed to immediately understand who has attacked here, independently of the individual attacker.'…

[BILD] 2197.5

CF News / Vatican watch

Hungary Prime Minister warns that Europe's being deliberately de-Christianised

THE LEADER of Hungary is warning that an effort to de-Christianize Europe is underway.
Speaking in Romania in July, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán spoke of a deliberate plan to transform Europe into a 'mixed, Islamicized' society.

'In Brussels,' he warned, 'an alliance has been forged against the opinion of the people.'
Orbán said Europe is being prepared to surrender its heritage and identity:

We are observing the conscious, step-by-step implementation of this policy. In order for this to happen, for the territory to be ready to be handed over, it is necessary to continue the de-Christianisation of Europe — and we can see these attempts. Priority must be given to group identities rather than national identities, and political governance must be replaced with the rule of bureaucracy. This is the aim of Brussels' continuous and stealthy withdrawal of powers from the nation states. This is the situation in Europe today. 

The prime minister described the effort as the product of a collusion between E.U. political elite and Hungarian-American financier George Soros.  

According to the 'Soros plan,' as he termed it, migrants are to be brought into the European Union from the Muslim world by the hundreds of thousands annually and 'distributed among the countries of Europe as part of a mandatory and permanent mechanism.' 

To facilitate this endeavor, the prime minister indicated E.U. officials will siphon 'all the decision-making powers related to migrant affairs away from the nation states and raise them to the level of Brussels.'

During his address, Orbán drew a line between European norms, rooted in Christianity and those of the Islamic world. 'It's obvious that the culture of migrants contrasts dramatically with European culture,' he observed and, 'Muslim communities coming to Europe see their own culture, their own faith, their own lifestyles and their own principles as stronger and more valuable than ours.'
'Opposing ideologies and values cannot be simultaneously upheld, as they are mutually exclusive,' the prime minister noted.

Orbán called on Europeans to fight to recover their sovereignty and to resist de-Christianization.
'We can never show solidarity with ideologies, peoples and ethnic groups, which are committed to the goal of changing the very European culture, which forms the essence, meaning and purpose of the European way of life,' he warned. 'We must not show solidarity with groups and ideologies which oppose the aims of European existence and culture because that would lead to surrender,' he asserted.

In March, Orbán named Soros a globalist threat. Through his Open Society Foundations, the activist financier lavishes billions of dollars on Leftist, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) around the world, promoting abortion, contraception, sterilization and LGBT ideology.

In December 2016, it was revealed that Soros is actively involved in attempts to legalize abortion in Ireland and Poland, funneling millions of dollars into staged protests in those majority Catholic countries.  

Soros has funded anti-government protests in Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Macedonia and Romania, attempting to manipulate national policy to suit his desired ends.

In January, Hungarian Vice President Szilard Nemeth explained, 'Fake NGOs of the Soros empire are sustained to suppress national governments in favor of global capital and the world of political correctness.'

[CMTV] 2197.5a



CF News / World news

Ireland Health Minister prepares abortion legislation ~ even before the referendum is confirmed

IRISH health minister Simon Harris has defended his decision to start drafting legislation that could legalise abortion, before the committee set up to examine the issue has reported.

A special Oireachtas committee has been set up to consider under what conditions, if any, abortion should be permitted if the Eighth Amendment, which protects the equal right to life of mother and child, was repealed.

However, health officials are already drafting laws, including a way to legislate for potential lawful abortions for rape victims without a conviction, to be ready for a referendum in summer 2018, the timescale indicated by taoiseach Leo Varadkar. The committee is planning to start taking evidence in September.

Mr Harris said he had 'great regard' for the committee, which is following the work of the citizens' assembly. 'My department, in conjunction with the office of the attorney-general, is seeking to explore and research the issue so that, in so far as is feasible, as much preparation as possible can be drawn upon once the special joint committee finalises its recommendations,' he said. 'I am concerned that we are prepared in the event that a decision is made by the Oireachtas to hold a referendum. This will be important if we are to complete the process in line with the timetable set out by the taoiseach.'

However, Mattie McGrath, an independent TD and one of only two of the 21 on the committee in favour of keeping the amendment, asked Mr Harris if he was trying to accelerate preparations for a vote while it was carrying out its work.

Pro-choice activists have also been agitating for an early referendum, claiming that holding it in June or July, when many students are abroad on holiday, 'would effectively mean disenfranchising thousands of young people'...

[SPUC] 2197.6

CF News / World news

Sweden Development agency to cut funds from charities that don't support abortion

SWEDEN'S International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) has announced that it will freeze funding to organisations that have agreed to the Mexico City Policy, which was expanded by Donald Trump to include all US aid streams, not just those concerned with family planning.

'This is about women's own right to decide when, and if, they want to have children and how many children they want', said Sida's director general, Carin Jämtin. 'Sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are a prerequisite for being able to attend school and being active on the labour market.'

'We have to defend SRHR and the right to abortion for girls and women in poor countries and when the United States implements a policy that will hit the poorest countries and the most vulnerable groups - women and girls in need of care, Sida has to make sure that Swedish aid continues to go to those activities we have agreed on.'

The measure is likely to force agencies to chose between US and Swedish funding. A Sida spokesperson said it was unclear at this stage how many organisations would be affected by the change. 'We are now starting a review of which of our organisations receive support and where they stand in relation to the Mexico City Policy', they added. 'Only then will we know. The only ones we know of today that have such support and have agreed to the MCP is Save the Children.'

Sweden is also increasing its funding of organisations involved in promoting sexual heath, contraception, abortion and maternity care by a further 170 million kronor (£15.6m).

Alithea Williams, SPUC's Communications Officer, commented, saying: 'What an appalling, ideologically driven decision from Sweden. It's really shocking that they would withdraw aid from organisations that provide real help and support to those in the poorest places in the word just to make a political point about the US's refusal to fund the killing of the unborn. What about those agencies that didn't provide these 'services' in the first place? The fact that they are withdrawing funds from Save the Children, which is hardly known to be pro-life, and so presumably thinks it can carry out its activities perfectly well without promoting abortion, really highlights what an exercise in political point scoring this is. As was pointed out so powerfully on the BBC a few days ago, what women in Africa are asking for is food, water and education, not contraception and abortion.'

[SPUC] 2197.7

CF News / World news

United Kingdom Advertising agency rejects pro-life billboards

ASA ad


THE ADVERTISING STANARDS AGENCY (ASA) has rejected complaints against billboards put out by Northern Ireland campaign group Both Lives Matter.

In January 2017, Both Lives Matter ran two billboards claiming '100,000 PEOPLE ARE ALIVE TODAY BECAUSE OF OUR LAWS ON ABORTION. Why change that?' Fourteen complainants argued that this claim was misleading and could be not be substantiated.

However, the ASA has rejected the complaints, and backed the claim made by the pro-life group.

After a thorough investigation, the authority's official report was published today. It said: 'on balance, we concluded that the evidence indicated that there was a reasonable probability that around 100,000 people were alive in Northern Ireland today who would have otherwise been aborted had it been legal to do so.'

The ASA also noted that while the complainants said the number of 100,000 was presented as an absolute figure, and would be viewed as such by readers, it was reasonable to expect readers to see such a round figure as an estimate based on methodology.

Dawn McAvoy of BLM commented, 'We are delighted with this result. Our opponents said we could not substantiate the claim despite us producing a robust report. The ASA have examined our calculations and backed our figure. Their expert concluded that it is reasonable to say that 100,000 people are alive today who would have otherwise been aborted had it been legal to do so. This independent verification is a real endorsement of our campaign.'

She went on: 'The billboard sought to highlight the 100,000 people alive in Northern Ireland today because we didn't bring in the 1967 Act. Statistically, everyone in Northern Ireland knows someone who is alive today because of our balanced laws relating to abortion. We wanted people to realise that this had changed the lives of everyone. It also debunks the myth that law doesn't stop abortions - it clearly does.'

'We hope that this independent verification will lead to widespread acceptance of the fact that Northern Ireland's different approach to abortion has made a very real difference - to at least 100,000 people.'

[SPUC] 2197.7a

CF News / World news

United Kingdom Over £1 billion of aid money to go on family planning and overseas 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 Obianuju Ekeocha 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] 2197.8

CF News / World news

United Kingdom Bishop Davies : Christians could be treated as extremists

Bp.DaviesCHRISTIANS could be targeted by the Government's new counter-extremism strategy, warns The Rt Rev Mark Davies , Bishop of Shrewsbury and Salford. Catholics professing their faith in Jesus could be caught up in measures to tackle non-violent extremism.

The Bishop of Shrewsbury suggests Theresa May's efforts to counter the ideology that underpins terrorist attacks could be misused to ensnare peaceful Christians who disagree with secularist ideologies.

He expressed his concerns in a homily to more than 1,000 English pilgrims gathered at the Marian shrine of Lourdes in France. Bishop Davies said: 'Britons now regard the claims of Christianity and even the person of Jesus Christ as representing extremism.

'It is even possible that the very faith in Christ, on which our nation was built, might become a focus of the Government's counter-extremism agenda.'

The Prime Minister announced a review of the Government's counter-terror strategy as well as a new commission for countering extremism in the Queen's Speech. But Bishop Davies highlighted confusion over the definition of extremism, citing findings from a ComRes poll which found that nearly a third of Britons think Jesus was an extremist.

He told pilgrims from his diocese that Christians are extreme only in their 'following of Christ'. He will say: 'There is a destructive extremism we ought to fear, one which seeks not only to deconstruct marriage and the family, but the very identity of the human person, which calls for medical experimentation with no reference to ethical boundaries, that decrees the unborn may live only to terms fixed by man, that demands legal protections be removed from the sick and the aged.

'It is such extremism which surely threatens the foundations of society.'

[Telegraph] 2197.9

CF News / World news

United Kingdom BPAS to Boots: 'Push the morning after-pill or else'

THE BRITISH PREGNACY ADVISORY SERVICE (BPAS) is encouraging the public to boycott high-street retailer Boots after they refused to follow Tesco's and Superdrug in slashing the price of the morning after pill.

The abortion provider wrote to retailers asking them to lower the price of the 'emergency contraceptive', arguing that it is much cheaper in European countries. Boots charges £28.25 for Levonelle emergency contraceptive (the leading brand) and £26.75 for its own generic version. Tesco now charges £13.50 for Levonelle and Superdrug £13.49 for a generic version.

In a reply to bpas, Marc Donovan, chief pharmacist of Boots UK, said: 'We would not want to be accused of incentivising inappropriate use, and provoking complaints, by significantly reducing the price of this product.' He also pointed out that it is already available for free in community pharmacies and NHS services.

Bpas said that said deliberately setting the price high to prevent women from using it regularly was both 'patronising and insulting', and called for a boycott. Female Labour MPs have since joined the calls, and have written to Mr Donovan to express 'deep concern' at the company's stance.

Interestingly, Boots' letter said its stance was based partly on the communications it receives from people who oppose the morning-after pill. 'In our experience the subject of emergency hormonal contraception polarises public opinion and we receive frequent contact from individuals who voice their disapproval of the fact that the company chooses to provide this service.'

What's in the morning-after pill?

The drug used in Plan B, Levonorgestrel, is a progestin, and it is not known exactly how it works. There is debate on whether 'emergency contraceptives' are abortifacient, and if so, how often, but information on the drug says that it may alter the lining of the uterus to prevent implantation should fertilization occur.

Medical information also says it should not be used repeatedly, and studies have linked use to increased risk of blood clots and ectopic pregnancy. It is currently UK law that a consultation with a pharmacist takes place when the pill is sold, to ensure it is safe for the woman - but bpas wants to scrap this too.

[SPUC] 2197.10

CF News / World news

United Kingdom Nietzschean transgender proposals

FR.ALEXANDER LUCIE-SMITH writes in the Catholic Herald: 'The government is putting forward new proposals that will make changing your gender easier. This has already happened in some other countries, and various wise commentators have already pointed out the practical consequences of this move. I would recommend everyone to read what Dr Tim Stanley has to say on the subject, as well as the trenchant criticism from the ever-stimulating Brendan O'Neill. In the Times, Clare Foges echoes what many must feel when she calls the government's proposal 'idiotic'. Perhaps the pendulum has started to swing back, and opposition to the transgender rights movement is growing.

The practical consequences, as all the writers mentioned above point out, are grave. People will now be able to go back in time and alter birth certificates, for example. Men will be able to declare themselves women and take part in sporting competitions against women. The proposal may well hurt those it most seeks to protect. But putting all this aside, also troubling are the theoretical underpinnings of this proposal.

Right now, and up to now, each and every one of us finds ourselves thrown into existence. We did not choose to be the people we are, or the sex we are, or to be born of the parents we were born of, or to be born in the country we were born in. Some of these things we can change. A British subject can apply for American citizenship, for example, and he or she can choose to become American. You can change your name, if you do not like it; you can change the way you speak, through speech therapy. But the truth is that there are certain things you cannot change - the year you were born, for example, or the sex you were born in. This latter is a scientific fact because every cell in your body is sexed, and sex does not rely on outward appearance, which can be changed. So, we find ourselves, in certain important aspects of existence, thrown into the world, and there is nothing we can do about it - except morally, which is an important freedom. We are male or female, and how we live as men and women is a matter of moral choice for us. Moral freedom is perhaps the greatest of all freedoms.

The government proposal about gender reassignment seems to indicate that gender is purely a matter of human choice. If I, born a man, declare myself to be a woman, then I become a woman. In other words, I am the sole arbiter of my fate, and my will is the absolute legislator. There is no need for my choice to have any reference to objective fact. In other words, biology and nature, and the structure of the world, must, in this important matter, be utterly malleable to my will.

This idea is troubling and dangerous, because it is simply not true. The world is not infinitely malleable. There are laws that we did not make but discover, and those laws cannot be abolished or set aside.

What the gender proposals reveal is the way the government had made a Nietzschean turn in its thinking. From now on, the will is supreme. Nothing else matters. We all know where that idea led us in the past.

The gender proposals also reveal that our government really does not seem too bothered by the philosophical implications of policy. This lack of care means pulling up everything by its roots. If the will, without reference to the law of nature, is the only legislator, will we, for example, now have to believe that a black person is one who declares him or herself to be black, without any reference to racial heritage? Indeed, this has already happened, in the case of Rachel Dolezal. If that is true, then the concept of blackness loses all meaning, just as the concepts of male and female lose all meaning if they depend purely on personal choice. We already have to endure the tyranny of personal choice in the question of abortion, where the choice to abort ('a woman's right to choose') is seen as the final arbiter. What about the choice not to pay taxes? In the end, who or what will decide between the conflicting choices that we make?

The government's philosophical naivety is to blame in this matter; but the Church is by no means innocent either. Certain theologians have tried to decouple the idea of God from that of Fatherhood and the use of the masculine pronoun, ignoring the fact that God chose to reveal Himself as 'He' and that His Son was made incarnate in a male body. These theological efforts are decades old: perhaps they represent the beginnings of the attack on our traditionally received ideas of gender and the first undermining of our traditional understanding of it?

Just as it is well worth challenging clergy who avoid using the pronoun 'He' to refer to God, and even use the ugly neologism 'Godself', for this undermines the entire Christian revelation, so too we must challenge our politicians. Let us hope someone in the cabinet speaks up against this madness. There are thinkers in the cabinet: they need to lead a much-needed revival in our national conversation on gender issues, and remind us all that all policies need to be properly thought through. This debate is by no means over; in fact, it is just beginning

[Catholic Herald] 2197.11

CF News / World news

International gloria.tv.news


[gloria.tv] 2197.12

CF News / World news


Some jihad headlines of the week


Austria : University of Vienna Islamic theologian's study of radical Islamists proves many have extensive knowledge of Islam despite mainstream claims that radical Islamists have little understanding of their own religion

Egypt : Soldier beaten to death when found to be a Christian

Ethiopia: Muslims attack Christian with machetes for proselytizing

France : Only 'deradicalization' centre closing. It was voluntary - and empty

Germany : Knife attacker : 'I don't want to do anything to you, I want to attack Christians'

Pakistan : New women's magazine launched, urges them to take up jihad, use a grenade

Surinam : Two arrested on suspicion of jihad activity

UK : Christian woman prosecuted for talking about Christianity to Muslim colleague

UK: Guilty of distributing jihad terror propaganda on YouTube

USA : 'I'm going to plant bomb in gay club', wanted to murder 10,000

USA : ISIS to Trump, 'you have eyes on Mosul, ours on Constantinople and Rome'


[CF News] 2197.13

CF News / World news

International The Prophet Voris

[CMTV] 2197.14

CF News / World news

International The World Over with Raymond Arroyo



[EWTN] 2197.15
























[Salt & Light] 2197.16








YouTube moves to block videos with “controversial religious or supremacist content”

CHURCH MILITANT reports : ' YouTube and other internet technology companies are rolling out new procedures to stop “controversial religious content” from publishing on its site.

Announced on their blog Tuesday, YouTube has created a “limited state” where videos can be placed that will prevent them from getting attention. Videos placed there will be ones that are not illegal but have been flagged by users as potentially containing hate speech.

YouTube then reviews the videos, and if they are found to contain “controversial religious or supremacist content,” they will be placed behind an interstitial, where it won’t be recommended or monetized and will not have comments, likes or suggested videos.

Last month, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube formed the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism to work together to “employ and leverage technology” to “disrupt terrorists’ ability to use the internet in furthering their causes.” The goals of this initiative are to include other companies in the coalition and become a resource for other companies by providing training in best practices.
This is evidenced by YouTube’s commitment to apply Jigsaw’s Redirect Method to searches — created by a think tank owned by Google and already being employed for Google searches. YouTube notes when sensitive keywords are used in a search, “they will be redirected towards a playlist of curated YouTube videos that directly confront and debunk violent extremist messages.”

Church Militant spoke with Robert Spencer, a well-known expert on Islam who has led seminars with the FBI and armed forces, appearing on numerous news programs about the effectiveness of the redirect method. He told us, “For many years, whenever one Googled ‘jihad,’ Jihad Watch was the first result. This was back in the days when Google’s results were based on the relevance of the subject matter to the search and the popularity of the site. But now, if you search for ‘jihad,’ Google will give you a whole page full of Islamic apologetics, and Jihad Watch doesn’t appear on the front page at all.”

He reported that his site, JihadWatch.org, once had tens of thousands of referrals from Facebook and Twitter that have now trickled down to only a couple hundred and dropping. He explains that it is not because his readership has plummeted, saying, “No, quite the contrary. It is because Google is now fully committed to not allowing people to search the internet but to controlling what they find when they do,” adding, “Incidentally, when one googles ‘Robert Spencer’ now, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hit piece on me comes up before my own website bio.”

YouTube claims to be working with several groups including the No Hate Speech Movement and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue to identify content that is “being used to radicalize and recruit extremists.”

YouTube is also planning to use “cutting-edge machine learning technology” that they boast is “faster and more effective.” They claim, “Over 75 percent of the videos we’ve removed for violent extremism over the past month were taken down before receiving a single human flag.”
They also claim the tools “have proven more accurate than humans at flagging videos that need to be removed.” That claim is hotly debated by many, especially Michelle Malkin, who complained YouTube banned her video First, They Came, but not the Imams’ radicalizing videos calling for killing innocent people — videos such as Imam Ammar Shahin’s “Annihilate the Jews” sermon, which is is still up on the site….

Church Militant asked Spencer if there are any other options for promoting his site, and he replied that there aren’t, saying, “The only recourse we have is to call attention to this until the backlash against these social media giants grows so large that their power is broken.”


[CMTV] 2197.23c























Comment from the internet


Interview with James Bogle  



[Remnant] 2197.16a




The Three Musketeers of the Court of Pope Francis

Sandro MagisterSANDRO MAGISTER blogs from Rome : 'The classic communist parties had their 'organic intellectuals.' But Pope Francis has them, too. Their names are Antonio Spadaro, Marcelo Figueroa, Víctor Manuel Fernández.

The first is an Italian and a Jesuit, director of 'La Civiltà Cattolica.' The others are Argentine, and the latter is not even Catholic but a Presbyterian pastor, and in spite of this Francis has put him at the head of the Buenos Aires edition of 'L'Osservatore Romano.'

Spadaro has turned 'La Civiltà Cattolica' into the organ of Casa Santa Marta, meaning of the pope. And together with Figueroa he put his name to an article in the latest issue of the magazine that slammed into the United States like a hurricane, because it accused both Catholic and Protestant conservative circles of acting in that country 'with a logic not different from that which inspires Islamic fundamentalism,' none less than that of Osama bin Laden and the Caliphate.

And on what are these Catholics and Protestants supposed to have come together to fight as 'neo-Crusaders'? On 'issues like abortion, same-sex marriage, religious education in the schools,' in other words, on 'a particular form of defense of religious freedom.' With the result - according to the two authors of the article - of fomenting an 'ecumenism of hatred,' nostalgia for 'a state with theocratic features.' The exact opposite of the ecumenism of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, a pope 'of inclusion, peace, encounter.'

The trouble is that the defense of life, of the family, of religious freedom have been at the forefront of the American Catholic Church's agenda for more than a decade. It therefore could not help but react at seeing that 'believers are attacked by their co-religionists merely for fighting for what their Churches have always held to be true.'

The highest-level protest came from the archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles Chaput, who rejected the article by Spadaro and Figueroa as 'an exercise in dumbing down and inadequate.' But other comments have been much harsher and have had an easy time pointing out a series of colossal historical and logical blunders in the article.

Any other magazine would have tossed out such an article, the Canadian Raymond J. de Souza for example wrote on 'Crux,' the most important and balanced website of Catholic information in the United States.

But at Santa Marta, on Francis's desk, it didn't end up that way, and on the contrary the article by Spadaro and Figueroa was passed with full marks and made an even bigger splash in that it was correctly interpreted by everyone as expressive not only of the pope's thoughts but also of his management style: in this case, an attack of unprecedented forcefulness on the 'Ratzingerian' leadership of the Catholic Church in the United States, launched through middlemen.

In the doctrinal camp Fr. Spadaro is fairly nonchalant, theorizing that 'in theology 2 + 2 can make 5,' and is infallible in prognosticating Bergoglio's revolutions big and small. But among the counselors and confidants is one who is even closer to the pope than he is. And it is none other than the Argentine Víctor Manuel Fernández, a theologian whose first and revealing work was, in 1995, a volume entitled: 'Heal me with your mouth. The art of kissing.'

It comes as no surprise that after this debut and after his other no less questionable literary productions Rome would veto Fernández's appointment as rector of the Universidad Católica Argentina, only to have to bend, in 2009, to the then-archbishop of Buenos Aires, who fought tooth and nail to get the nulla osta for the promotion of his protege.

In 2013, just after he was elected pope, Bergoglio even made Fernández an archbishop. And since then this figure has almost spent more time in Rome than in Argentina, swamped as he is with acting as counselor and ghostwriter for his friend the pope.

Whole paragraphs of chapter eight of 'Amoris Laetitia,' the document of Pope Francis that has most shaken the Church, have been found to have been copied wholesale from articles by Fernández of a decade ago.


Among the critiques of the article by Spadaro and Figueroa, the most definitive may be the one published on 'Crux' by Thomas D. Williams on July 28:

> 'Ecumenism of hate' unjustly defames real Catholic-Evangelical dialogue


[L'Espresso] 2197.17

CF News / Comment from the internet

The Galat Case: A lesson in prudence for Papal critics

STEVE SKOJEC comments, in OnePeterFive, how the news of the excommunication of papal critic Professor José Galat, formerly the rector of La Gran Colombia University and founder of Spanish language TV station Teleamiga, has stirred up quite a firestorm of comment. 'And not without reason', he writes.

'Galat is not, however, just a papal critic. As reported by Maike Hickson, he takes his criticisms to the point of unfounded conclusions:

'Galat himself recently made statements on his own television show, where, citing the 'Sankt Gallen Mafia,' of whom Belgian cardinal Godfried Danneels is among the most famous members, he claimed that Pope Francis was unlawfully elected. He also claimed that Pope Francis is distorting many aspects of the Catholic Church's fundamental teaching. [emphasis added]

Of the existence of the so-called 'Sankt Gallen Mafia,' which is said to have colluded to elect Jorge Bergoglio pope, there is no real question. By the admission of some of their own members, the group existed. Quite a good deal is known about their operations. Other details have come to light about international pressure against Pope Benedict XVI to resign. Questions have also come up about possible canonical irregularities in the election of Pope Francis.

Of the assertion that Francis is distorting the teaching of the Church, there can also be no question. From significant segments of Amoris Laetitia to certain assertions in Evangelii Gaudium to his many, many less-well-known statements that appear to run contrary to what the Church has perennially taught, this pope has done great damage to the faithful in their ability to comprehend and accept authentic Catholic teaching.

Whatever one thinks of all these things, it seems to me that within reasonable parameters, there is room for a measure of scepticism. Scepticism about the abdication, scepticism about the election, scepticism about whether material heresy may have crossed the line into formal heresy, and so on. It seems that no honest Catholic today feels sure about very much except that we're dealing with a crisis in the papacy of unprecedented proportions.

But scepticism, difficulties, doubts, and questions are just that. They do not rise to the level of certitude. They do not give to any of us the right to make formal declarations of fact when we don't even have all of the information needed to make a determination, let alone the authority to do so. These things, by their nature, give rise to uncertanties, not the other way around. And we should give these uncertanties to God in prayer, asking Him to guide us and to aid and restore His Church.

In other words: it's a big mess, but fixing it is above our pay grade. We each have our tasks. Let's leave the big problems to the big players.

By way of analogy, one of the things we (rightly) push back against in the midst of the ecclesiastical assault on Holy Matrimony is the idea that via the 'internal forum' a couple can determine that their marriage was never valid, even if a tribunal has not been involved, or has reached a decision upholding the union. But how is this any different than those of us who run around telling ourselves and anyone who will listen that Francis isn't just a lousy pope, he's an antipope? Do we really think we can defend the Church's juridical authority in the former case and totally ignore it in the latter?

Further - and I think this is what really lies at the heart of the matter - do we have so little trust that God is guiding His Church that we think we have to jump in and do it for Him? Are we, finding ourselves int he midst of this storm, reacting like the apostles before us? Do we wish to prod Him from His (apparent) sleep, crying out, 'Master, does it not concern thee that we perish?' Have we forgotten Our Lord's reaction to such squeamishness?

]And rising up, he rebuked the wind, and said to the sea: Peace, be still. And the wind ceased: and there was made a great calm. And he said to them: Why are you fearful? have you not faith yet? And they feared exceedingly: and they said one to another: Who is this (thinkest thou) that both wind and sea obey him? (Mark 4:39-40)

We have a Church that is both human and divine. It has been guaranteed the guidance of the Holy Spirit to keep the faithful from being bound to error, but we were never promised the impeccability of the men who would lead it. St. Paul warned the bishops of precisely the problem we face at this very moment:

'Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. (Acts 20:28-31)

And in the Scriptures, we were even given, under divine inspiration, an example of an errant pope:

'But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. - Galatians 2:11

In his commentary on Galatians 2, St. Thomas Aquinas explained the nature of Peter's error, and thus, Paul's rebuke:

'Apropos of what is said in a certain Gloss, namely, that I withstood him as an adversary, the answer is that the Apostle opposed Peter in the exercise of authority, not in his authority of ruling.

St. Thomas goes on:

'The occasion of the rebuke was not slight, but just and useful, namely, the danger to the Gospel teaching. Hence he says: Thus was Peter reprehensible, but I alone, when I saw that they, who were doing these things, walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel, because its truth was being undone, if the Gentiles were compelled to observe the legal justifications, as will be plain below. That, they were not walking uprightly is so, because in cases where danger is imminent, the truth must be preached openly and the opposite never condoned through fear of scandalizing others: 'That which I tell you in the dark, speak ye in the light' (Mt 10:27); 'The way of the just is right: the path of the just is right to walk in' (Is 26:7). The manner of the rebuke was fitting, i.e., public and plain. Hence he says, I said to Cephas, i.e., to Peter, before them all, because that dissimulation posed a danger to all: 'Them that sin, reprove before all' (1 Tim 5:20). This is to be understood of public sins and not of private ones, in which the procedures of fraternal charity ought to be observed.

Note well the distinction made here: a differentiation between Peter's exercise of authority and his authority of ruling. The former is subject to rebuke, even on a matter that was 'a danger to the Gospel teaching'; the latter, however, is not. Peter was still the pope, even though he was leading the faithful astray, and his authority from Christ was unquestioned by Paul.

It would be much easier for us to deal with the multiple 'dangers to Gospel teaching' presented by Francis if he were not a legitimate pope. But we ourselves have no authority of ruling, and no one may judge a pope. Whatever suspicions we may have, we have been told by the Church that Benedict XVI resigned and we have been told that Francis was elected by the conclave. There is no rival claimant to the Petrine Throne. The Universal Church has accepted Francis as pope.

He is, whether we like it or not, the man we must accept as the Roman Pontiff. He holds the keys of St. Peter. If, like the marriage tribunal I used in the example above, he is determined at some point to have in some way nullified his office, then we may rest assured that we will come to know it after the fact. But we do not know it today.

This is a cross. There is no question. It is a heavy one, and for some, it has scandalized them to the point of losing their faith. This is certainly a tragedy, and it is one that Pope Francis will have to answer for. No matter how much he causes us to grind our teeth, we should be praying for him, because to stand accountable before the Lord for using the highest office in the Church to confuse and scatter the flock is…well, about the most terrifying thing you can imagine.

Speculation on these matters might feel cathartic, but it helps nothing. It does not remove him from office. It does not change what is being done. And for some who are already struggling with their faith, or why they've converted, running into endless debates on who is pope and who isn't and why and why not just compounds the confusion they already feel about the chaos in the Church. It has the potential to lead people astray, or to cause them to give up completely.

This is why we have the comment policy we do, and why we enforce it even when it sometimes seems a bit heavy handed. I'm not looking forward to standing before God and having to answer for why I let reckless and idle speculation run wild here. We're careful in the stories we report to give you the information we have about the problems that exist, but not to draw conclusions that we have no right to come to. We ask for that same prudence to be extended to your discussion of these articles.

The selective application of ecclesiastical penalties against Professor Galat when so many dissenters are empowered or promoted to positions of influence in the Church is surely an injustice. On the other hand, if Galat could have just refrained from arrogating to himself the authority to say with certainty what we cannot know with certainty, he might never have wound up in trouble in the first place.

Whatever happens with Galat - and we should hope and pray that he receives justice, not the jackboot - it's a lesson for all of us. One we'd do well not to forget.

[1P5] 2197.18

CF News / Comment from the internet

Next stage in the Bergoglian debacle: Gay Church comes out

CHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA writes in The Remnant: 'As I have noted on these pages more than once, the essential novelty of the Bergoglian pontificate, even in the midst of the turbulent sea of novelty that is the post-conciliar epoch, is its carefully planned and relentlessly executed assault on the Sixth Commandment under the guise of 'accompanying and 'integrating' public sinners involved in 'second marriages' and other 'irregular unions' through a vague process of 'discernment' of their 'concrete situations.' In other words, a form of situation ethics in matters sexual. This development is simply apocalyptic. There is no other word for what we are witnessing.

From the beginning, this assault was also aimed at mainstreaming the habitual practitioners of sodomy and their 'homosexual unions.' We must not forget that it was Bergoglio who got the homo-ball rolling by approving and ordering the publication of a document falsely presented to the world as the midterm relatio of the Synod Fathers in 2014, when they had not even seen it and later resoundingly rejected it. Therein we read:

'Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

The creation of a 'welcoming home' for homosexuals qua homosexuals would have to include recognition of their diabolical mockery of marriage. Hence the same document declares that while 'same-sex unions cannot be equated with marriage between men and women…. there are cases in which reciprocal support to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support for the life of the partners.'

It was Bergoglio who insisted that this abominable text be included in the proceedings of Synod 2015, as if the Fathers had adopted it, despite their rejection of 'the most shocking document in the history of Rome,' whose fraudulent publication as 'their' report helped spark an open rebellion against Bergoglio's ham-handed manipulation of the synodal proceedings. (Note: the English, French and Spanish translations of the original Italian document appear to have been purged from the Vatican website; only the Italian and Portuguese versions remain.)

Consider the following indications of where Pope Bergoglio stands respecting the conquering march of militant homosexualism in Church and State:

• At the very beginning of his pontificate, Bergoglio appointed a notorious homosexual, Msgr. Battista Ricca, as prelate of his own papal household and the so-called Vatican Bank.

• Confronted with the scandal of the Ricca appointment during an airborne press conference, Bergoglio uttered his infamous 'who am I to judge?' respecting 'a person [who] is gay and seeks God and has good will…'-meaning an active homosexual proven indisputably to have been involved in numerous sodomitical relationships, including a young man with whom he was trapped in an elevator.

• Setting the tone for the entire project of the emerging Gay Church, in the infamous America magazine interview of September 2013, Pope Bergoglio scoffed at the very idea of disapproving homosexual conduct: 'A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: 'Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?' We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation….'

• Bergoglio has since made a big show of personally meeting with and physically embracing an assortment of deviants, even accepting as given the 'marriage' of a woman pretending to be a man who 'married' another woman.



• Bergoglio has ostentatiously kissed the hand and concelebrated Mass with a notorious pro-homosexual activist priest, and prayed at the grave of the pro-communist rebel priest, Lorenzo Milani, described by La Repubblica-Pope Bergoglio's favorite, radical-Left newspaper-as 'a bohemian artist of unconcealed homosexuality,' whose correspondence includes filthy, depraved references to his love for boys that he admitted aroused temptations to sexually abuse them, restrained by a fear of Hell.

• Bergoglio has refused to speak out against the legalization of 'homosexual unions, gay marriage' or even 'gay adoption' in Italy, Ireland, the United States and Malta. For this default of his duty as Pope he offers the excuse that 'the Pope does not place himself into the concrete politics of a country'-which, on the contrary, is exactly what he does when it comes to various political issues beyond his competence, such as 'climate change' and immigration policy.

• One of the few forthright episcopal opponents of the emerging 'Gay Church' is Archbishop Charles Chaput, appointed Archbishop by Pope Benedict. Chaput, who was elected as the US delegate to the rigged Synod, has issued pastoral guidelines forbidding Holy Communion to sexually active 'gay couples' as well divorced and 'remarried' couples who continue in their adulterous sexual relations. Tellingly, Francis refuses to make Chaput a cardinal, passing him over in consistory after consistory, even though Philadelphia is traditionally a major cardinalate see.

Now, with Bergoglio's heavy hand on the tiller of the Barque of Peter, which he is yanking ever more violently to the left, the homosexuals who infest the Church at every level in the midst of the Church's worst crisis in 2,000 years are 'coming out' everywhere, often with Bergoglio's direct assistance.

A Growing cast of 'Gay Church' promoters and enablers

The annoyingly prissy Father James Martin, who likes to say 'What the hell!' a lot, is a relentless promoter of the 'gay' priesthood and 'gay' marriage. He has not only escaped all ecclesiastical sanction for his subversion of the Church's infallible moral teaching, but Bergoglio has made him a consultant to the Vatican's Secretariat for Social Communications. Evidently, Bergoglio's Vatican embraces his pro-homosexual activism, including a book on 'building a bridge' between the Church and the imaginary 'LGBT community' wherein Martin simply rejects the Church's teaching, affirmed even in the 'updated' Catechism of John Paul II, that the homosexual condition is intrinsically disordered (Martin would prefer to call it 'differently ordered'), that homosexual acts are gravely depraved, and that sodomy is a sin.

Martin assiduously promotes the notion that God has 'created' homosexuals and 'transgenders' as such, which can only mean that He has positively endowed them with intrinsic disorders inclining them to acts of grave depravity.

In a video defending his book, Martin recites the Church's teaching on the intrinsic immorality of sodomy and then promptly dismisses it as not having been 'received' by the 'LGBT community.' The rest of the video, featuring images of happy 'gays' in their happy 'gay' relationships, argues for the mainstreaming of the 'LGBT community' in the Church.

Cardinal Walter Kasper

Cardinal Walter Kasper, Bergoglio's favorite theologian whose Modernist notion of 'mercy' has animated the entire Bergoglian program of moral insurrection, defended Ireland's legalization of 'gay marriage' in 2015: '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.'

Cardinal Reinhard Marx

Cardinal Reinhard Marx, who informed the world press that Bergoglio expressed 'joy' over the German bishops' authorization of Holy Communion for adulterers pursuant to Amoris Laetitia, sees no problem with the recent legalization of 'gay marriage' in Germany. The real problem, says he, is that 'the Church has not exactly been a trailblazer as far as the rights of homosexuals are concerned.' Concerning 'gay marriage' Marx declared: 'The Christian position is one thing. It's another thing to ask if I can make all the Christian moral concepts laws. Whoever fails to understand that the one does not automatically lead to the other, has not understood the essence of modern society.'

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, whom Francis has called a 'great theologian' under the embarrassingly mistaken impression that 'he was Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,' is leading the way to the Church's acceptance of 'gay marriage, gay adoption' and 'LGBT families.'

As Life Site News reported, in a 2015 interview in La Civiltà Cattolica, whose contents are vetted by Bergoglio's Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin, Schönborn declared: '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.' Bergoglio has designated Schönborn his trusted 'interpreter' of AL.

Schönborn's own cathedral in Vienna has published a pamphlet on AL that features a beaming 'gay couple' and the adopted child they have brutalized by depriving him of a mother and father. The accompanying text, written by one of the child's 'two daddies,' boasts of their 'Rainbow family, modern family, unconventional family… there are many titles for our fine nest of sanctuary. But we are not so special, we, that is: daddy Bernd, Papi Georg, and son Siya…' As Life Site News reports, 'Daddy and Papi' plan to inflict themselves on another innocent victim of 'gay adoption': a three-year-old girl from Johannesburg, South Africa.

Archbishop Vincenzio Paglia

Pope Bergoglio has made this notoriously 'pro-gay' prelate head of the Pontifical Academy for Life as well as Grand Chancellor of the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. Bergoglio has neutralized both of these Vatican institutions by sacking their previous members, appointing (among others) pro-abortion and pro-euthanasia members, whose appointment Paglia defends, and rewriting the mission statements and statutes. As Life Site News notes, Bergoglio's installation of Paglia as head of the two institutions is part of 'an apparent overhaul … in favor of a departure from fidelity to Catholic teaching on life.'

Paglia 'paid a homosexual artist to paint a blasphemous homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself.'

Cardinal Blase Cupich

Cardinal Blase Cupich, a key Bergoglian LGBT-mainstreamer, promptly announced a path to the reception of Holy Communion by 'gay couples' upon his installation as Archbishop of Chicago. Based on their 'inviolable' conscience, they would be able join at the Communion rail (or on the Novus Ordo bread line) the public adulterers in 'second marriages' that Cupich is accommodating while they 'discern what the will of God is.'

As Cupich stated during a press conference at the Vatican Press Office: 'I think that gay people are human beings too and they have a conscience.' The new Bergoglian gnosis of 'discernment,' he said, is 'for everybody. I think that we have to make sure that we don't pigeonhole one group as though they are not part of the human family, as though there's a different set of rules for them. That would be a big mistake.' In other words, 'gay couples' habitually engaging in sodomy are just as entitled as heterosexual adulterers to receive Holy Communion while 'discerning' whether to cease committing sodomy-a decision entirely up to them, however.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan

When the failed pro football player Michael Sam 'came out' as a homosexual in 2014, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, whose New York Archdiocese is thoroughly infested with homosexual priests, declared on national television: 'Good for him. I would have no sense of judgment on him. God bless ya…. [T]he same Bible that tells us, that teaches us well about the virtues of chastity and the virtue of fidelity and marriage also tells us not to judge people. So I would say, 'Bravo.'' Dolan infamously served as Grand Marshall of the 2015 Saint Patrick's Day Parade despite its inclusion of a 'Gay Pride' contingent, replete with 'Gay Pride' banner.

Cardina Joseph Tobin

Card. Tobin

Cardinal Tobin pumps iron

Cardinal Joseph Tobin, made a cardinal by Bergoglio and placed at the head of the Archdiocese of Newark, last month gave his blessing to a 'gay pilgrimage' that ended with a sacrilegious Mass at the cathedral in Newark. One of the militant homosexuals who participated in this abomination called the Cardinal's blessing of it 'a miracle.' The New York Times hailed the event under the following headline: 'As Church Shifts, a Cardinal Welcomes Gays; They Embrace a 'Miracle''.

Tobin supports Martin's pro-LGBT propaganda and lauds his book: 'In too many parts of our church, LGBT people have been made to feel unwelcome, excluded, and even shamed. Martin's inspiring new book invites church leaders to minister with more compassion and reminds LGBT Catholics that they are as much a part of our church as any other Catholic.'

Cardinal Kevin Farrell

Elevated to cardinal status by-who else?-Pope Bergoglio, Kevin Farrell dutifully marches in Bergoglio's growing 'homophile' cardinalate brigade. He likewise praises Martin's call to mainstream homosexuality and 'transgenderism' in the Church. Praising Martin's book, he declares, is ' [a] welcome and much-needed book that will… help LGBT Catholics feel more at home in what is, after all, their church.' The pro-'gay' prelate, appropriately enough, has been made head of Bergoglio's new 'Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life,' which should accomplish as much for the family as the phony Synod did.

Life Site News sums up the crucial role of Bergoglio's cardinals in Martin's subversion: 'Francis-appointed Cardinals back Jesuit's pro-LGBT book.'

Bishop Robert McElroy

Bishop Robert McElroy, head of the Diocese of San Diego-one of the recruits to the expanding corps of pro-'gay' shock troops Bergoglio is installing in key dioceses, has praised Martin's book thus: 'The Gospel demands that LGBT Catholics be genuinely loved and treasured in the life of the Church. They are not. Martin provides us the language, perspective, and sense of urgency to undertake the arduous but monumentally Christlike task of replacing a culture of alienation with a culture of merciful inclusion.'

McElroy has also demanded that his diocese be 'deeply inclusive: embracing mothers and fathers beautifully bonded in their married love and the love of their children, as well as… LGBT families…' He pronounces the Catechism's teaching that homosexuality is 'intrinsically disordered' to be 'very destructive language that I think we should not use pastorally.' McElroy has already explicitly authorized Holy Communion for the divorced and 'remarried' who 'discern' that they are not guilty of adultery, while posing no impediment to Holy Communion for sodomites.

Auxiliary bishop Robert Dolan

A brand new recruit to the growing gay-friendly hierarchy Pope Bergoglio is installing, Father Robert Dolan was made McElroy's auxiliary bishop last June 29. Dolan is being billed as 'Vice Disruptor' under McElroy, meaning he is part of the Bergoglian preference for what McElroy describes as 'pastoral leaders, rather than theologians' with 'more knowledge of the nitty, gritty of life.'

The 'nitty, gritty of life' includes episcopal opposition to President Trump's immigration policies, being spearheaded by McElroy-the mass murder of unborn children being not that big a deal under Pope Bergoglio. The nitty, gritty must also include the now-requisite 'embrace of the LGBT community.' Accordingly, Dolan has served as 'pastor of a 'welcoming parish' in the city's gay and lesbian district,' which assignment Dolan describes as 'an eye-opening experience, but also a joyful experience.'

Joy, joy, joy! There's endless, unquenchable joy in Gay Church-now open for business in the 'gay and lesbian district' of every city, which naturally requires at least one gay and lesbian parish. Because, as everyone knows, 'gay and lesbian Catholics' are different from just plain Catholics. They can hardly be expected to attend just any old Catholic parish. Oh, no, no, no! They must have their own special parishes where they can be 'welcomed' with all their gayness and lesbian-ness on public display.

Fr. Thomas Rosica

The unbearably smug Father Thomas Rosica, a Vatican Press Office attaché during the Phony Synod, indignantly declared during the rigged proceedings: 'The jubilee of mercy requires a language of mercy, in particular in speaking about homosexuals or gay persons. We do not pity gay persons but we recognize them for who they are. They are our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters.'

Assuming the role of LGBT attack dog, Rosica blasted Chaput and other bishops (alluding to 'some bishops') who have been critical of Martin's book and the LGBT mainstreaming campaign in general, accusing them of 'erecting high, impenetrable walls and noisy echo chambers of monologue' and attributing opposition to Martin's propaganda to 'the dark, dysfunctional side of the Catholic blogosphere…'

Rosica harkened back to the Phony Synod, during which 'courageous bishops and Cardinals of the Church challenged their brother bishops and Synod delegates to be attentive to our language in speaking about homosexual persons.' He praised New Zealand Cardinal John Dew in particular for his 'fervent plea to examine our ecclesial language of 'intrinsically disordered' to describe homosexual persons.' The language of the Catechism, according to Rosica, is merely 'scholastic theology' that 'miss [es] the mark and end [s] up doing more harm than good.'

Alluding to one of Bergoglio's demagogic slogans, Rosica declared: 'Reality is more important than lofty theological or philosophical ideas'-meaning the negative precepts of the natural law, including the absolute impermissibility of sodomy.

Bishop Robert Barron

Alongside the more obvious 'gay Church' promoters are the smooth-talking 'conservative' commentators, such as Bishop Robert Barron-made a bishop by Bergoglio, of course-who enable the same mission by insisting the Church is not 'anti-gay' and apologizing for her supposed insensitivity to 'gay persons,' while soft-pedaling the intrinsic evil and depravity of sodomy as merely (to quote Barron) 'falling short' of 'the high bar' of the Church's teaching on sexuality, thus reduced to a lofty ideal, and an 'incomplete integration of the sexual act' rather than one of the sins crying out for divine retribution.

Last, but far from least

Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio

Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, who has declared (based solely on Amoris Laetitia) that public adulterers living in 'second marriages' should be admitted to Holy Communion if they find it 'impossible' to refrain from adulterous sexual relations, has also stated that while this permission would not extend to 'gay couples' because 'it's not a natural condition'-unlike 'natural' heterosexual adultery!-nevertheless 'We can accept them, welcome them, accept their decision…'

In what is surely only the tip of a very large iceberg, Coccopalmerio's personal secretary, Luigi Capozzi, was arrested in the midst of a drug-fueled homosexual orgy in a plush apartment located in the same building as the headquarters of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. According to the journalist who broke the story, Francesco Antonio Grana, Coccopalmerio had recommended (unsuccessfully) that Capozzi be made a bishop.

Edward Pentin, unable to obtain an official Vatican comment on the scandal (because it is undeniable), reports that his source within the curia admits that 'the story is true' and that '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.' Those efforts have clearly not only been halted but have gone into reverse.


As Pope Bergoglio continues to stack the College of Cardinals and the episcopate with pro-'gay' subversives or clueless liberal ding-a-lings, the faithful can only brace themselves for the next stage of the Bergoglian Debacle-the rise of Gay Church-while praying for a speedy (and probably miraculous) deliverance from the clutches of the Dictatorship of Mercy.

In its puff piece on Cardinal Tobin, The New York Times notes that after he was sent packing from the Vatican to Indiana on account of his failure and refusal to do anything effective to discipline America's plague of dissident nuns-an assignment he resented-Tobin 'lifted weights in the early mornings wearing a skull-printed do-rag.' What could be more appropriate to depict the 'gay'-friendly Bergoglian regime Tobin so perfectly exemplifies than the universal symbol of death?

[Remnant] 2197.19

CF News / Comment from the internet

Protestantism in the Church has failed ~ let's try Catholic Tradition

RORATE CAELI has posted this sermon by Fr. Richard G. Cipolla, delivered at St Mary's Norwalk, Connecticut, on July 30, 2017

HOW the hammer of the whole earth has been cut off and broken! How Babylon has become an object of horror among the nations! 'I set a snare for you and you were also caught, O Babylon, While you yourself were not aware; You have been found and also seized Because you have engaged in conflict with the LORD.' Jeremiah 50:23-24

Brokenness. That is the only word, a neologism I am sure, that describes our current situation, our plight. Last evening before dinner I read the New York Times, skimming as I always do. I had no hope of objectivity in the reporting of the news. Objective reporting went several years ago. But I was deeply saddened to see in an article on yet again another personal debacle within the Trump administration of revolving doors and twitter invective the reporting of the ipsissima verba of an off hand conversation of someone who is working at a high level in the administration and who worked to get someone high up fired and succeeded. The Times reported his language in the very words he used, which included four letter words that are now common in the artistic media and in everyday talk among so many of our young people but still never until this time have been printed in a newspaper that is read by many people indeed, including young people. For me this was a powerful sign of where this society is.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Times did this on purpose to make clear the grossness of these people who are close to the president. But printing those words is crossing a line that needed not to be crossed, because we all know the low level to which discourse has descended among the majority of people. When the terrible earthquake destroyed the town of Norcia, the birthplace of St. Benedict and destroyed the monastery of Benedictine monks there, I said that this was the sign of the end of Western civilization as we knew it, that is, a civilization founded on the Christian faith, not perfect, but yet with a grounding in faith in the person of Jesus Christ and all that that means. What is going on not only in this country but also in the whole Western world provides incontrovertible evidence that we are living not only in a post-Christian time but also in a real way in an anti-Christian time.

The breakdown in the moral fibre of this country and of the Western world that happened in the 1960s is real and we are living in its aftermath. To make this observation has nothing to do with a stuffy moralism or puritanism or any ism at all. We live in a time in which the real fruits of the Protestant reformation that denied the corporate nature of the existence of the individual within the Church as the body of Christ in the world are plain to see. We see its fruits in the so called rediscovery of the self in the Renaissance, the revolutionary spirit of the later eighteenth century and early nineteenth century and the attendant movement called the Enlightenment that placed the individual at the center of meaning, and despite the use of WE in the declaration of independence, the American vision placed the freedom of the individual, whose goal is the achievement of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness at the very center of the meaning of human existence. That peculiar American understanding of the importance of being a corporate entity as one nation, a special nation, was nevertheless undergirded by that radical understanding of the self-determination of the individual that can never be reconciled with the Catholic understanding of the individual as necessarily linked to everyone else in the body of Christ that is the Church in this world. And yet two terrible World Wars were fought with the belief that there is something very important in the corporate understanding of Western civilization that is worth fighting for and dying for.

But all this is broken and cannot be repaired. It is a foolish endeavour to try in any way to go back or to recapture the past millennia. Despite the lowest Mass attendance perhaps in the history of the Church, at least per capita, despite the abandonment of the Catholic faith and its necessary moral component by the great majority of baptized Catholics under forty, despite the confusion and itching of the powers that be in Rome to make things more palatable to a non-believing and self-centered age, the Church seems to refuse to do what has to be done and preach and teach as did the Apostles, daring to tell this generation of the great danger they face if they do not repent and turn to God and throw themselves at his feet and ask for his mercy, a mercy that is never automatic nor can it be presumed, but is always there for the asking, for the asking, one must ask for mercy.

But how can one even preach such things in a Church that has taught her people to feed themselves of the Body of Christ? A Church who has taught them to stand to receive What is Holy in direct contradiction to the examples of the Magi and of St. Peter and the practice of the Church for nearly two thousand years? A Church that has forgotten the vision of Isaiah of the Holy, a Church in which the words Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus have been emasculated by countless vernaculars that imitate the tower of Babel? A Church where a moon faced priest faces his people and becomes a presider instead of a sacrificing priest?

Brokenness. Marriage, the understanding of the family, the constant upsurge in the use of ever new drugs to dull the terrible emptiness felt by so many of our young people, the avoidance of the alleviation of the real poverty of so many people on this earth and instead taking refuge in screeds about global warming, a theory that seems to have some basis in data but is not helping those who are the poorest of the poor and who suffer every day atrocities that we cannot even conceive-this has little to do with Jesus' mandate to love especially those who are in need.

And what are the successors of the Apostles doing in this singular time? Beating the air. Trying to figure out how to get through this time of brokenness without admitting that things even in the Church are broken. That anti-intellectual and irrational positivism that the hierarchy has taken refuge in is crumbling in the face of the onslaught of a godless world and is becoming the laughing stock of what passes for the intelligentsia in our society. The embarrassing attempt to attract disenchanted youth by imitating the failed methods of Protestant appeal to sentimentality and emotion is indeed disheartening. It does not seem to occur to them to draw on the deep and God-given Tradition of the Church to reconvert our people by truth spoken plainly, by goodness in living a life that makes a serious attempt to be holy, and by beauty, that beauty that is found in Catholic Tradition but needs to be put into practice especially in the liturgical life of the Church.

I was hoping for a good nor'easter, but then they said that the heavy rain would be confined to the Delmarva peninsula, a name that sounds like a 1930s hotel in Palm Beach. I had hoped to be able to put on my Gene Kelly hat and my Gene Kelly smile and my tap shoes and go dancing and singin' in the rain. I pictured myself clicking my heels and gracefully swinging on a lamp post and let the rain help me forget the innumerable lines that have been crossed. But the rain never came.

So I donned my own peculiar hat and went to the stone altar and performed that primordial gesture of throwing smoke against a stone altar, an act that resonates with the whole history of man, an act that recalls the Abrahamic sacrifice in all of its terrible incomprehensibility. But this altar was being prepared not for a sacrifice that was a test of faith. In this sacrifice there was no hand to stay the knife. In this sacrifice the very body of God incarnate was slaughtered like a sheep and the blood of God flowed onto the stone altar of the Cross and flowed over the thousands of lines that have been crossed by men and women who have deliberately confused freedom with self-fulfillment and that Blood covered those lines with the infinite merciful love of God.

[RC] 2197.20


CF News / Comment from the internet

The Church of the Vatican II renewal is on life support. Here's why

CHRISTOPHER A. FERRARA writes for Fatia Perspectives : 'I always find it faintly amusing to see how “mainstream” Catholic commentators attempt to diagnose the obvious malaise of the Church that developed abruptly after the Second Vatican Council, at whose beginning Pope John XXIII was praising “the Church’s vitality.”

Take this commentary, for example, which laments that “[f]ew religious publications are willing to delve into the issues facing the Catholic Church today when it comes to declining attendance. Most priests do not want to recognize the fact that churches are now emptier today than ever before and parochial schools are closing at an accelerating rate.”

Why?  The author never really gets around to telling us.  He merely notes the signs of both social and ecclesial decline in America since 1960 — the very year in which the Third Secret was to be revealed, only to be suppressed by Pope John — without offering any definitive answer to his own questions about the causes:

• Only about half of Americans are married today, down from 72 percent in 1960. Why has marriage declined?

• Although the divorce rate has fallen since the 1980s, when it was at an all-time high, it is still twice as high as it was in 1960 and currently hovers around 50%.

• The U.S. birth rate is declining…. The average number of babies [has] dropped to a record low of 1.8 babies, well below the 2.1 needed for a stable population. Statistics show that birth rates among Catholic couples fell well within the current national statistics.

• Catholic schools are closing at a rapid rate. At their peak in the mid-1960s, more than 13,000 Catholic elementary and secondary schools enrolled 12% of U.S. school children. But by 2012, fewer than 7,000 Catholic schools enrolled about two million, or 5% of U.S. school-aged children.

• ... No more nuns. From a peak of over 100,000 sisters in the 1960s down to about 6,500 in 2010 still working or less than one per Catholic school.”

• The Catholic congregations are aging and dying off. At least 60% of most congregations today are over 65 years of age. The older the church’s membership, the more likely that the church is to have falling numbers, weaker finances, anemic youth programming and a sense of spiritual fatigue.”

The author makes a couple of weak stabs at an explanation, citing the women’s liberation movement for the decline in marriage and family and “no more nuns” for the decline in Catholic education.  But these are merely symptoms of an underlying disease.

Throwing up his hands, the author concludes: “The pews will remain empty unless the Catholic Church can address the issues blocking attendance. This will not be an easy task. The issues have to be addressed at the highest level in the Church.”

As we can see, our author is essentially clueless about why the Church has suffered a precipitous decline since Vatican II, correlated with a social decline reflected in the parlous state of the Catholic family in comparison with the immediate pre-conciliar period.  He refers merely to “issues” that “have to be addressed at the highest level in the Church.”

But what issues? Let me suggest a few:

• the sudden abandonment of the Church’s traditional Latin liturgy, which nurtured the faith of Catholics for nearly 2,000 years, inspiring countless saints and the greatest works of art, literature and music the world has ever seen;

• the sudden abandonment of the traditional formation of priests and nuns in the seminaries and convents, eliminating the other-worldliness that made religious vocations attractive to souls;

• the sudden abandonment, for the sake of the novelty of “ecumenism,” of the Church’s perennial teaching which “altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you.’ [2 John 10].”

• the sudden abandonment of all condemnations of error, along with the Oath Against Modernism designed to root out the ecclesial subversives who are now running rampant in the Church;
the sudden adoption of a posture of “dialogue” with the “modern world” instead of militant opposition to its deadly errors;

• the sudden abandonment (at least in practice) of the dogma that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation;

• the sudden embrace of the notion, condemned by Pius XI as a threat to “foundations of the Catholic faith”, i.e., that that “all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy,” leading naturally to the conclusion that Catholicism is no better than any other religion and has no special claim to the allegiance of men;

• the consequent overwhelming impression among the people that there is no particularly compelling reason either to join or to remain in the Catholic Church or to heed her teachings, leading inevitably to a drastic decline in membership and conversions and a drastic moral decline among those who remain nominally Catholic.

In sum, the “issues” our author says must be addressed “at the highest level in the Church” reduce to one issue:  reversal of the ecclesial revolution that has convulsed her over the past half-century and the restoration of Catholic Tradition in all its integrity — liturgical, doctrinal and moral.  Failing that, the human element of the Church will continue to be the salt that has lost its savor and is being trampled underfoot by a hostile world with whose powers Church leaders continue their fatuous, pointless, and worse-than-useless “dialogue.” 

But that reversal, it now seems clear, can come only through a dramatic divine intervention — literally a miracle. And that miracle will not come, we can be sure, until Russia is finally consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, an act that will undo the consequences of the epochal faithlessness of her leaders these past fifty years.

[FP] 2197.20a


CF News / Comment from the internet

Saint Ignatius on heresy, and the capsizing boat

FR. TIM FINIGAN blogs : 'On the feast of St Ignatius, I offer my prayers and good wishes to some great Jesuits. Just off the top of my head, I think of Fr Joseph Fessio SJ the founder of Ignatius Press which has not only published the English translations of various works of Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict, but has also given a break for good Catholic authors both of theology and of Catholic fiction. Then there is Fr Bob Spitzer SJ, with whom I studied in Rome many years ago, and Fr Paul Mankowski SJ who has written some superb articles over the years. Here in England, I recall Fr Anthony Meredith SJ, the great fatherly commentator on the Fathers of Cappadocia and in Rome, there is Fr Gilles Pelland SJ, the fierce French-Canadian patristics scholar was a bit harsh when I first arrived in the Holy City, but seemed to soften a bit when after 5 years he seeme satisfied that, though English, I was not a modernist.

Many of my Jesuit priest friends and mentors have now reached 'that night when no man can work' and I remember them in my prayers today - Fr Thwaites SJ, Fr John Edwards SJ, and some of my teachers in Rome. Fr Antonio Orbe SJ was an immensely learned expert in the pre-Nicene Fathers, with whom I enjoyed a challenging couple of terms in a major seminar reading Tertullian's Adversus Praxean.

Thinking of these sound men, it seemed good to me to quote a letter to Father Peter Canisius which St Ignatius wrote from Rome on 13 August 1554, advising him on the need for the society to oppose heresy. St Ignatius said:

'The heretics have made their false theology popular and presented it in a way that is within the capacity of the common people. They preach it to the people and teach it in the schools, and scatter pamphlets that can be bought and understood by many; they influence people by their writings when they cannot reach them by preaching. Their success is largely due to the negligence of those who should have shown some interest, and the bad example and the ignorance of Catholics, especially the clergy, have made such ravages in the vineyard of the Lord.'

Sadly in our time, some prominent Jesuits have been part of the ravages and caused a reaction in which people understandably emphasise the action of Pope Clement XIV in 1773 in Dominus ac Redemptor Noster suppressing the Jesuits. (Here is a link to Fr Z's Clement XIV gear.) I do admit to having stopped off occasionally when walking home from the Gregorian University, to call in to say a prayer at the tomb of Papa Ganganelli at the Basilica of the Dodici Apostoli which was conveniently situated in the next square.

On the feast day of the saintly founder, let us recall instead the document Sollicitudo Omnium Ecclesiarum of Pope Pius VII, restoring the Society. I quote:

'We would believe ourselves guilty of a great crime in the presence of God, if, in these so grave necessities of the public interest, We were to neglect to put to work those salutary helps which God, with singular providence has provided Us, and if We, placed in the bark of Peter, tossed and buffeted by continual storms, were to reject the expert and valorous rowers who offer to break the waves of a sea which at every moment threatens Us with shipwreck and ruin.

This reminds me of the recent message of Pope Benedict for the funeral of Cardinal Meissner who, the Emeritus Holy Father said, had 'learned to let go and live increasingly from the conviction that the Lord does not leave his Church, even if at times the ship is almost filled to the point of shipwreck.'

The strong rowers don't necessarily have to be Jesuits. Today we might search for some other group who could volunteer their services to break the waves. There are one or two societies who spring to mind.

[http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.co.uk] 2197.21

CF News / Comment from the internet

Remembering Saint Padre Pio's words on abortion

The stigmata saint's stark warning, amid signs that some in the Church are losing, or perhaps never had, a horror for such a grave sin.

EDWARD PENTIN writes for the National Catholic Register : 'The decision to have the notorious abortionist Emma Bonino speak about immigration in an Italian church last week drew widespread condemnation.

But it also led some to argue, including the local Caritas representative who sponsored her talk, that Bonino's atrocious abortion record, of which she has never repented, could be set aside to focus on this other aspect of Catholic Social Teaching.

Yet effectively sidelining the gravity of abortion in favor of bringing a radical secularist to form a common front on immigration perhaps signifies how much the West, and some in the Church, have become numb to abortion and the gravity of the sin.

St. Padre Pio, for example, believed abortion was not just the murder of an innocent human being, but also a true suicide.

In a now famous story, Father Pellegrino Funicelli, who assisted Padre Pio for many years, once confronted the saint on the sin, asking him:

'Today you denied absolution to a woman because she had voluntarily undergone an abortion. Why have you been so rigorous with this poor unfortunate?' (Padre Pio would sometimes refuse to give absolution to a penitent if they showed insufficient contrition; often they would return and he'd give absolution if they were sincere).

Padre Pio responded: 'The day that people lose their horror for abortion will be the most terrible day for humanity. Abortion is not only a homicide but also a suicide. Shouldn't we have the courage to manifest our faith before those who commit two crimes within one act?

'Suicide?,' asked Father Pellegrino.

'The suicide of the human race will be understood by those who will see the earth populated by the elderly and depopulated of children: burnt as a desert,' Padre Pio replied.

Bonino, who boasts of performing more than 10,000 abortions in 1975, vacuuming the unborn child from the womb with a bicycle pump and putting the mangled remains into a glass jar, ironically noted in her talk the population decline in Italy.

For her, migrants are an answer to fill that gap, even though, as one listener protested (and was thrown out as a result), she is at least partly responsible for that lacuna through her abortion crimes.

The warning of Padre Pio, who remains so beloved in Italy, was therefore prophetic. And it is as if Bonino's enthusiasm to welcome immigrants is aimed at covering up the mass suicide of a country's population precipitated by the legalization of abortion in Italy that she fought so hard for.

Over six million have died since abortion was legalized in Italy in 1978, and like many countries in the West, Italy is also criticized by the pro-life movement and Catholics as a whole for contracepting itself out of existence.

[NCRegister] 2197.22

CF News / Comment from the internet

The Trojan Horse of Population Control


Soros & Boninos

Soros and Bonino


HILARY WHITE writes for The Remnant : 'With the breaking of the news into the English language media-sphere the other day, some thoughts converged, into the form of a question: Why would anyone expect Emma 'La Bicicletta' Bonino not to be invited to speak at a Catholic Church in Italy? Catholic editorialists are furious that Bonino was invited to speak at the church of San Defendente in Ronco di Cossato, on July 26, 2017, 'World Refugee Day'. But there is an underlying tone of defeated routine in their protestations, as though they are objecting out of a dogged sense of duty to fulfill rather than any real outrage; let alone shock.

This is a woman who entered parliament in the 1970s to avoid prosecution for, according to her own boasts, having committed over 10,000 illegal abortions. The nickname comes from the machine she built for the job from a bicycle pump and a pickle jar. Bonino launched the Center for Information on Sterilization and Abortion (CISA) that achieved legalisation in 1975. After this success, Bonino went on to a stellar career as a parliamentarian for the Radical Party, and later, as a protégée of George Soros, as a European Commissioner and Italy's foreign minister where she spends Soros' and a good bit of Italian citizens' money promoting mass migration, European federalism and the abolition of national borders.

It is perhaps difficult for Anglos to imagine what the situation in the Church is here, but the abortionist doyenne of the bitterly anti-Catholic Radical party, Emma Bonino, is the embodiment of what the Italian hierarchy as a whole, and with very few exceptions, regards as the ideal politician. At best her aggressive promotion of abortion is seen as a forgivable peccadillo, (and a dead issue now that Italy has 'settled' its abortion laws) something to be brushed aside and politely not mentioned, while she is lauded for her work pressing the government to allow the landing of hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants on Italian shores. As it is in the US, limitless immigration is the most fashionable issue on the Church's left - that in Italy we must simply call 'the Church,' there being no structural 'right.' And Emma Bonino is the face in this country of the Soros 'open borders' plan to overwhelm Europe, especially European culture, with (mostly Islamic) migrants from Africa and the Middle East.

The soaring rates of violent crime - a few months ago in the little town next to ours our station master was murdered by the gang of African migrant thugs who loiter about the station day and night… he had dared to intervene in their bullying - seems inconsequential to the bishops and clergy. Italy is simply no longer a safe country, as it was only five years ago. The respectable village ladies are afraid to walk the five minutes from the church to their homes at the end of their Thursday night Rosary group. But the parish priest is more likely to accuse them of racism than change the time to help keep them safe should they complain.

The sacramental life - that is, the Catholic religion - seems to be of interest to no one but the laity, slowly spiritually starving on bare subsistence rations. In our village there is only a Mass offered one day a week, and, in the summer, half the Masses in the six villages down the valley are cancelled completely. (It goes without saying that this is strictly the Novus Ordo, with the full complement of guitar-strummers; the traditional Mass is simply not on the radar.) Even worse, there are no scheduled Confession times at all; that Sacrament has simply gone locally extinct.

But none of this is apparently of any interest to our bishop, whom Francis recently appointed head of the Italian bishops' conference and made a cardinal (at 75) and who a few months ago organised a sort of rally (without a Mass, of course) in the city up on the hill to 'celebrate' the enormous influx of African Muslim migrants to our area. This was after having given an interview in which he urged the government to grant legal concessions to same-sex liaisons, while cautioning Catholic participants in the Family Day demonstrations not to be 'against' anyone: 'The example comes from Pope Francis. His words are always of absolute clarity, the Holy Father is never against anyone, ever.'

It is true that in the Francis pontificate the Marxist faction in the Italian episcopate has been emboldened. In March 2017 when Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia - yes, the one who commissioned the homoerotic mural for Terni cathedral, with himself as one of the featured nudes - gave a brief eulogy for a Radical Party founder, Marco Pannella. Francis' pick as head of the Pontifical Academy for Life and the John Paul II Institute for Studies in Marriage and Family went to a party meeting as a very special guest to call Pannella 'a man of great spirituality,' saying his death is a 'great loss' not just for the party but 'for our country' and 'for our world, which needs more than ever men who can talk like him.'

Pannella, Paglia said had 'spent his life for the least' in 'defence of the dignity of all, especially the most marginalized.' Paglia described his warm and close friendship with Pannella, calling his death 'a great loss,' not just for the party but 'for our country.' Pannella's life, he said, is an 'inspiration for a more beautiful life not only for Italy, but for our world, which needs more than ever men who can talk like him ... I hope that the spirit of Marco can help us to live in that same direction.'

In October last year, Catholic writers in Italy expressed their shock at the bishops proudly announcing their partnership with the Radicals to promote the party's 'March for Amnesty, Justice, Freedom' project demanding the release of criminals from prisons. Given the party's devotion to driving the Church out of public life, the Italian bishops' collusion with the Radicals could justly be described as the turkeys working with the butcher to promote Thanksgiving.

It sounds to an outside observer like the world's most advanced case of Stockholm Syndrome: A Church demonstrating its bona fides to a bitterly anti-Catholic Left by committing ritual suicide. Perhaps the only sensible question we are left with is why Emma Bonino is not doing a preaching tour of all the major basilicas and cathedrals of Italy.

But the whole business does raise other questions. As we start to understand the advanced state of moral decay this anti-Catholic ideology has caused among bishops and clergy, we tend to forget that it was not always so. The news has raised in my mind the question of how exactly this situation came about. How and why and by whom was Italy and the other Catholic nations of Europe so thoroughly de-Catholicised? Why, for example, are the 'most Catholic' nations of Europe also the countries with the lowest fertility rates in the western world? Why has Italy not had a fertility rate over 1.4 children per woman in the last 30 years? The country's statistical agency, Istat, says that in 2015 the total fertility rate was 1.35, a demographic death spiral. Italian politicians now openly speak of Italy as 'a dying nation.'

By now the looming 'demographic winter' of the western and westernized Asian nations is an accepted reality, but why is it particularly acute - particularly advanced - in the formerly Catholic nations? If we put what we know together with these questions, the logic drives us toward an inescapable, though profoundly disturbing, hypothesis. One could be excused for asking, 'Has the Catholic hierarchy been colluding with the globalist population control agenda to effect the decimation, even the extinction, of the Catholic population of Europe? And if so, for how long? Who made the decision and when, and what did they get in exchange?'

Anyone who wants to can do the research; I'm not going to reproduce it all here but everything has been declassified and is available online. Suffice for now to note that in 1974 a document was presented to the United Nations, authored by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, that demanded the resources of the UN - especially including all its aid organisations like UNICEF - be ordered to the reduction of fertility in certain 'target' states [1]. Assistance to people in these countries was to be attached to a demand that they accept contraception and sterilization - and later abortion - or do without the help.

The Catholic depopulation work, however, was already well under way when Kissinger's committee produced National Security Memorandum 200. Had some controlling faction of the Catholic hierarchy already agreed in the 1960s to participate in a similar clandestine European Catholic genocide? Was there an agreement at the international level - as it has been said there was between Toronto's Cardinal Gerald Emmett Carter [2] and Pierre Trudeau - to suppress the teaching of the Church on marriage and family life in exchange for concessions of some kind? Certainly the mood, the fashion, in Rome at the time was for making such deals. And it might have seemed like a pretty good one: progressives - and even normal Catholics who loved the approval of the secular world - were angry and deeply embarrassed by Humanae Vitae; they were definitely in a mood to suppress it. And after the debacle in Washington DC, it was clear that Pope Paul VI had no immediate plans to defend it. And we have certainly seen that the Holy See's decades of presence at the UN has greatly increased the Vatican's prestige and influence in international diplomatic circles, as we were reminded by Pope Francis' intervention in Cuba.

Is it possible that some character like an Agostino Casaroli [3] - thought by many in this country to be a Freemason - made a deal with the nascent population control movement at the UN to effectively suppress Humanae Vitae in Europe's Catholic churches?

The Holy See established its mission - and received 'permanent observer' status - at the UN in 1964. Ten years later, the UN formally entered the global population control business, but by that time the population slide in Europe was well under way.

The international contraception promoters had already been at work in Italy for some years by that time. A report by the abortion/contraception agency Pathfinders International, brags that their agents were already handing out hormonal contraceptives to poor women in Rome in 1958, materials that 'had been supplied free of charge by a manufacturer in Great Britain.' The agent of the Planned Parenthood affiliate group, Maria Luisa DeMarchi, 'continued these visits for the next two decades, making weekly visits to over 550 clients annually-a total of over 7,000 visits.' The propaganda was effective: friends tell me that if you have one baby in a stroller, the nonnas will smile and coo; two or more children and the response is a lecture on overpopulation.

The results, the statistics, are easy to find; a recent report said that Italy now has the lowest fertility rate in Europe, one that has more halved since the 1960s. Births have fallen to fewer than in any other years since the modern state was formed in 1861. Italian Health Minister Beatrice Lorenzin - who thinks the problem can be solved by a 160 Euro monthly baby bonus - warned that Italy as a nation is facing an uncertain future without children. 'In five years we have lost more than 66,000 births (per year) - that is the equivalent of a city the size of Siena. If we link this to the increasing number of old and chronically ill people, we have a picture of a moribund country.'

This bleak picture, of course, gives the likes of Emma Bonino and her friend at Santa Marta all the excuse they require to bring in as many African Muslim migrants as George Soros could wish. Italian parliamentarians on the left openly argue that these are the people needed to 'replace' the native Italian population that is going extinct.

Italy's fertility rate is well below the European average of 1.58 average, but that number itself falls far short of the 2.1 required to maintain a stable population. The CIA World Factbook, a project of the US State Department, tells us that Spain (67.8%), Italy (80%), Poland (87.2%), Portugal (81%) and the Republic of Ireland (84.7%), are among the 'most Catholic' nations of Europe. Every one of them also has what demographers call the 'lowest-low,' or below-replacement fertility rates. Incremental boosts in the birth rates have come in the last few years, but have been generally understood to be the result of influxes of more fecund immigrants.

Just taking a closer look at one country, the little bellwether nation of Malta, we see that the situation has to have been sliding for decades before the recent leftist governments started altering the legislative scene. The median age of the Maltese population is 41.5 years, which breaks down to 'male: 40.4 years; female: 42.7 years,' well over child-bearing age. This could not be accomplished in a few years. It takes decades of low birth rates to push the median age so high, even for such a small population. The Total Fertility Rate of Malta was 1.55 children born per woman in 2016, a situation that would be impossible if the Maltese hierarchy and clergy had taught what the Church teaches about marriage and family.

It can be fairly said that Malta is the most Catholic nation in the world. Various estimates place it about 90-98%. The conscious abandonment of the Church's teaching can be the only possible explanation for their current demographic situation. Fifteen years ago, about 80% of the population of Malta attended Mass every week. A few years ago when I visited it was down to 50%. Masses are mainly well attended, but only with older people, and the men generally stay away. The installation of legalized divorce, contraception and now 'gay marriage' in this Catholic nation could not have come about without at least the tacit cooperation of the Church. I was told that when the government moved to legalise divorce in 2011 - the first of a long line of legislative dominoes - there was no outcry, either from the laity or the clergy; indeed, many of the latter promoted the change from the pulpits. More recently still, we have seen the Maltese bishops becoming the poster-boys for the Bergoglian revolution; ordering their priests to give Holy Communion to people they know to be in unrepented adulterous liaisons.

For obvious reasons, it might also be worth looking at Argentina, for which the CIA's notes are especially damning: 'One-third of the population lives in Buenos Aires,' and are merely 'nominally Roman Catholic, 92% (less than 20% practicing)'; this might be the only country for which the notes include this telling little caveat. It gives the fertility rate for Argentina as '2.28 children born/woman (2016 est.)' putting it just marginally above the level of population replacement of 2.1 children per woman. The 2014 'country implementation' report on Argentina by the UNFPA, the United Nations office overseeing the global population control movement, notes that between 1990 and 2001, contraceptive use increased from zero to 65%. The report also notes that the government has 'major concerns' about 'adolescent fertility,' and is implementing 'direct support for family planning' among young people.

North American conservative Catholics, working with their local political categories, are often hampered in understanding this situation. They laugh at the wild 'conspiracy theories' of Traditionalists, with our table talk of Freemasons and Communist infiltration… What's next? UFO abductions? But on the old continent, these realities are acknowledged as part of the landscape; Italians know that Freemasons and Communists are not fairytales; the prominent displays of hammers and sickles at the 'Gay Pride' parade every year in Rome being a bit of a give-away. We sheltered Anglos really have no idea how commonplace it is for Italian priests and even bishops to openly operate as Communist agitators or sympathizers.

Many years ago, when I first became interested in these issues, I started reading about the movement by wealthy western countries to 'curtail' the birth rates of poor 'developing nations'. At the time I had no strong objection to contraception per se, but it struck me immediately that it was a gross moral violation for rich people to start demanding that poor people stop having children, so they could maintain their extravagant consumption indefinitely. This was clearly a case of genocide, on a global scale. But it is simply a fact that the European Catholic fertility rates started plunging well before the UN's aid agencies started working to curtail births in the developing world.

Mass contraceptive and sterilization programmes, including government propaganda promoting them, is genocide. And this is what the UN has been doing in every 'developing' nation in the world since the early 1970s. Given what we know now about how things have worked in the Vatican since the 1950s, I see no reason not to suspect, very strongly, that the extermination of Catholic Europe, that has been on the secularist, Freemasonic agenda since the early 19th century, was brought into the Church by the turncoat Trojans in Rome.

[1] The countries named in the 1974 memo for special treatment were India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Turkey, Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mexico, Colombia and Brazil. With the revelations since then that UN-funded health organisations have been entering South American and African countries and sterilizing women without their knowledge or consent, one can assume that the mandate has expanded.

[2] Carter was one of the Church's most outspoken opponents of Humanae Vitae and the author of the key paragraphs of the Winnipeg Statement repudiating its moral teaching. He publicly called the encyclical a 'tragedy' and issued confessional guidelines for priests all but instructing them to ignore it: 'Because of the doubt in the practical order, no priest can refuse absolution to persons using the pill, unless their motive is clearly sinful.'

[3] Secretary of State 1979 - 1990, Casaroli was a lifelong Vatican diplomat. Under John XXIII he was the author of the Vatican's 'Ostpolitik' approach of appeasement of Communism. He was included in the famous 'Pecorelli's List' of suspected Vatican Freemasons, as was his immediate predecessor in the office, Jean Villot.

[Remnant] 2197.23

CF News / Comment from the internet

The philosophical key to Bergoglianism

CHRISTOPHER A.FERRARA writes for Fatima Perspectives : 'As the continually astonishing phenomenon of this pontificate progresses, mainstream Catholic commentators, awakening to the inescapable drama of it all, are now offering their frank diagnoses of what is wrong with what Antonio Soccio has dubbed 'Bergoglianism.' One such commentator is James Patrick, writing in Crisis Magazine.

Patrick rightly observes that 'every theology necessarily incorporates a philosophy, for there will always be a natural way of thinking that under-girds the exposition of revelation.' Thus, he continues, 'Like everyman, popes have philosophies, and although it is not the business of a pope to advocate any philosophy, the philosophy every pope presupposes will influence his representation of the Catholic faith and his government of the Church.'

I would politely disagree with the proposition that 'it is not the business of a pope to advocate any philosophy.' On the contrary, it is the business of a Pope to advocate a philosophy that accords with reality, with the content of Revelation, and with the nature of man as created in the image and likeness of God but in need of redemption on account of the Fall. And such a philosophy is that of the Angelic Doctor, Saint Thomas Aquinas.

In his landmark encyclical Aeterni Patris, on precisely the subject of 'the restoration of Christian philosophy,' Pope Leo XIII said this of Saint Thomas in the course of calling for a thorough revival of the Church's commitment to Thomistic philosophy:

'Among the Scholastic Doctors, the chief and master of all towers Thomas Aquinas, who, as Cajetan observes, because 'he most venerated the ancient doctors of the Church, in a certain way seems to have inherited the intellect of all.' The doctrines of those illustrious men, like the scattered members of a body, Thomas collected together and cemented, distributed in wonderful order, and so increased with important additions that he is rightly and deservedly esteemed the special bulwark and glory of the Catholic faith.'

Why is Thomistic philosophy 'the special bulwark and glory of the Catholic faith'? Quite simply, because, as G.K. Chesterton has noted, 'Thomism is the philosophy of common sense.' That is, Thomism defends the correspondence of the mind to the real world, failing which God would be a monster who has imprisoned us in diving bells cut off from reality. All of so-called modern philosophy is, more or less, a denial of the authority of the senses that Saint Thomas defended, because that authority comes from God Himself.

More than this, however, Saint Thomas' profound exploration of what reason (perfected by grace) reliably reveals (through the senses) about reality led to his development of a vast system of philosophic precision in moral and theological matters which protects the doctrines of the Faith from corruption though faulty thinking. For example, the dogma of transubstantiation, reflective of Thomistic philosophy, holds that at the moment of their Consecration the 'substances' of bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, while only the 'accidents' of bread and wine remain.. The concept of transubstantiation carefully distinguishes the substance (essence or nature) of a thing from its accidents (visibly detectable physical characteristics). To deny that distinction is to deny that Christ is really present in the Holy Eucharist, leading inevitably to the conclusion that the bread and wine remain bread and wine in substance, not just in appearance. Which is precisely the error of Protestantism and its denial of the Real Presence.

Patrick's diagnosis of Bergoglianism focuses on one of the Pope's sayings that strikes at the heart of Saint Thomas' defense of reason. Quoth Francis in Evangelii Gaudium: 'Reality is greater than ideas.' The disjunction between ideas and reality is false. For as Saint Thomas teaches, and as Patrick explains: 'When Saint Thomas asks where truth resides, he answers that it resides in the mind and only secondarily in things. A historical or scientific account may derive truth from what happens in the world by explaining events under a generalization, but reality remains unintelligible without ideas, and in that sense ideas are always more important than reality. And also with theological truth and moral precepts.'

Indeed, there can be no theology or morality without fixed ideas in the mind that govern human reason and human action in the use of reason. This is also true, Patrick notes, 'with the exercise of authority. The attempt to rule without reference to tradition or any other transcendent rational ground, or even the regulative claims of the past, however benign the results may or may not accidentally be, will result in a government that rests upon unmoderated will, difficult in principle to distinguish from a vernacular Marxism.'

Moreover, Patrick continues: 'The attempt to derive moral guidance from reality, from how mankind behaves, from the sorry story of our aspirations and failures, will make every teaching of the Church uncertain, as has Amoris Laetitia in the opinion of many. An editorial writer in the Guardian has said that Francis has changed the Church forever from a rule-bound institution to an instinctive Church. Good luck with your instincts.'

Thus, we can see that by one simple, seemingly plausible phrase that flies in the face of the common-sense philosophy of Saint Thomas - i.e., that 'reality is greater than ideas' - literally the entire edifice of the Faith is undermined.

From which it is obvious that philosophical errors have enormous consequences when they are espoused by a Pope. And such is the new stage of the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves.

[FP] 2197. 23a

CF News / Comment from the Vatican

The Second Vatican Council and the Message of Fatima

Roberto de MatteiROBERTO DE MATTEI writes for the Lepanto Institute : 'Rorate Caeli, Corrispondenza Romana and other Catholic news-outlets, carried a valuable intervention by Monsignor Athanasius Schneider on the 'Interpretation of the Second Vatican Council and its relationship with the current crisis in the Church'. According to the auxiliary Bishop of Astana, Vatican II was a pastoral Council and its texts should be read and judged in the light of the perennial teaching of the Church. In fact 'From an objective point of view, the statements of the Magisterium (Popes and councils) of definitive character, have more value and more weight compared with the statements of pastoral character, which have naturally a changeable and temporary quality depending on historical circumstances or responding to pastoral situations of a certain period of time, as it is the case with the major part of the statements of Vatican II.'

Monsignor Schneider's article was followed on July 31st by a balanced comment from Don Angel Citati of the FSSPX, according to which the German Bishop's position recalls very closely what was repeated constantly by Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre: 'To say that we evaluate the Council's documents 'in the light of Tradition', means, evidently, three indissoluble things: that we accept those that are in keeping with Tradition; that we interpret those that are ambiguous according to Tradition; that we reject those that are contrary to Tradition' ( (Mons. M. Lefebvre, Vi trasmetto quello che ho ricevuto. Tradizione perenne e futuro della Chiesa, [I transmit what I have received. Perennial Tradition and the future of the Church] by Alessandro Gnocchi and Mario Palmaro, Sugarco Edizioni, Milano 2010, p. 91). Having been published on the official site of the Italian District, Don Citati's article helps us understand what might be the base of an agreement to regularize the canonical situation of the Fraternity of Pius X.

It must be added that, on the theological level, all of the distinctions can and have to be made to interpret the texts of Vatican II, which was a legitimate Council: the twenty-first in the Catholic Church. Its documents from time to time may be defined pastoral or dogmatic, provisional or definitive, in keeping or not in keeping with Tradition. Monsignor Brunero Gheradini, in his recent works offers us an example of how a theological judgment may be articulated, if it wants to be precise (Il Concilio Vaticano II un discorso da fare, Casa Mariana, Frigento 2009 e Id., Un Concilio mancato, Lindau, Torino 2011). Each text, for a theologian, has a different quality and a different degree of authority and cogency. Hence the debate is open.

On the historical level, however, Vatican II constitutes a non-decomposable block: It has its own unity, its essence, its nature. Considered in its origins, its implementation and consequences, it can be described as a Revolution in mentality and language, which has profoundly changed the life of the Church, initiating a moral and religious crisis without precedent. If the theological judgment may be vague and comprehensive, the judgment of history is merciless and without appeal. The Second Vatican Council was not only unsuccessful or a failure: it was a catastrophe for the Church.

Since this year is the centenary of the Apparitions of Fatima, let us consider this point only. When Vatican II opened in October 1962, Catholics from all over the world were waiting for the disclosing of the Third Secret and the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate heart of Mary. John Haffert's Blue Army led a mass campaign for years in this regard. What better occasion for John XXIII ( died 3rd June 1963), Paul VI and with circa 3000 bishops gathered around them, in the very heart of Christendom, to meet Our Lady's requests in a solemn and unanimous way? On February 3rd 1964, Monsignor Geraldo de Proença Sigaud, personally delivered to Paul VI, a petition signed by 510 prelates from 78 countries, which implored the Pontiff, in union with all the bishops, to consecrate the world and in an explicit manner, Russia, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The Pope and most of the Council Fathers ignored the appeal.

If the Consecration request had been done, great graces would have poured down on humanity. A movement of a return to the natural and Christian law would have begun. Communism would have fallen many years earlier, in an non-fictitious way, but authentic and real. Russia would have converted and the world would have experienced an age of peace and order. Our Lady had promised this.

The failed consecration allowed Russia to continue spreading its errors throughout the world and these errors conquered the highest ranks of the Church, inviting a terrible chastisement for all of humanity. Paul VI and the majority of the Council Fathers assumed a historical responsibility for which today we gauge the consequences.
(by Roberto de Mattei)


[Lepanto Institute] 2197.23b

CF News /Comment from the internet

Gerhard Cardinal Mueller

FR JOHN HUNWICKE blogs : 'His Eminence Gerhard Cardinal Mueller may not have been well treated by the current occupant of the Roman See ... but he was badly treated by the more eccentric wing of Traddidom long before that.

Among the things I most admire about Mueller is his steadfast defence of the highly important principle, established by Benedict XVI and detested by the apostate sections of Germanic Christianity, that Episcopal Conferences have no theological status. The Universal Church, within which the Roman See is the centre of Catholic Communion, does have status; and so does the the Local, Particular Church, with its Bishop, Presbyterium, Diaconate and Laos. But 'Conferences' ... no way. Lose sight of this, and you will find yourself wandering down the muddy track called Provincial Autonomy, which smashed up the unity and traditions of the once great Anglican Communion. The Universal Church does indeed have priority over the Particular Church, as Ratzinger demonstrated in his punctiliously courteous but devastating demolitions of the sneering and nasty Kasper. The scholarly clarity of the former was more than a match for the slippery and phony logic of the latter.

But the dafter traddies never really noticed any of this. It was Mueller's stand on Amoris laetitia which most irritated them. They totally failed to observe the dilemma upon the stiletto-sharp horns of which he skewered Amoris laetitia. His Eminence offered AL two alternatives: (1) it has changed nothing; Familiaris consortio and Caritatis sacramentum still rule, OK; or (2) it has changed the immemorial praxis and doctrine of the Church.

The former of these is the only viable option. It is widely suspected both by the pope's admirers and his critics that Pope Francis had hoped to create a massive and confused muddy area of ambiguities in which the solutions he wanted would bubble up to the service and gradually, over time, establish themselves as facts upon the ground. If that is accurate, Mueller called his bluff. Perhaps that is why he had to go.

Gerhard Mueller will now have the leisure to work on his major edition of Joseph Ratzinger's works; and, I hope, to do a lot of his own work. He is, for a cardinal, young, and has much to offer the Church ... for which reason I am particularly glad that he did not accept some face-saving but time-wasting 'role'. If this pontificate lasts long enough, Bergoglio may come to regret that he did not (as the English mingently express it) keep Mueller inside the tent.

Mueller has put up with major humiliations, such as the tediously insistent implication in Pope Francis' words that Kasper, and then Schoenborn, are this age's brilliant theologians. There are also compelling reasons for thinking that the more minor and private humiliations which Mueller endured, Friday after Friday, may not have been few in number. This kindly and intelligent man has served the People of God through all of that with grace, simplicity, and loyalty.

I particularly hope that he will have time to return to the question of Liberation Theology. Despite a fair bit of froth about the Poor and the Peripheries, Pope Francis has no interest in this. But the major problems of unequal distribution and of the multinational corporations are still with us. So are the consequent violent polarities (as we see today in Venezuela) and the concomitant theological questions. Mueller is the man to take a fresh look at them.


[http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.co.uk/] 2197.23c






















Our Catholic Heritage

Site of the day : Quin Abbey



QUIN ABBEY lies six miles east of Ennis, Co.Clare. This was a Franciscan friary, founded in 1402 by Sioda MacNamara.. It is said to have been the first Observatine friary founded in Ireland. The ruins are well preserved. In 1541 the friars were expelled from the premises by Henry VIII, King of Ireland, but after the death of Queen Elizabeth I in 1603 they returned. They were driven out again in 1652 but contrived the remain in the neighbourhood for the next 150 years. The last surviving member of the Order, Father John Hogan, died in 1829 and his tomb is in the north-east corner of the cloister. The remains of a Norman castle were used in its building - three of the old corner towers have been incorporated in the friary building. Most Irish records relating to the Dissolution of the Monasteries were destroyed in the burning of the Dublin Records Office in 1922.


CF News / Our Catholic Heritage

Saint of the Day

BLESSED WILLIAM FREEMAN was born in the East Riding, Yorkshire, studied at Oxford and was converted to Catholicism in 1586 by the martyrdom of Blessed Edward Stransahm at Tyburn. He went to Reims, France, where he was ordained in 1587. He went back to England the following year, and laboured for the English mission in Worcestershire and Warwickshire until he was arrested in early 1595. Seven months later he was hanged, drawn, and quartered at Warwick on August 13. William was beatified in 1929.


CF News / Our Catholic Heritage


Relics of St Cuthbert go on display at Durham Cathedral

St CuthbertRELICS of one of Britain's earliest saints, St Cuthbert, have gone on display in Durham Cathedral.

The centrepiece of the permanent exhibition at the cathedral - which was built in his honour - is an oak coffin, made in Lindisfarne in AD 698, 11 years after Cuthbert's death. Other exhibits include the saint's pectoral cross - Cuthbert was called back from his hermit's cell to become a bishop - and his ivory comb.

Cuthbert's body and relics were carried by Lindisfarne's monks when they fled inland to escape Viking raids. They eventually settled in Durham, which became a place of pilgrimage. Although his shrine was destroyed in the Reformation, his relics survived, and his remains were finally reburied in the cathedral in 1899.

The exhibition is housed in the cathedral's 14th-century Great Kitchen, one of only two monastic kitchens to survive.

'The launch of the Treasures of St Cuthbert on permanent display in their new home marks a new phase in the life of Durham Cathedral and its exhibition experience Open Treasure,' said the Very Rev Andrew Tremlett, Dean of Durham.

'It is very fitting that the final jewel in the crown of Open Treasure is centred on St Cuthbert, in whose honour Durham Cathedral was built.'

TV historian Dr Janina Ramirez said: 'It is the most intact glimpse of our medieval past focused on possibly one of the most important Englishmen of the period, St Cuthbert.

'These artefacts bring the time and character to life and to have them exhibited in one of the few remaining monastic kitchens in the country is extraordinary.'

[Catholic Herald] 2197.26

CF News / Our Catholic Heritage

Teach me, O Lord, the way of your statutes

William Byrd



[The Piping Rock Singers] 2197.27






















Carthusian monk


The Life of Grace

A CARTHUSIAN MONK writes : 'The good that God has promised us', says St Thomas Aquinas, 'so exceeds our nature that, far from being able to attain it, our natural faculties could never even suspect a it...' What is this good that we could never suspect? It is God's gift to us of supernatural life.

To understand what we mean by super-natural life, we must first of all have a clear idea about our natural life. Man is a kind of little world in minature, a mixture of the different kinds of life below us: animal and vegetable. Now, as you'll appreciate, vegetables can't stroll about, enjoy things or suffer as animals can; nor can animals argue or discuss politics; they can't reason about things. But man can. Combining the vegetable life of growth and the animal life of feeling, we can also understand.

Even by only using our reason, we can understand something about God. We can know a certain amount about His nature, a certain amount about His perfections (and, indeed, because we are intelligent, our ultimate good lies in such understanding; we'll never be totally satisfied until we've understood the source and goal of all things, which is God.

This means that it's actually our duty, on behalf of the lower creatures, to use our reason to know God, to use our will to love and worship Him, and to serve Him by obeying our consciences.

However, if we only had the knowledge of God that we can obtain by using our minds, He would remain almost a stranger to us. We would certainly have no idea of what His real life consisted of, let alone have any share in that life. His life would remain absolutely unknowable to us - unless He decided to reveal it to us.

But, our of pure love, that's exactly is what He's done. What He revealed was that His life consists in being an infinitely simple unity, but at the same three in one - Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

No doubt, this formula is extremely obscure to us, impossible to fathom. But it's complete, it's infallible and when finally we see the reality it contains, we'll see that it meets every desire of our heart, filling us to the brim with happiness.

Next, besides telling us about His inner life, God decided to do something else. He decided to give Himself fully to us outside his Divine nature. And to do this He took on a human nature.

Let's go back again, for a moment, to our human nature. Our nature is the root of our intelligence, the root of our will, and the source of our other facilities. But to 'aim' all these facilities and actions towards God, is really quite beyond us. We need God to lift us up, beyond our natural capabilities, and that's just what He has done. He has, as it were, supercharged us, 'supernaturalised us' through the gift of sanctifying grace.

Super-naturalised, we can act supernaturally. Lifted up by grace, we can know through our intellect what is supernatural to us, through our will we can love what is supernatural to us, through our will we can love what is supernatural to us, by actual grace we can 'anoint' our smallest actions and make them supernatural. Think of this when God took on our Lady human nature, this tool had to be supernaturalised, just as ours.

This means God is in Christ in three different ways. He said there (just as He is in all of us), keeping in being what He's created; He is in Christ by 'super naturalising' His nature, and He is present through the 'hypostatic' union, which is of union of Christ's human nature to the person of God the Word.

This mystery is God's absolute masterpiece. Because Christ, the God-man, is the most excellent of all God's works, it's for Christ that everything has been made, and all possible honour is given to God through Him.

But God did not will to have one, single all-perfect adorer. He determined that His Son should be the head of a vast body that would share in His work. This amazing caused Saint Basil to exclaim, correctly: 'Man is a creature who has received the order to become a God'.

What God wants to see in us Christ, and Christ in us. We acieve this to the degree in which we are united to Christ. When the gates of the Garden of Paradise closed behind our first parents, they were left with only one of the two lives that God wanted them to possess - the lower life which would allow them (or us, their children) to attain our true destiny. Man was left alive in the temporal order, but dead in the eternal.

We were left mutilated and deformed. But there was a way by which we could be saved - and that was by union with Christ, as God-man, able to offer total satisfaction and so 'buy us back'.

It's always as 'buyer-back' as Redeemer, that Christ comes to his, fellow-creatures. Entering at baptism, He applies the fruits of His passion to our souls; bestowing sanctifying grace, he conveys to us

the power to love Divinely. And He enters our souls the very moment we begin to love Him.

Do you see what this means? Christ's entire life becomes ours: we share in His mysteries, in His virtues, His actions and in His merits. The soul, as Our Lord says, 'Abides in me and I in him'.

Since we know that Christ is quite inseparable from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, this means that all three Divine Persons really dwell in us - firmly intending to remain with us always.

'Our ultimate destiny', says St Thomas, 'is uncreated good, namely God, who can alone fill our will to the brim because of His infinite goodness'.

Once God made man for this destiny, he had a universal yearning for it. Today, people in huge numbers have rejected any notion of the supernatural - yet, although they probably live in company more than they've ever done before, there's never before been such widespread suffering from internal loneliness. Of such people, we can say with the poet Coventry Patmore: 'all the world is secretly maddened by the mystery of love, and seeks its answer everywhere but where it is to be found'. Within.

With the Blessed Trinity dwelling in his soul, the Christian actually becomes an extension of the human nature of the Word. We can say that we actually reproduce (on a much lower level, of course) the mystery of Christ.

To describe this wonderful way in which we are incorporated into Christ we are forced to use the most daring language. In his Divine Hymns of Love St Symeon the New Theologian explains how, in a sense, we truly become Christ's limbs or members, and Christ becomes our members. 'Unworthy though I be, my hand and my foot are Christ building a', he says. 'I move my hand, and my hand is wholly Christ, for God's Divinity is united inseparably to me. I move my foot, and lo! it glows like God Himself'.

When God comes to the soul he restores to it what has been lost by sin, but He doesn't put it back into the peaceful state that it enjoyed before Adam sinned. He doesn't even establish it in the perfect state that it is capable of achieving on earth. For His own surpassingly good reasons, He's left us with an outer layer of miseries. Puzzingly, God reigns from the Cross, and to achieve union with Him we must follow Him along the path to Calvary.

Even of Our Lord's human nature it is said: 'He advanced in wisdom and age and grace before God and men'. We also have to advance in wisdom and grace before God and man, and this will be a two-pronged affair. First, the advance of God from the depths of our soul to take a greater possession of our lives. Second, on our part, we must increasingly place all our actions and good works under the control of God. Divine charity must prompt all our work; you can hardly call something a 'supernatural activity' when it's something we do just because we want to.

In Our Lord' life on earth there were many actions of every kind - but grace was in them all, even in the smallest actions that makes up any human existence: standing, sitting down, opening doors, washing dishes, boiling eggs.

So it must be for us. There is absolutely no act, however ordinary or obscure, which will not have a dignity and a worth above anything else as long as we prayerfully place it into God's hands.

[CF News] 2197.28


























EWTN Live Radio click click here

EWTN Live Television click here

EWTN Bookmark with Doug Keck click here

EWTN Catholic Heritage with Tim Matthews & Joanna Bogle click here

EWTN Live with Fr Mitch Pacwa click here

EWTN Mother Angelica Live Classics click here

EWTN The Journey Home with Marcus Grodi click here










































By courtesy of LifeSiteNews



































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


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





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


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

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





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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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