HOME

 

CF NEWS

THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CATHOLIC FAMILIES

 

NEWS and CATHOLIC AFFAIRS

 

This edition of CF NEWS No.2258 posted at 5.33 pm on Thursday, November 22nd,,2018.
.

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

 

Please note : This edition of CF NEWS is being posted
early this week as I have to have a cataract operation
tomorrow morning and may be rather
out of action over the weekend . . .

Vatican watch

The 'Synodality' Scam    read more >>>
$25m. Papal Foundation grant to Vatican remains unaccounted for
   read more >>>
Dictator Pope author expelled from Order of Malta
   read more >>>
Pope Francis' most admired theologian does not believe in objective truth    read more >>
Cardinal Müller on abuse crisis and its link to homosexuality in priesthood read more >>>

Humanae Vitae

'The Challenge Goes Deep    VIDEO    read more >>>

China supplement

Church throwing Chinese Christians to the lions    read more >>>
P
olice kidnap bishop to undergo government indoctrination    read more >>>

News from around the world

CANADA Homosexualist activists coming after Christian churches nex    read more >>>
KENYA Marie Stopes ordered to 'immediately cease offering abortion services
   read more >>>
SPAIN 341 religious houses closed in within 18 months
   read more >>>
UK Bishops under fire for recognizing pro-transgender 'day of remembrance
   read more >>>'
USA Cardinals Cupich, Wuerl propose alternative sex-abuse response plan
   read more >>>
USA What fear smells like: Our US bishops, God’s frozen people
   read more >>>
USA Bishops Conference   VIDEO      read more >>>
USA Francis pleased Mexico is helping shuttle illegals into the USA
   read more >>>
USA The Catholic abuse crisis
   VIDEO    read more >>>
INTERNATIONAL Michael Voris
   VIDEO    read more >>>
INTERNATIONAL gloria.tv.news
   VIDEO    read more >>>
INTERNATIONAL Some jihad headlines of the week
   read more >>>

Newman

Newman's Grammar of Assent and classical Christian education   read more >>>

Media

NBC News attacks LifeSiteNews and others as 'alt-right'   read more >>>

Comment from the internet

How to win the culture war    VIDEO    read more >>>
The 'Vigano case' and the 'impasse of Pope Francis
  read more >>>
The Infallibility of the Ordinary and Extraordinary Magisterium
   read more >>>

Our Catholic Heritage

Site of the day : Cloyne VIDEO    read more >>>
Saint of the Day
   read more >>>
Gregorian Chants - Voices of Tranquility
   VIDEO    read more >>>

Quote

St Thomas Aquinas    read more >>>


   read more >>>

   VIDEO

 
By courtesy of LifeSiteNews

 

ADDITIONAL  FEATURES

Translation

To TRANSLATE this bulletin,Click here and then enter the URL
http://www.cfnews.org.uk/CF_News 2258.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

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

LINK TO VATICAN YOUTUBE SITE  HERE

 

Vatican watch

 

Vatican

 

The 'Synodality' Scam

CHRISTOPHER A.FERRARA writes for Fatima Perspectives : 'In the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council, Paul VI invented the novelty of the 'universal Synod,' not part of the Church's divine constitution but a merely human contrivance involving a select group of bishops meeting regularly in Rome to discuss and debate matters of doctrine and discipline - as if the Church were a kind of parliamentary democracy.

Even Pope Francis, in Episcopalis Communio (EC), adverts to Pope Paul's admission that his invention, 'like every human institution, could be further improved with the passage of time.' Yet, in his address on the 50th anniversary of Pope Paul's invention, Francis smuggles in the idea that 'Synodality, as a constitutive element of the Church, offers us the most appropriate interpretive framework for understanding the hierarchical ministry itself.'

By a mere verbal sleight of hand, Francis has turned a human invention into 'a constitutive element' of the Church, even though it did not exist for the first 1,965 years of the Church's history. Worse, in EC he announces his 'commitment to build a synodal Church' and declares: 'I am persuaded that in a synodal Church, greater light can be shed on the exercise of the Petrine primacy.'

Upon this synod Francis will build his church. Literally. That is, he actually believes he has the power to construct an entirely new model of the Church based on a human invention that did not even exist until 1965. To recall his astonishing 'dream' as enunciated in Evangelii Gaudium:

'I dream of a 'missionary option', that is, a missionary impulse capable of transforming everything, so that the Church's customs, ways of doing things, times and schedules, language and structures can be suitably channeled for the evangelization of today's world rather than for her self-preservation.'

But, of course, it is all a rhetorical ruse, another empty neologism to join all the others that have proliferated since the Council: e.g., 'collegiality, dialogue, interreligious dialogue, ecumenism,' the 'new evangelization,' and so on ad nauseam. And into these empty vessels is poured the exercise of raw power in service of the same revolution that has convulsed the Church for more than half a century, a revolution Dr. Douglas Farrow rightly describes as a 'conquest,' which '[i]f it is not stopped, the gates of Hades will prevail against the Church, which will die out everywhere just as it is dying out in the lands of the revolutionaries themselves.'

In this case, the empty vessel of 'synodality' is filled with the exercise of power by none other than Francis. For as anyone who is not willfully blind can see, the Roman synods he directs are mere stage shows in which the bishops assembled are extras in a play whose entire script has been written long before the curtain rises. Hence, in a recent interview with Edward Pentin, Bishop Anthony Fisher of Sydney revealed, in so many words, that the entire 'youth Synod' was a sham designed to ram through a Final Document most of the Synod Fathers could not even read because it was provided only in Italian and only at the Synod's conclusion: 'Yes, it [the Final Document] was read so fast the translators struggled to keep up, and the fathers could not take notes in their own language. So, we were not always sure what we were being asked to vote Yes or No to.'

The Final Document, written by Francis' handpicked draftsmen, is pervaded with the notion of 'synodality' even though, as Bishop Fisher notes, 'it wasn't in the working document, it wasn't in the general assembly discussions, it wasn't in the language-group discussions, it wasn't in the reports from the small groups - it just appeared, as if from nowhere, in the draft final document.' As Fisher rightly complained, the Synod Fathers were forced into 'voting on it in a matter of minutes, and under terrible pressure of time, with no opportunity for further amendments. To me, that's not the way to make doctrine.'

No, but it is the way for Francis to 'make doctrine' - or rather, to pretend to make doctrine. For as the First Vatican Council solemnly declared, the Pope has no such power:

'For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.'

In EC Francis has the audacity to declare that the documents he has force-fed the participants in his sham synods are 'the outcome of the working of the Spirit…' ( 5). But at this point in the post-conciliar debacle, the faithful know better. They know they are being defrauded yet again, and that they are living in the time of 'false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.' (Matt. 7:15)

Whoever thinks this assessment is beyond the pale need only look at the state of the Church today and ask himself honestly whether this is the work of good shepherds. The honest answer should be that given by Dr. Farrow: that what we are witnessing is an attempted 'conquest' of the Church which, were it successful, would mean that the Church 'will die out everywhere just as it is dying out in the lands of the revolutionaries themselves.'

The revolution will fail, and the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph. The only question is how long the Church will have to suffer the indignities heaped upon her by those who abuse the power with which God has entrusted them. Such is the mystery of iniquity prophesied in the Third Secret of Fatima.

[FP] 2258.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

$25,000,000 Papal Foundation grant to Vatican remains unaccounted for

CMTV reports -- After Cardinal Donald Wuerl spearheaded a $25 million grant to the Vatican earlier this year through the Papal Foundation, sources confirm the money remains unaccounted for, the Rome hospital designated as beneficiary apparently never having received the grant.

Sources also confirm Wuerl was behind the pope's cancellation of a meeting with foundation members in March, and continues to pull the strings behind the scenes.

Controversy engulfed the Papal Foundation, a charity partially founded by Abp. Theodore McCarrick in 1988 with assets worth $206 million, when three stewards resigned from the Audit Committee earlier this year after Wuerl pushed for the Vatican to receive $25 million - the largest single grant ever given by the foundation. The money was ostensibly to be used toward the Istituto Dermopatico Dell'Immacolata (IDI), a scandal-ridden hospital in Rome investigated by Italian authorities for embezzlement and tax fraud of nearly a billion euros.

Pope Francis had allegedly requested the $25 million in summer of 2017, and Wuerl, then-chairman of the foundation, lobbied members of the Board of Trustees to vote to approve the grant (originally a loan, but revised to an outright grant on Wuerl's insistence).

Board members consist of all nine U.S.-based cardinals, as well as various bishops and laymen, making up a total of 24 trustees.

Tim Longon, former chair of the Audit Committee, was first to voice criticism of the move. A leaked report obtained by LifeSiteNews summarized the problems with the grant.

The initial $8 million was sent without any supporting documentation for the loan. ... There was no Balance Sheet. There was no clear explanation as to how the $25 million would be used. ... The absence of a NEED for our cash; the insistence of a grant, when a loan had been requested; the missing interview of the resigned Executive Director all raise major concerns. Too many Red Flags. This is a badly run business venture, not a helping of our Church or a helping of the poor.

According to inside sources, Wuerl at the time considered Longon a lone maverick, confident the vote to send the $25 million would be approved almost unanimously. He was shocked to find that nine of the 24 board members rejected the proposal after a secret vote.

The Board met in December to discuss the IDI grant. The Papal Foundation had already given $8 million in July to the failing hospital and wanted to give another $17 million over three years. In a carefully choreographed process the 15 bishops outvoted the 9 Stewards with a vote of 15 YES, 8 NO, 1 ABSTENTION (two bishops did not participate). It was a clear out-muscling of the Stewards. Political favor replaced sound stewardship of our resources.

After the vote, and a subsequent board conference call where Wuerl again tried to silence Longon, he quit his position on the board in protest in a letter in January explaining to all the stewards his decision.

'As head of the Audit Committee and a Trustee of the Foundation, I found this grant to be negligent in character, flawed in its diligence, and contrary to the spirit of the Foundation,' he said in his resignation letter. 'Instead of helping the poor in a third-world country, the Board approved an unprecedented huge grant to a hospital that has a history of mismanagement, criminal indictments, and bankruptcy.'

Media reported in March that, after the internal uprising within the foundation, Pope Francis cancelled an annual meeting with the organization. Although the move was reported as originating with the pontiff, inside sources confirm with Church Militant that Wuerl was behind the cancellation. The cardinal had contacted the pontiff and suggested the move in order to send a clear message and muscle the trustees. His tactic worked, and the board agreed to give the pope the remaining $12 million. To date, however, the remaining amount is pending distribution.

Although the move was reported as originating with the pontiff, inside sources confirm with Church Militant that Wuerl was behind the cancellation.Tweet

Boston's Cardinal Sean O'Malley was recently announced to replace Wuerl as chairman, with Cardinal Daniel DiNardo as vice chairman. A member of the Ad Hoc Committee informed Church Militant they were Wuerl's hand-picked appointees, made after an initial plan to elect new leadership was scrapped by the cardinal. In other words, Wuerl continues to pull the strings.

The Pennsylvania attorney general's office is mulling the possibility of investigating the Papal Foundation, a 501(c)3 corporation registered in Pennsylvania and bound by state law, after it was revealed the vote to send $25 million to Rome could be voided for potential fraud; McCarrick, under investigation by the Vatican since May 2017 over a sex abuse allegation, voted to send the enormous sum of money to the very entity investigating him - a material conflict of interest that would amount to little more than a bribe.

'The Charitable Trusts and Organizations Section (CT&O) of the Office of Attorney General is in receipt of your email complaint regarding The Papal Foundation,' wrote Daniel Sanchez, financial investigator for the Pennsylvania attorney general's office, in a letter obtained by Church Militant. 'Please be advised, this matter is currently under review and the office will take any action deemed appropriate.'

The Papal Foundation has also been under increased scrutiny after a number of its leaders have been associated with sex abuse. McCarrick, a co-founder, was suspended from the College of Cardinals this summer and consigned to a life of prayer and penance over allegations of abuse of minors and seminarians. The announcement of his suspension launched the Church's 'Summer of Shame,' a crisis moment in the American Church that has left bishops scrambling to provide answers to angry laity who are withholding donations to the Church in protest of clerical malfeasance.

Bishop Michael Bransfield, former president of the board of trustees, resigned from the diocese of Wheeling-Charlston, West Virginia in September after credible allegations of sexual harassment of adult males.

Monsignor Thomas Benestad, who first chaired the foundation in 1988, was singled out by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro at a press conference in August, where he announced the publication of the grand jury report naming 301 accused predator priests. The report alleged that in the early 1980s, Benestad had forced a nine-year-old boy into oral sex, afterwards rinsing out his mouth with holy water to 'purify' him. This would have taken place only about five years before Benestad was named to lead the Foundation.

And Wuerl, the most recent chairman, resigned in disgrace last month after the Pennsylvania grand jury report showed he transferred and reassigned predator priests while bishop in Pittsburgh, even paying hush money to buy the silence of a priest involved in a sadomasochistic child porn ring. The priest, Fr. George Zirwas, whom Wuerl had reassigned to various parishes in spite of multiple allegations of abuse of minors, was murdered by a gay prostitute in Cuba in 2001.

In spite of recent scandals, insiders are hopeful the Papal Foundation, which has a record of three decades of charitable giving to worthy causes, will overcome its problems and continue to be a force for good.

'I have hopes that The Papal Foundation will take the steps to fix itself so that the Stewards' hard-earned and prayerfully given millions will help the Catholic needy wherever they are in the world,' Longon told Church Militant. 'There is a 30-year history of good works, and once we fix this flaw in the organization (greed in the hierarchy is not only a flaw, but a sin), people blessed with good fortune will eagerly join in the ministry of The Papal Foundation.'

[CMTV] 2258.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

Dictator Pope author expelled from Order of Malta

H SwireTHE CATHOLIC HERALD reports -- The historian Henry Sire has been expelled from the Order of Malta after writing a book which heavily criticised Pope Francis.

Sire was suspended in March, when the Order set up a disciplinary commission. His book, entitled The Dictator Pope, criticised Francis's interventions in religious orders, and said the Pope had introduced doctrinal ambiguity, following the programme of the 'St Gallen mafia' who brought about his election. Sire also claimed the Vatican was increasingly dominated by corrupt churchmen, while officials with integrity lived in fear of the sack.

The book divided opinion: some reviewers praised the book as an accurate portrayal, while others said it was inadequately sourced and guilty of irreverence towards the Pope.

Now, the Grand Master of the Order of Malta, Fra' Giacomo Dalla Torre, has decreed that Sire be expelled, as his book is 'gravely offensive and disrespectful to the person of the Holy Father' and his conduct 'gravely incompatible with his membership of the Order'.

Sire has defended the book as a necessary warning to the Church, saying that he hopes it will help the cardinals at the next conclave 'to avoid making the same mistake'. In a statement following his expulsion, Sire said that he wrote his book 'for the good of the Church, in defence of the Faith and in obedience to the duty of a Christian to witness to the truth'.

But the decree of expulsion says that, while canon law recognises a right to public commentary on the Church, it also says that such commentary must show 'reverence' to 'pastors', and be 'attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons'. The decree says Sire overstepped the mark.

The expulsion was immediately followed by disagreement about whether due process had been followed.

In a statement, Sire said the expulsion was 'illegal because it side-steps the procedures and principles laid down in the Order's own legal Code.' He claims that, while he exchanged letters with the commission, he was never summoned to a hearing, and no witnesses were named.

A spokesman for the Order told the Catholic Herald that 'The Disciplinary commission invited Henry Sire to come to Rome to defend himself, something he never did.'

Sire rejected this claim, saying that 'At no time was any mention made of a hearing before a tribunal of the Order at which I was expected to be present.

'My lawyer and I answered in full all the requests for a defence made by the disciplinary commission, and did so within the deadlines stipulated. It is a complete falsehood to imply that I have failed to satisfy my obligations in the procedure initiated against me.'

In a follow-up statement, the spokesman for the Order said that 'the President of the Disciplinary Commission offered Henry Sire the possibility to be audited before the Disciplinary Commission. It is a matter of fact that Henry Sire never used this possibility.'

Sire and his lawyers intend to appeal against the judgment, 'through the courts of the Order and if necessary to the Holy See,' according to a statement.

[[LSN] 2258.3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

Michael de Certeau, regarded by Pope Francis as the "greatest theologian for today", does not believe central truths of the Catholic Church or in objective truth

M erteauCCATHOLIC MONITOR blogs: The Catholic Thing wrote that "Francis made a startling claim" that appears to deny objective truth:

"We must be careful not to fall into the temptation of making idols of certain abstract truths." Pope Francis apparently got this terminology about "abstract truths" from a Jesuit theologian Michael de Certeau who wrote"In history everything begins with the gesture of setting aside, of putting together, of transforming certain classified objects... It exiles them from practice [praxis] in order to confer upon them the status of "abstract" objects of knowledge..."

"... [T]he historical discipline... designate[s] the "that" as a "fact" is only a way of naming what cannot be understood."
( Michael de Certeau's book: The Writing of History, pages 72-73 and 84)

De Certeau is a nihilist who Francis considers to "be the greatest theologian for today." This theologian believes that there is no "possibility of an objective basis for truth" and that there is no objective meaning or reality. (Dictionary.com definitions of nihilism)

In simple words, de Certeau's theology denies objective truth and objective Catholic truth.

The present Pope considers him the most eminent modern theologian. Francis said:

"For me, de Certeau is still the greatest theologian for today." (onepeterfive.com, March 8, 2016, "Pope Francis Reveals His Mind to Private Audience")

Rev. Dr. Federico Colautti, ITI, in a talk titled "Pope Francis: Understanding His Language and Mission (1-10-2015)," shows that de Certeau had "a great influence in the Pope's way of being open... [n]ot making faith of a museum":

In the "discourse, a video message that the Pope send the Catholic University of Buenos Aires... I discovered that one of the few quotes he makes is from a theologian... a certain Michael de Certeau... I can imagine that this author had a great influence in the Pope's way of being open... Not making faith of a museum... This preference for the periphery could have a relationship with this theologian Michael de Certeau."

De Certeau in his greatest book "Heterologies" said:

"It is not Mr. Foucault who is making fun of domains of knowledge... It is history that is laughing at them. It plays tricks on the teleologists who take themselves to be the lieutenants of meaning. A meaninglessness of history." ("Heterologogies," Pages 195-196)

Historian Keith Windschuttle shows that the Pope's favorite modern theologian is a radical who thinks that there is no "access" to outside reality. Windschuttle wrote:

"Of all the French theorists... de Certeau is the most radical. He is critical of the poststructuralist Foucault for his use of documentary evidence and of Derrida for the way he privileges the practice of writing. For de Certeau, writing is a form of oppression... he argues... writing itself constitutes the act of colonisation..."

"Like both structuralist and poststructuralist theorists, de Certeau subscribes to the thesis that we have access only to our language and not to any real, outside world..."

"De Certeau claims that writing can never be objective. Its status is no different from that of fiction. So, because history is a form of writing, all history is also fiction." ("The Killing of History," Pages 31-34)

By Francis's greatest modern theologian's logic then Jesus Christ, true God and true man, who walked the earth during the reign of Pontius Pilate is fiction.

The central doctrine of Catholism, the Incarnation, is fiction.

Post Structuralists like de Certeau, more widely known as Postmodernists, believe all reality is fiction or "narrative."

They change the "narrative" or story usually to compile with their leftist or liberal views on politics, sexual morality or whatever their pet project happens to be.

They rarely use scholarship to backup their "narrative" point of view, only mind numbing long confusing writing that obscures instead of clarifying.

The Postmodernists in the media are one exception to the obscurantism of non-clarity.

Their "narratives" are clear and well written, but again rarely is there scholarship or strong evidence to backup their stories. They use spin to obscure.

Media spin "narrative" is "news and information that is manipulated or slanted to affect its interpretation and influence public opinion." (Dictionary.com)

They usually use their "narratives" in history, news, the Bible and any writing as a vehicle to promote their ideological ideas.

With that background, here is the Pope's favorite theologian's central religious ideas. The de Certeau Scholar Johannes Hoff wrote:

"According to this new approach to the Biblical narrative, the focal event of Christianity is not the incarnation, the crucifixion, or the resurrection of Christ, but the empty tomb. The Christian form of life is no longer associated with a place, a body, or an institution, but with a quest for a missing body: the missing body of the people of Israel, and mutatis mutandis the missing body of Jesus."

(Article by Johannes Hoff, "Mysticism, Ecclesiology And The Body Christ: Certeau's (Mis-) Reading of Corpus Mystium and the Legacy of Henri de Lubac" Page 87, Titus Brandsma Institute Studies In Spirituality, Supplement 24, "Spiritual Spaces: History and Mysticism in Michel De Certeau")

The nihilist theologian believes that the central truths of Christianity are about "absence" or nonexistence. De Certeau scholar Graham Ward wrote:

"For de Lubac the... Eucharist is not a sign of the presence of Christ's body, it is Christ's body... And yet Certeau... makes the Eucharist (as later the church and body of mystical text he treats) into substitutes, acts of bereavement, signs of absence." ("Michel de Certeau - in the Plural, " Page 511)

In other words, Francis's greatest modern theologian believes that the Eucharist is not the body of Christ present, he doesn't even believe it is a sign of the presence of Christ's body like some Protestants, but a sign of "absence."

Might de Certeau's influence on Francis be the reason he never kneels before the Eucharist, but kneels to wash the feet of those he like Certeau might consider oppressed?

De Certeau's influence on Francis may be the reason he reportedly said:

"It is not excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church." (Der Spiegel magazine, December, 23, 2016)

De Certeau scholar Frederick Christian Bauerschmidt wrote:

"Certeau... came increasingly to stress the clash of interpretation, the "law of conflict," that applies even to the church. Under the pressure of this clash, the ecclesial/eucharistic body is "shattered." ("Michael de Certeau - in the Plural", Page 359)

Francis's greatest modern theologian doesn't believe in the central truths of the Catholic Church.

The Pope's most eminent modern theologian doesn't even believe in objective truth.

Does Francis believe in the central doctrines of the Catholic Church or in objective truth?

The question needs to be asked:

If the Pope is a disciple of de Certeau and Postmodernism, then what ultimately do he and these thinkers believe in?

Philosopher Stephen Hicks said:

The "Left thinkers of the 1950s and 1960s... Confronted by the continued poverty and brutality of socialism, they could either go with the evidence and reject their most cherish ideals - or stick by their ideals and attack the whole idea that evidence and logic matter..."

"Postmodernism is born of the marriage of Left politics and skeptical epistemology..."

"Then, strikingly, postmodernism turns out not to be relativistic at all. Relativism becomes part of a rhetorical political strategy, some Machiavellian realpolitik employed to throw the opposition off track..."

"Here it is useful to recall Derrida: 'deconstruction never had any meaning... than as a radicalization... within the tradition of a certain Marxism, in a certain spirit of Marxism.'" ("Explaining Postmodernism," Page 90, 186)

For Postmodernists like de Certeau, Derrida, Foucault and it appears Francis, if he is their disciple, falsehood or truth doesn't matter.

The only thing that matters is achieving power for their liberal ideology or group.

Instead of economic Marxism, the post-modernist in the 1970's focused on what de Certeau and other post-modernists termed "oppression" of groups.

Power not truth for groups such as women, gays, transexauls, workers and any sub-category of minorities was the new goal to achieving control.

An example is abortion: women had to have power over their bodies so the truth that the unborn baby is human must be denied and politically incorrect.

Another example is homosexual acts: gays had to have power over their bodies so the truth that is was a sin and lead to disease and a early death had to be denied and politically incorrect.

Remember that liberals, who never use Marxist words, are nothing but post-modernist who use words like equality and compassion as masks for raw power.

Venezuela is another example.

The liberals from Fr. James Martin to Pope Francis will not lift a finger or say a word to stop the Venezuelan people from being starved and brutalized because the country's dictator is part of their liberal group.

The liberals means to achieve power in the Church is praxis theology.

Internationally renowned theologian Dr. Tracey Rowland said Francis's "decision - making process" outlined in Evangelii Gaudium is "the tendency to give priority to praxis over theory."

She states that chapter eight of Amoris Laetitia "might be described as the praxis chapter rather than a theory chapter." Theory meaning Catholic doctrine.

The renowned theologian asks:

How can footnote 351 of Amoris Laetitia "be consistent with paragraph eighty-four of John Paul II's Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio and paragraph twenty-nine of Benedict XVI's Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis? A pastoral crisis may arise if the lay faithful and their priests have to choose between... two Popes (John Paul II and Benedict XVI) on one side, and a third Pope (Pope Francis) on the other." ("Catholic Theology," Page 192, 198, 199)

The choice appears to be between the infallible doctrines of the Catholic Church or praxis theology.

Rowland says "praxis types agree in rejecting classical metaphysics." She then explains praxis ideology or "theology":

"Doctrinal theory is at best extrinsic and secondary. The reflex character of theory-praxis tends toward a reduction of theory to reflection on praxis as variously understood. The normativity tends toward an identification of Christianity with modern, secular (liberal or Marxist) process." ("Catholic Theology," Page174)

If what the internationally renowned theologian is saying is true of Pope Francis and praxis "theology," then the Church is in the greatest crisis in history.

The Church has a Pope who has betrayed Jesus Christ and His Gospel for the world.

It appears that Francis has exchanged the Gospel of Jesus Christ for "secular (liberal or Marxist)" ideology which denies objective truth.

Francis in Amoris Laetitia and back on Holy Thursday appeared to be denying objective truth. Canon lawyer Fr. Gerald E. Murray, in The Catholic Thing, wrote at the Chrism Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica on Holy Thursday morning "Francis made a startling claim" when he called truth an idol:

"We must be careful not to fall into the temptation of making idols of certain abstract truths. They can be comfortable idols, always within easy reach; they offer a certain prestige and power and are difficult to discern. Because the “truth-idol” imitates, it dresses itself up in the words of the Gospel, but does not let those words touch the heart. Much worse, it distances ordinary people from the healing closeness of the word and of the sacraments of Jesus."

Fr. Murray then defines truth as the Catholic Church and St. Thomas Aquinas teaches and shows that apparently Francis denies truth and makes "erroneous opinion into an idol":

"Truth is the conformity of mind and reality. The truth about God is understood when we accurately grasp the nature and purpose of His creation (natural theology), and when we believe in any supernatural revelation He may make. Jesus told us that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. All truths have their origin in the Truth who is God made man. The Christian understands that the truth is a Person."

"... Pope Francis states that “the ‘truth-idol’ imitates, it dresses itself up in the words of the Gospel, but does not let those words touch the heart.” Is the Gospel obscured or falsified by truths taught by the Magisterium of the Church – which are drawn from that Gospel?

"If the truth could be an idol, then naturally any use of the Scriptures to illustrate that particular truth would be a charade. But the truth of God cannot be an idol because what God has made known to us is our means of entering into His reality – the goal of our existence."

"Francis states that this 'truth-idolatry' in fact 'distances ordinary people from the healing closeness of the word and of the sacraments of Jesus.'”

"Here we have the interpretative key to what I think he is getting at. He is defending his decision in Amoris Laetitia to allow some people who are living in adulterous unions to receive the sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharistic while intending to continue to engage in adulterous relations."

"... The truth will set you free, it will not enslave you in error and darkness. Those who seek to be healed by coming close to Christ in his sacraments will only realize that goal by knowing and doing what Jesus asks of them. To reject in practice his words about the permanence of marriage and the obligation to avoid adultery, and then assert a right to receive the sacraments risks making an erroneous opinion into an idol." [https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/04/21/of-truth-and-idols/]

Francis because of his apparent denial of truth appears to be denying objective morality and intrinsically evil acts. Professor Claudio Pierantoni, a Patristic Scholar of Medieval Philosophy at the University of Chile and Member of JAHLF (John Paul II Academy for Human Life and Family), said that Francis's Gaudete et Exsultate appears to deny "the existence of intrinsically evil acts" and is promoting "situation ethics":

"[T]he document is read within the context of the present controversies in the Church, especially that about Amoris Laetitia and situation ethics, one gets the strong impression that many passages are directly aimed at harshly rebuking all those people (cardinals, scholars, journalists and simple laypeople writing on blogs) that have opposed the papal agenda about giving Communion to the divorced and remarried, Communion to Protestants, permitting contraception in certain cases, too mild opposition or silence in the face of anti-family and anti-life legislation (pro-abortion, pro-birth control pro-euthanasia and pro same-sex marriage). In this sense, the document brings no progress or clarity in any of the most controversial and anti-doctrinal stances of Pope Francis. Quite to the contrary, it seems to represent one more step towards giving a kind of official approval to situation ethics."

"So, the reading of this document should once more to urge us to plead before the Pope for an answer to the dubia, and in particular to dubium no. 2 about the existence of intrinsically evil acts, which are not justifiable in any situation. We should not forget that to deny this doctrine, or sow doubts about it, in any field of ethics, is the principal heresy of our times and the most dangerous enemy of sanctity." [http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/professor-pierantoni-gaudete-et-exsultate-supports-error-of-situational-eth#.WuLDtN9lDqC]

Why does Francis deny truth which has led to his promoting situation ethics?

Pope Francis expert Austen Ivereigh points to how this happened:

"Bergoglio’s fascination with polarities began in the 1960s, when he first began exploring as a Jesuit via Gaston Fessard’s 1956 monumental anti-Hegelian work on the dialectics of grace and freedom in St. Ignatius of Loyola’s Spiritual Exercises. Fessard, Francis tells Borghesi, 'gave me so many of the elements that later got mixed in.'”

"Fessard was one of a 1950s group of Lyons-based jésuites blondéliens - that is, Jesuits inspired by Maurice Blondel - that included Henri de Lubac, Gaston Fessard and Michel de Certeau." [https://cruxnow.com/book-review/2017/11/18/new-book-looks-intellectual-history-francis-pope-polarity/]

Ivereigh's claim that Fessard is "anti-Hegelian" is wrong.

Back in 1950, scholar Jules "Isaac [O.P.] was accusing Fessard of identifying this quasi-science of thought with the science of the real order, or metaphysics. That is what Hegel does."

"The executive function of the dialectic, as Isaac interpreted Aquinas, uses the law of thought in a concrete instance of thinking or arguing. Because Fessard used these laws not as laws of arguing, but as laws of the development of historical events, he is again accused of Hegelianism." ("Gaston Fessard S.J., His Work Toward A Theology of History," by Mary Alice Muir, 1970, page 25-26)

Francis theological advisor Fr. Juan Carlos Scannone connects the final dots of the close connection of Francis's thinking with Fessard and Blondel's Hegelian teachings which explains why the Pope does not apparently believe in truth and promotes situation ethics:

"Between Blondel’s philosophy of action and Pope Francis’ pastoral action, there are significant coincidences, probably because they both draw from the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola. However, indirect links between the two should not be excluded, for example, through the relationship between Gaston Fessard (strongly influenced by Blondel) and Miguel Ángel Fiorito, much appreciated by Bergoglio. This article focuses first on the convergences regarding action; then it compares the coincidences between the two authors regarding the overcoming of social and existential conflicts. Finally, it studies the parallelism between the «logic of love», nominated and applied by the Pope, and the «logic of a moral life» by Blondel, focused on charity. ( La Civiltà Cattolica 2015 III / www.laciviltacattolica.it )" [https://m.facebook.com/civiltacattolica/photos/a.10150836993325245.745627.379688310244/10242607255245/?type=3]

Scannone connecting the Pope's thinking to Blondel is very important because he is one of "Francis’ closest theological advisors" according to an expert on Latin America and Francis's theology, Claudio Remeseira:

"In the almost fifty years since its appearance, the Theology of the People has become the Argentine theological school by default. The generation of its founders was followed by a second generation of disseminators, the most prolific of whom is father Scannone... Scannone, Galli, and Fernández are among Francis’ closest theological advisors. ["https://medium.com/@hispanicnewyork/pope-francis-per%C3%B3n-and-god-s-people-the-political-religion-of-jorge-mario-bergoglio-2a85787e7abe ]

Theologian John Lamont explains what Blondel taught:

"The neomodernists, due to their historical perspectivism, did not think that the theology and dogma of previous epochs could satisfy this understanding, but they did not want to dismiss them as false. They accordingly held that dogma was true, but that its truth could not be understood in Aristotle's sense. Garrigou-Lagrange saw them as reviving the philosopher Maurice Blondel's rejection of the traditional definition of truth as bringing the mind into conformity with reality ('adaequatio rei et intellectus') in favour of an account of truth as bringing thought into line with life ('adaequatio realis mentis et vitae'). While this definition of truth was not explicitly stated by the neomodernists, the importance of Blondel for their thought makes this interpretation a plausible one; Bouillard, for example, wrote extensively and approvingly on Blondel.12 What they did explicitly assert was that the truth of past dogmatic pronouncements does not consist in their being an accurate description of reality, and that a theology that was not relevant to the present day ('actuel') was untrue." [https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/01/a-christmastide-gift-for-our-readers.html?m=1]

Even liberal neo-modernist philosophy writer Anthony Carroll wrote:

"Conscious of the challenge to the traditional Thomist theory of knowledge that had been ushered in by modern philosophy, Blondel, for example, sought to identify the practical level of human action as the place where one might find a new apologetic for the Christian faith. In his L’Action (1893), he analyses the dynamics of human action and argues that the distance between what we desire and what we actually realise in our actions indicates that what we truly desire lies always beyond the particular object that we are momentarily fixed upon. This transcendental horizon of desire draws the mind and heart towards God as the only One who can satisfy truly our infinite longings. For Blondel, it is this Augustinian unrest that leaves a trace of the divine in our human experience. Such a turn to the interiority of human experience as grounds for the proof of God’s existence is what is meant by immanentism in Pascendi."

"Rather than pointing towards the historical existence of Jesus, the factual occurrence of miracles and the fulfilment of earlier prophecies for proof of God’s existence, the Blondelian schema holds that justification for the faith is to be found by turning inwards to the personal experience of the human subject. This turn to the subject is characteristic of modern philosophy, from Descartes right up to the Idealism of Kant and Hegel and beyond, and presented a major challenge to the traditional Catholic apologetics of the time, which had been constructed on the basis that external revelation could be taken for granted. With this turn to the interior experience of the human subject, more than simply philosophical questions were raised. If it were the case that inner experience justified the faith, if each person was to find the proof of God’s existence within their own life, then what would be the basis for the teaching authority of the Church?" [https://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/20090724_1.htm]

Finally, the great theologian and teacher of Pope John Paul II, Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., wrote about Blondel and why anyone who was influenced by his teachings, directly or indirectly, would deny truth, as apparently Francis is influenced according one of his closest advisor's Scannone:

"One sees the danger of the new definition of truth, no longer the adequation of intellect and reality but the conformity of mind and life.™ When Maurice Blondel in 1906 proposed this substitution, he did not foresee all of the consequences for thefaith. Would he himself not be terrified, or at least very troubled? What life" is meant in this definition of: "conformity of mind and life"? It means human life. And so then, how can one avoid the modernist definition: "Truth is no more immutable than man himself inasmuch as it is evolved with him, in him and through him. (Denz. 2058) One understands why Pius X said of the modernists: "they pervert the eternal concept of truth. 11 (Denz. 2080 https://archive.org/stream/GarrigouLagrangeEnglish/_Where%20is%20the%20New%20Theology%20Leading%20Us__%20-%20Garrigou-Lagrange%2C%20Reginald%2C%20O.P__djvu.txt]

Blondel's modernist theology came from "the Idealism of Kant and Hegel." Hegel leads to the "Prophets of Extremity: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida" where de Certeau got most of his philosophy.

Remember what Francis expert Rev. Dr. Colautti said:

In the "discourse, a video message that the Pope send the Catholic University of Buenos Aires... I discovered that one of the few quotes he makes is from a theologian... a certain Michael de Certeau... I can imagine that this author had a great influence in the Pope's way of being open... Not making faith of a museum... This preference for the periphery could have a relationship with this theologian Michael de Certeau."

Francis's favorite theologian de Certeau's key ideas are oppression of groups and the deconstruction of meaning for the most part. De Certeau got these ideas from Derrida who, like Fessard, had as his starting point Hegel. Remember that much of Francis's thinking comes not only from de Certeau, but from Fessard who was a Hegelian.

Derrida scholar Allan Megill on the Hegelian influence wrote:

He "sees no possibility of ever "escaping" Hegel... every attempt to state a truth is already a reintegration into the dialectic... A key term for Derrida is "dissemination"... a kind of anti-dialectic, going against the dialectical rule of three... The fourth moment of the dialectic is the deconstruction moment: position, negation, negation of the negation, deconstruction (or Nietzsche... Derrida)."
("Prophets of Extremity: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida," Pages 271, 273-274)

The fourth moment or the deconstruction of meaning for Derrida and de Certeau is the Nietzschean relativism moment.

Francis's favorite theologian de Certeau ultimately leads him to Friedrick Nietzsche and the Nietzschean relativism moment.

De Certeau apparently made Francis a Nietzschean.

Nietzsche scholar Hans-Georg Gadamer wrote:

Nietzsche said the "'dialectical principles with which Hegel assisted the German spirit to gain its victory over Europe- 'contradiction moves the world, all things are contradictory to themselves.'"
("From Hegel to Nietzsche," Page 180)

Professor Allan Bloom, author of "The Closing of the American Mind thought that the only virtue 50 years of Nietzsche's influence on public education – and he could have said 50 years of Catholic education – has achieved is relativity of truth.

Bloom said relativism "is the modern replacement for the inalienable natural rights that used to be the traditional ground for a free society."

The move away from objective truth leads to universal rights being replaced by Nietzsche's will to power. Bloom, for example, showed how the old civil rights movement "relied on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution." But the new Black Power movement considered the Constitution "corrupt" and demanded a "black identity, not universal rights. Not rights but power counted."

The liberal "Catholics" speak the jargon of the Catholic while following Nietzsche's will to power. They understand power and hold most of the power positions in the infrastructure of the American Church.

According to Catholic scholar James Hitchcock, the leftist "clerical homosexual network" extends to "bishops, seminary rectors, chancery officials, [and] superiors of religious orders."

The faithful Catholics, the ones not infected with relativism and will to power, not realizing that their opponents use words as ploys to attain power, still use logic in an attempt to reason them back into objective truth. So they control many traditional and conservative publications, as well as the EWTN Cable Network, but they have power over only a few dioceses, colleges and high schools, where the real power is.

Meanwhile, the Nietzschean "Catholics" are going for the throat by going after the young. They control the American Catholic high school system, which is pro-homosexual, and filter out Roman Church documents such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Catechism states that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered ... [and] under no circumstances can they be approved."

That the Catholic schools are not teaching the Catechism of the Catholic Church is shown by recent polls which found that the vast majority of Catholic high school students are pro-gay. That is, they buy the whole gay agenda and even have gay clubs at their Catholic schools.

Norman Mailer, in his book "Prisoner of Sex," shows why this relativism and moving away from natural objective truths such as heterosexual sex can lead to will to power:

"So, yes, [homosexuals] in prison strive to become part of the male population, and indeed – it is the irony of homosexuality – try to take on the masculine powers of the man who enters them, even as the studs, if Genet is our accurate guide, become effeminate over the years. ... Homosexuality is not heterosexuality. There is no conception possible, no, no inner space, no damnable spongy pool of a womb ... no hint remains of the awe that a life in these circumstances can be conceived. Heterosexual sex with contraception is become by this logic a form of sexual currency closer to the homosexual than the heterosexual, a clearinghouse for power, a market for psychic power in which the stronger will use the weaker, and the female in the act, whether possessed of a vagina or phallus, will look to ingest or steal the masculine qualities of the dominator."

This is the end result when universal truths and responsibility toward those truths are denied. The only "currency" left to the left is stealing of power, because they are insecure in any truth including their own objective masculinity.

Unsure of their own objective masculinity – or any objective truth, for that matter – they will not tolerate truth, calling it intolerance. They will not tolerate the truth of the purpose of sex, which is married love, with the creation of a secure family for the children of that love.

Leftists replace the traditional family with sexual power struggles that lead to the death mills of the abortion industry and the graveyards of AIDS and the abandonment of children and women at the altar of free sex.

Sex is not free. It was once a responsibility that a mature man entered into for life, for the security of his beloved children and wife.

Likewise, liberals replace the Constitution with gay, gender, group and ethnic power struggles that lead to the breaking of the rule of law.

If a president can sexually abuse women and possibly even rape them, then obstruct justice and lie under oath, are we under the rule of law?

If our society will not tolerate truth, then men and women are not secure in their "inalienable natural rights that used to be the traditional ground for a free society," as Bloom said.

If we reject the rule of law and natural rights, our society will progress toward the Clintonian and homosexual power tactics of prison inmates.

The leftists in the Church and the media rejecting objective truth no longer want to be identified as men of objective faith and reason, but rather as Nietzschean post-modernists to be identified with the "culture" of the gay and Clintonian playboy slogans of the media elite.

The media elite uses management tactics on anyone who wants to be identified as a man of objective morals, faith and reason. They redefine the meaning of words like morals, faith and reason through association and repetition, then isolate those who don't accept the new definitions, after which they ostracize the good name of any person or group that doesn't accept the new "culture" and isn't a "team player."

The very respected scholar Edgar H. Schein of MIT Sloan School of Management explains the process in "Organizational Learning as Cognitive Re-definition: Coercive Persuasion Revisited":

"It may seem absurd to the reader to draw an analogy between the coercive persuasion in political prisons and a new leader announcing that he or she is going 'to change the culture.'

"However, if the leader really means it, if the change will really affect fundamental assumptions and values, one can anticipate levels of anxiety and resistance quite comparable to those one would see in prisons. The coercive element is not as strong. More people will simply leave before they change their cognitive structures, but if they have a financial stake or a career investment in the organization, they face the same pressure to 'convert' that the prisoner did. ... Consider, for example, what it means to impose a 'culture of teamwork' based on 'openness and mutual trust' in an individualistic society."

By using this process, the leftists with the media's marketing ability learned they could create massive peer pressure – some would call it a "mob mentality," which changes the worldview of people with weak morals, weak faith or the Judas mentality. These types of people see themselves as the "elite" because they accept the "culture of teamwork" and have "openness" to the new definitions.

These persons wishing to be part of the "culture" or "team" are open to cognitive re-definition. Schein explains how the process works:

"'Cognitive redefinition' involved two different processes. First, concepts like crime and espionage had to be semantically redefined. Crime is an abstraction that can mean different things in different conceptual systems when one makes it concrete. Second, standards of judgment had to be altered. Even within the western concept of crime, what was previously regarded as trivial was now seen to be serious. The anchors by which judgments are made are shifted and the point of neutrality is moved. Behavior that was previously judged to be neutral or of no consequence became criminal, once the anchor of what was a minimum crime was shifted. These two processes, semantic re-definition and changing one's anchors for what is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, are the essence of cognitive re-definition."

Professor Bloom thought that Nietzsche was the father of the modern American culture with it's "semantic re-definition and changing one's anchors for what is good or bad." He said, "Words such as 'charisma,' 'lifestyle,' 'commitment,' 'identity,' and many others, all of which can easily be traced to Nietzsche ... are now practically American slang."

But the most important Nietzschean slang word is "values."

"Values" are the death of Christian morality because values simply mean opinions. If opinion is how things are decided, then might makes right.

One must remember that whenever someone talks about values in modern America – family values or religious values or place-the-blank-in-front-of values – they are saying there is no real or objective right or wrong – only opinions of the self and its will to power.

Nietzsche's philosophy is summed up by Bloom as:

"Commitment values the values and makes them valuable. Not love of truth but intellectual honesty characterizes the proper state of mind. Since there is no truth in the values, and what truth there is about life is not lovable, the hallmark of the authentic will is consulting one's oracle while facing up to what one is and what one experiences. Decisions, not, deliberations, are the movers of deeds. One cannot know or plan the future. One must will it."

As a philologist, Nietzsche believed there was no original text and transferred this belief to reality, which he thought was only pure chaos. He proposed will to power in which one imposes or "posits" one's values on a meaningless world.

Previous to Freud's psychoanalysis, Nietzsche's writings spoke of the unconscious and destructive side of the self. In fact, Freud wrote that Nietzsche "had a more penetrating knowledge of himself than any other man who ever lived or was likely to live."

Max Weber and Sigmund Freud are the two writers most responsible for Nietzschean language in America. Few know that Freud was " profoundly influenced by Nietzsche," according to Bloom. Freud, much more than Weber, profoundly changed America from a Christian culture to a therapeutic or self-centered culture.

The therapeutic approaches, which started with Freud, have a basic assumption that is not Christian. The starting point is not the Christian worldview, which is summed up in the parable of the prodigal son: a fallen and sinful world with persons needing God the Father to forgive them so they can return to be His sons and daughters.

Unlike the Christian worldview, the therapeutic starting point is that the individual must overcome personal unconscious forces, in Freud, and in Carl Jung the person must unite to the collective unconscious, which is shared by all humans.

In both cases, the therapist assists his client to change himself to 'become his real self.' Forgiveness and returning to God are not needed. What is needed are not God and His Forgiveness, but a therapist assisting a self to reach the fullness of its self.

Freud, under the influence of Nietzsche, moved psychiatry away from the mechanistic and biological to the previously "unscientific" model of the "symbolic language of the unconscious."

Freud's pupil Carl Jung took the symbolic language of the unconscious a step further. Unlike his mentor, Jung's unconscious theory is not just about making conscious sexually repressed or forgotten memories. His symbolic therapy used what he called the "active imagination" to incorporate split-off parts of the unconscious (complexes) into the conscious mind.

He believed with Freud that dreams and symbols are means to the unconscious, but for Jung the dream and symbol are not repressed lusts from stages of development. They are a way to unite with the collective unconsciousness.

Many Christians thought this "language of the soul" was a step forward from what they considered the cramped scientific reality of modernity. What they didn't understand was that Jung's theory was part of a movement that led to the rejection of objective morality and truth.

Jungian (and Freudian) psychoanalysis reduces Christian concepts such as God, free will and intelligence to blind reactions, unconscious urges and uncontrollable acts. Even more disastrous, Jung inverted Christian worship.

Leanne Payne, a Christian therapist, considers Jung "not a scientist, but a post-modernist subjectivist. Jung's active imagination therapy is hostile not only to the Judeo-Christian worldview, but to all systems containing objective moral and spiritual value. Within this world the unconscious urge becomes god. What the unconscious urge wants is what is finally right or moral. These psychic personae [complexes] are literally called 'gods' (archetypes),' and so an overt idolatry of self follows quickly."

It seems to me that within the modern French Nietzschean schools of thought of Foucault, Derrida and Francis's favorite theologian de Certeau a type of Jungian unconscious urge is replacing the old existential conscious self who chooses. The post-modernist and all Nietzschean secularists are moving from the idolatry of self to the idolatry of autonomous inner "beings" that, according to Payne, are similar to pagan "gods."

Sadly, these pagan "gods" appear to be the "spirits" that guides those who are disciples of de Certeau and the French Postmodernists who can be called Marxist "Materialist Magicians."

As C.S. Lewis predicted in "The Screwtape Letters," we are moving to a "scientific" paganism. C.S. Lewis' name for the "scientific" pagan was the Materialist Magician and the name of the autonomous inner "beings" was the "Forces."

In "The Screwtape Letters," his character who is a senior evil spirit said:

I have high hopes that we shall learn in due time how to emotionalise and mythologise their science to such an extent that what is, in effect, belief in us (though not under that name) will creep in while the human mind remains closed to the Enemy [God]. The "Life Force," the worship of sex, and some aspects of Psychoanalysis may here prove useful. If once we can produce our prefect work – the Materialist Magician, the man, not using, but veritably worshipping, what he vaguely calls "Forces" while denying the existence of "spirits" – then the end of the war will be in sight.

Some of the largest audiences for this "scientific" paganism with its inversion of worship and the Judeo-Christian worldview are followers of Christ. By using Christian symbols and terminology, Jungian spirituality has infiltrated to a large extent Christian publishers, seminaries, even convents and monasteries.

Many Christians are using Jung's active imagination as a method of prayer. Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., thinks this is dangerous "because this fantasy life has no moral underpinnings, because it helps to reinforce an experience of autonomous inner 'beings' accessible via the imagination, and because it is a defense against redemptive suffering, it easily allies with and quickly becomes a Gnostic form of spiritually with powerfully occult overtones."

If one is under the influence of the autonomous inner "beings," uncontrollable urges can overpower the self. One can go temporarily or permanently insane. And in the Christian worldview, the autonomous inner "being" is not always just an imaginary being, but can be a personal being, which then makes possession a rare, but not impossible, occurrence.

In fact, according to one Jungian therapist, Nietzsche himself went insane permanently when an autonomous inner "being" (archetype) overpowered him. So, unfortunately with the widespread acceptance of Jungian spirituality, mainstream Christianity seems to be moving to post-modern Nietzschean insanity and possibly, in some cases, possession.

Jung's autobiography is full of insane or occult experiences. He was continually hearing 'voices.' In his autobiography he said his home was "... crammed full of spirits ... they were packed deep right up to the front door and the air was so thick it was scarcely possible to breathe."

During the Hitler regime, which itself was obsessed with the occult, Jung edited a Nazi psychotherapeutic journal where he said, "The 'Aryan' unconscious has a higher potential than the Jewish." Keep that word "potential" in your mind. It will be used by American psychology.

Once opinion is master, then might makes right. In "Beyond Good and Evil," Nietzsche proclaimed a new morality, "Master morality," which was different from Christian morality – or "slave morality," as he called it. He thought the weak have the morality of obedience and conformity to the master. Masters have a right to do whatever they want; since there is no God, everything is permissible.

In what Nietzsche considered his masterpiece, "Zarathustra," he said the new masters would replace the dead God. The masters were to be called Supermen, or the superior men.

After Freud and Jung came Alfred Adler, also a follower of Nietzsche, with "Individual psychology," which maintains that the individual strives for what he called "superiority" but now is called "self-realization" or "self-actualization," and which came from Nietzsche's ideas of striving and self-creation.

The "human potential movement" and humanistic psychology of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers are imbedded with these types of ideas. The psychologists of "potential" teach the superior man.

Edvard Munch said:

"Alfred Adler translated Nietzsche's philosophical idea of 'will to power' into the psychological concept of self-actualization."

"Thus, Nietzschean thought forms the foundation for and permeates Alfred Adler's Individual Psychology, Abraham Maslow's Humanistic Biology, Carl Rogers's Person-Centered Psychology, and has influenced many other psychological ideas and systems. ... Alfred Adler was the first psychologist to borrow directly from Nietzsche, making numerous references to the philosopher throughout his works. Adler took Nietzsche's idea of "will to power" and transformed it into the psychological concept of self-actualization, in which an individual strives to realize his potential."

Mary Kearns, in an address to the Catholic Head Teachers Association of Scotland, spoke of the Nietzschean ideas now being taught in Catholic schools in the name of "scientific" psychology. Kearns said:

"The methods are based on 'the group therapy technique' first developed in America in the 1970's by two psychologists, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. They described how emotional conditioning should be carried out by a group 'facilitator.' The facilitator does not impart knowledge like the old fashioned teacher. Instead he/she initiates discussions encouraging children to reveal their personal views and feelings. The facilitator's approach is 'value free.' There is no right or wrong answer to any religious or moral question. Each person discloses what is right or wrong for them. All choices are equally valid even if they are opposites. Everything depends on feelings or emotions. Reason and conscience are discouraged. If anyone attempts objective evaluation, they are to be treated as an 'outsider' and there will be a strong emotional reaction against such judgemental intolerance'".

If it is true that Catholic education now uses these techniques in "teaching religious and moral education," then the Catholic education system has entered into the Nietzschean insanity. If these are the techniques being used in education and in the seminaries, then sexual misconduct charges against priests are a symptom of "scientific" paganism replacing Christianity.

Santa Rosa priest Don Kimball, who is charged with sexual misconduct, is an example of someone whose "approach" was "value free" – that is, there was "no right or wrong answer to any religious or moral question."

In 1996, Karyn Wolfe and Mark Spaulding of Pacific Church News said, "THE WEDGE! You can't do youth ministry (any ministry for that matter) without it. ... Basing his theory on psychologist Abraham Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs', the Rev. Don Kimball developed this model for the growth and maturity process of a group."

Another example of the value-free approach is Thomas Zanzig, a major leader in the Catholic Church for youth ministry, plus an editor and writer of Catholic textbooks.

According to Marks S. Winward, Zanzig, in a book on youth ministry, "bases his 'Wedge Model' on a similar model developed by Fr. Don Kimble." Homeschool leader Marianna Bartold said, "Sharing the Christian Message by Thomas Zanzig has students come up with as many slang or street words as possible for penis and vagina in three or four minutes."

Now, many might say these are only isolated cases of misuses of Maslow and Adler until one reads the original text. According to William Coulson, a former collaborator of Carl Rogers, Maslow was always a revolutionary. ... In 1965, working a radical idea about children and adult sex into his book about management, "In Eupsychian Management: A Journal," [Maslow said]: "I remember talking with Alfred Adler about this in a kind of joking way, but then we both got quite serious about it, and Adler thought that this sexual therapy at various ages was certainly a very fine thing. As we both played with the thought, we envisioned a kind of social worker ... as a psychotherapist in giving therapy literally on the couch."

As one can see, the basic therapeutic assumption leads to certain results in the real world. These thinkers don't believe in the basic Christian assumption that there is a need for forgiveness from God. Instead, they believe there is no sin, only selves needing to reach the fullness of themselves.

It is understandable that Nietzschean atheists such as Maslow, Adler and Gay activists could hold these basic assumptions that sexually abusing children is okay, just as Hitler thought killing Jews was okay since he had the basic assumption that there is no right or wrong only relativism and will to power disguised in Nazi pagan religious and "National Socialist" language.

It would not be understandable and would be a disgrace if Pope Francis holds these Nietzschean assumptions. Relativism with its implicit denial of original sin and personal sin is, in large part, behind the sex-abuse headlines of Chile, Pennsylvania and those around the globe.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

[Catholic Monitor] 22 58.3a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

Cardinal Müller on abuse crisis and its link to homosexuality in priesthood

CARDINAL erhard Müller, the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (2012-2017), has granted LifeSiteNews an interview in which he discusses in depth the problems of the current clerical sex abuse crisis.

In this discussion about the abuse crisis, Müller does not shy away from pointing out that the Church needs to address the problem of practiced homosexuality in the ranks of the clergy, saying that "homosexual conduct of clergymen can in no case be tolerated."

He states, however, that leaders in the Catholic Church still underestimate this problem. The prelate states: “That McCarrick, together with his clan and a homosexual network, was able to wreak havoc in a mafia-like manner in the Church is connected with the underestimation of the moral depravity of homosexual acts among adults.”

Cardinal Müller also challenges the Vatican for its lack of earnest investigations — early on — into the rumors concerning McCarrick, saying that a public apology is needed. He writes that “there should very clearly come out a public explanation about these events and the personal connections, as well as the question as to how much the involved Church authorities knew at each step; such an explanation could very well include an admission of a wrong assessment of persons and situations.”

Cardinal Müller criticizes as a “disastrous error” the changes in Canon Law that have been made in the 1983 Code of Canon Law which, when dealing with priestly offenses against the Sixth Commandment, does not even mention homosexuality as an offense anymore, and which contains a less rigorous set of penalties against any abuser priests.

Returning to the matter of the abuse crisis, the German prelate explains that in the Church, “it is part of the crisis that one does not wish to see the true causes and covers them up with the help of propaganda phrases of the homosexual lobby. Fornication with teenagers and adults is a mortal sin which no power on earth can declare to be morally neutral.” He calls the “LGBT” ideology within the Church “atheistic,” and adds, in light of the recent Youth Synod in Rome, that the "LGBT" term “has no place in Church documents.”

Moreover, Cardinal Müller, in light of his stricter handling of sex abuse cases at the CDF, wonders whether there was a homosexual lobby in the Vatican which was glad to see him being dismissed: “But it could be so that it has pleased them that I am no longer tasked in the Congregation for the Doctrine to deal with sexual crimes especially also against male teenagers.”

Discussing possible reasons for his sudden dismissal from the CDF – for which Pope Francis never gave him any reasons – Cardinal Müller comes back to his defense of Catholic doctrine on marriage with regard to Pope Francis' post-synodal exhortation Amoris Laetitia. He says: “Amoris Laetitia has to be absolutely in accordance with Revelation, and it is not we who have to be in accord with Amoris Laetitia, at least not in the interpretation which contradicts, in a heretical manner, the Word of God. And it would be an abuse of power to discipline those who insist upon an orthodox interpretation of this encyclical and of all the papal magisterial documents.”

The German cardinal recalls the correct role of the Pope as the guardian of the Faith when he says: “The Magisterium of the bishops and of the Pope stand under the Word of God in Holy Scripture and Tradition and serves Him. It is not at all Catholic to say that the Pope as an individual person receives directly from the Holy Spirit the Revelation and that he may now interpret it according to his own whims while all the rest are to follow him blindly and mutely.”

 

Full interview with Cardinal Gerhard Müller


LifeSite: The U.S. bishops have just ended their fall assembly in Baltimore, where they were not permitted to vote on national guidelines concerning episcopal involvement in sexual abuse cases (either by commission or by omission or cover-up), because the Vatican told them not to do so. The new guidelines would have contained a code of conduct and a lay-led oversight body to investigate bishops accused of misconduct. Many Catholics in the U.S. had been waiting for some concrete steps, and they are now indignant. Do you think this decision wise, or do you think the U.S. bishops should have been able to set up their own national guidelines and commission, just as the French bishops have themselves done this month?

Cardinal Gerhard Müller: One has to make a strict distinction between the sexual crimes and their investigation by secular justice – in the eyes of which all citizens are equal (thus a separate lex [law] for the Catholic Church would constitute a contradiction to the modern, democratic state of law) – and those canonical procedures for clergymen in which the ecclesial authority determines the penalties for any misconduct that diametrically contradicts the priestly ethos.

The bishop has the canonical jurisdiction over each clergyman in his diocese, which is connected, in special cases, with the Congregation of the Faith in Rome, which acts in the authority of the Pope. If a bishop does not comply with his responsibility, then he can be held accountable by the Pope. The episcopal conferences can set up guidelines for prevention and for canonical prosecutions, both of which give the bishop in his own diocese a valuable instrument.

We need to keep a clear mind in the middle of the situation of crisis in the U.S. We will not succeed with the help of a lynch law and a general suspicion against the whole episcopacy or of “Rome.” I do not see it as a solution that the laymen now take control, just because the bishops (as some believe) are not capable of doing so with their own strength. We cannot overcome shortcomings by turning upside down the hierarchical-sacramental constitution of the Church. Catherine of Siena candidly and relentlessly appealed to the consciences of popes and bishops, but she did not replace them in their positions. That is the difference to Luther, due to whom we still suffer from the split of Christianity. It would be important that the U.S. Bishops' Conference assume its responsibility with independence and autonomy. The bishops are not employees of the Pope who are subject to directives nor, as in the military, generals who owe absolute obedience to the higher command. Rather, they carry together with the successor of Peter, as shepherds appointed by Christ Himself, responsibility for the Universal Church. But from Rome, we may expect that it serves the unity in the Faith and in the communion of the Sacraments. This is the hour of a good collaboration in overcoming the crisis, and not of the polarization and of a compromise, so that in Rome one is angry about the U.S. Bishops, and in the U.S., people are angry about Rome.

LifeSite: An essential part of the discussions during the USCCB meeting was still the McCarrick scandal and how it was possible that someone like McCarrick could rise to the highest levels of the Catholic Church in the U.S., with much consequential influence in Rome. What are your own reflections on the McCarrick case and what the Church should learn from the fact that there was a network of silence that has surrounded a man who in his life constantly defied the Church's laws by practicing homosexuality, by seducing seminarians who were dependent upon him and thus leading them into sin, and, worst of all, by abusing minors?

Müller: I do not know him and wish to abstain from any judgment. I hope that there will soon be a canonical process at the Congregation for the Faith, also in bringing light into the sexual crimes committed with young seminarians. In my time as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith (2012-2017), nobody told me anything about this problem, most probably, because one would have feared from me a too “rigid” reaction. That McCarrick, together with his clan and a homosexual network, was able to wreak havoc in a mafia-like manner in the Church is connected with the underestimation of the moral depravity of homosexual acts among adults. Even if in Rome one supposedly only heard some rumors, one had to investigate the matter and to check the truthfulness of the accusations and also to abstain from any episcopal promotion [of McCarrick] to the very important diocese of the capital city [Washington, D.C.] and likewise to abstain from appointing him to become a cardinal of the Holy, Roman Church. And when there even has already been paid some hush money – and with it, the admission of his sexual crimes with young men – then every reasonable person asks how such a person can be a counselor of the Pope with regard to episcopal appointments. I do not know whether this is true, but it would need to be clarified. The hireling helps in the search of good shepherds for God's fold – nobody can understand this. In such a case, there should very clearly come out a public explanation about these events and the personal connections, as well as the question as to how much the involved Church authorities knew at each step; such an explanation could very well include an admission of a wrong assessment of persons and situations.

LifeSite: Did you during the last five years witness cases where then-Cardinal McCarrick was given considerable influence or specific missions by either the Pope or the Vatican?

Müller: As I said, I was not informed about anything. One said that the Congregation of Faith was merely responsible for the sexual abuse of minors, but not of adults – as if sexual offenses committed by a clergyman either with another clergyman or with a layperson would not also be a grave violation of the Faith and of the holiness of the Sacraments. I stressed again and again that also homosexual conduct of clergymen can in no case be tolerated; and that the Church's sexual morality may not be relativized by the worldly acceptance of homosexuality. One also has to differentiate between sinful conduct in an individual case, a crime, and a life carried on in a continuously sinful state.

LifeSite: One of the problems of the McCarrick case is that, already in 2005 and in 2007, there were legal settlements with some of his victims, yet the Archdiocese of Newark – at the time under Archbishop John J. Myers – did not inform the public, nor its own priests, about them. He thus withheld vital information for those who still worked with McCarrick or trusted him. As did Cardinal Joseph Tobin, when he became, in January of 2017, the archbishop in Newark. To my knowledge, neither Myers nor Tobin has issued an apology for this omission and breaking of the trust of their priests. Do you think the Archdiocese should have made known the fact of these legal settlements, especially since in 2002, the U.S. Dallas Charter had called for more transparency?

Müller: In earlier times, one assumed that one could solve such difficult cases quietly and unobtrusively. Then, however, the offender was also able to continue to abuse the trust of his bishop. In today's situation, the Catholics and the public have a moral right to a publication of these events. It is not about accusing someone, but about learning from the mistakes.

LifeSite: Can such a moral problem ever be solved by setting new guidelines, or do we need here in the Church a deeper conversion of hearts?

Müller: The origin of this whole crisis lies in a secularization of the Church and the reduction of the priest to the role of a functionary. It is finally atheism that has spread within the Church. According to this evil spirit, the Revelation concerning Faith and morals is being adapted to the world without God so that it does not interfere anymore with a life according to one's own lusts and needs. Only about 5% of the offenders are being assessed as pathetically pedophile, whereas the great mass of offenders have freely trampled upon the Sixth Commandment out of their own immorality and thus have defied, in a blaspheming way, the Holy Will of God.

LifeSite: What do you think of the idea to establish a new Church law that proposes excommunications for abuser priests?

Müller: The excommunication is a coercive penalty and has to be removed immediately in the case of repentance by the offender. But in the case of serious abuse and other offenses against the Faith and the unity of the Church, one can impose the permanent dismissal from the clerical state, that is to say a permanent interdiction to act as a priest.

LifeSite: The older 1917 Code of Canon Law had a clear set of penalties placed upon an abuser priest, as well as upon a homosexually active priest. These concrete penalties have largely been removed in the 1983 Code which is more vague and now does not even mention explicitly homosexual acts. Do you think, in light of the grave abuse crisis, the Church should return to a more rigorous set of automatic penalties in these cases?

Müller: That was a disastrous error. Sexual contacts between persons of the same sex completely and directly contradict the sense and purpose of sexuality as grounded in creation. They are the expression of a disordered desire and instinct, just as it is a sign of the broken relationship between man and his Creator since the Fall of Man.

The celibate priest and the married priest in the Eastern Rite have to be models for the flock and also have to give an example that the redemption also encompasses the body and the bodily passions. Not the wild lust for fulfillment, but the bodily and spiritual self-giving, in agape, to a person of the other sex, is the sense and purpose of sexuality. This leads to responsibility for the family and for the children that God has given.

LifeSite: During the recent Baltimore meeting, Cardinal Blase Cupich stated that one should “differentiate” between consensual sexual acts between adults and the abuse of minors, implying that a priest's homosexual relations with another adult is not a major problem. What is your own response to this kind of approach?

Müller: One can differentiate everything – and then even consider oneself to be a great intellectual – but not a grave sin which excludes a person from the Kingdom of God, at least not as the bishop who is duty-bound not to exhibit the taste of the time [“Zeitgeschmack”], but rather, to defend the truth of the Gospels. It seems the time has come “when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables” (2 Tim 4:3f).

LifeSite: In your work as the Prefect of the CDF, you had the oversight over many clerical sex abuse cases that the CDF investigated. Is it true that the majority of the victims in these cases were male adolescents?

Müller: More than 80% of the victims of these sexual offenders are teenagers of the male sex. One cannot conclude from this, however, that the majority of the priests are prone to homosexual fornication, but, rather, only that the majority of the offenders have sought out, in their deep disorder of their passions, male victims. From the entire crime statistics, we know that the majority of offenders of sexual abuse are one's own relatives, even the fathers of their own children. But we cannot conclude from this that the majority of fathers are prone to such crimes. One has always to be very careful not to make generalizations out of concrete cases so that one does not thus fall into slogans and anti-clerical prejudices.

LifeSite: If this is the case – and the German bishops' sex abuse study, as well as the John Jay Report, showed similar numbers – should then the Church not more directly deal with the problem of the presence of homosexual priests?

Müller: In my view, there do not exist homosexual men or even priests. God has created the human being as man and woman. But there can be men and women with disordered passions. Sexual communion has its place exclusively in the marriage between a man and a woman. Outside, there is only fornication and abuse of sexuality, both either with persons of the opposite sex, or in the unnatural intensification of sin with persons of the same sex. Only he who has learned to control himself fulfills also the moral precondition for the reception of priestly ordination (see 1 Tim 3:1-7).

LifeSite: We seem to have a situation in the Church right now, where there is not yet even a consensus present that acknowledges that homosexually active priests have a large part in the abuse crisis. Even some Vatican documents still speak of “pedophilia,” or of “clericalism” as the main problem. The Italian journalist Andrea Tornielli even goes so far as to claim that McCarrick did not have homosexual relationships, but that they were rather about his exercising power over others. At the same time, we have others, such as Father James Martin, S.J., who travels the world (and even was invited to the World Family Meeting in Ireland) and promotes the idea of “LGBT-Catholics” and even claims that some saints have been probably homosexual. That is to say, there is now a strong tendency in the Church to downplay the sinful character of same-sex relationships. Would you here agree, and if so, how could – and should – this be remedied?

Müller: It is part of the crisis that one does not wish to see the true causes and covers them up with the help of propaganda phrases of the homosexual lobby. Fornication with teenagers and adults is a mortal sin which no power on earth can declare to be morally neutral. That is the work of the devil – against whom Pope Francis often warns – that he declares sin to be good. “Some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, and having their conscience seared.” (1 Tim 4:1f) It is indeed absurd that, suddenly, ecclesial authorities utilize the Jacobin, Nazi, and Communist anti-Church combat slogans against sacramentally ordained priests. The priests have the authority to proclaim the Gospels and to administer the Sacraments of Grace. If someone abuses his jurisdiction in order to reach selfish goals, he himself is not clerical in an exaggerated form, but, rather, he himself is anti-clerical, because he denies Christ Who wishes to work through him. Sexual abuse by clergymen is then, at most, to be called anti-clerical. But it is obvious – and can only be denied by someone who wishes to be blind – that sins against the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue stem from disordered inclinations and thus are sins of fornication which exclude one from the Kingdom of God, at least as long as one has not repented and made atonement, and as long as there does not exist the firm resolve to avoid such sin in the future. This whole attempt at obfuscating things is a bad sign of the secularization of the Church. One thinks like the world, but not as God wills it.

LifeSite: At the recent Youth Synod in Rome, a similar tone could be heard. The working document uses for the first time the term “LGBT,“ and the final document stressed the need to welcome homosexuals in the Church, and it even rejected “any form of discrimination” against them. However, do such statements not effectively undermine the Church's standing practice not to hire practicing homosexuals, for example as teachers in Catholic schools?

Müller: The LGBT ideology is based upon a false anthropology which denies God as the Creator. Since it is in principle atheistic or perhaps has only to do with a Christian concept of God at the margins, it has no place in Church documents. This is an example of the creeping influence of atheism in the Church, which has been responsible for the crisis of the Church for half a century. Unfortunately, it does not stop working in the minds of some shepherds who, in their naive belief of being modern, do not realize the poison that they day by day drink in, and that they then offer for others to drink.

LifeSite: Can we not now say that we have a strong “gay lobby” within the ranks of the Catholic Church?

Müller: I do not know that because such people do not show themselves to me. But it could be so that it has pleased them that I am no longer tasked in the Congregation for the Doctrine [of the Faith] to deal with sexual crimes especially also against male teenagers.

LifeSite: You recently revealed that, while you worked at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the Pope set up a commission that was to counsel the CDF concerning possible penalties for abuser priests. That commission, however, tended to have a more lenient attitude toward abuser priests, unlike you who wished for a laicization in grave cases (such as the Father Mauro Inzoli case). Now the Jesuit magazine America revealed last year – at the time of your dismissal from your position as the Prefect of the CDF – “that a number of cardinals had asked Francis to remove Cardinal Müller from that post because he had on a number of occasions publicly disagreed with or distanced himself from the pope’s positions, and they felt this was undermining the papal office and magisterium.” Do you yourself see a possible connection between your own stricter standards and attitude toward abuser priests and a group of cardinals close to the Pope who wish a more lenient approach? If this is not the case, would you still say that you were removed because of your firmer defense of orthodoxy?

Müller: The primacy of the Pope is being undermined by the sycophants and careerists at the papal court – that is what the famous theologian Melchior Cano has already said in the 16th century – and not by those who counsel the Pope in a competent and responsible manner. If it is true that there is a group of cardinals who accused me in front of the Pope of the deviation of my ideas, then the Church is in a bad state. If these would have been courageous and upright men, they would have spoken with me directly, and they should have known that I as a bishop and cardinal am to represent the teaching of the Catholic Faith, and not to justify the different private opinions of a Pope. His authority is extended over the revealed Faith of the Catholic Church and not over the individual theological opinions of himself or those of his advisers. They can perhaps accuse me of interpreting Amoris Laetitia in an orthodox way, but they cannot prove that I deviate from the Catholic doctrine. Additionally, it is irritating that theologically uneducated people are being promoted to the rank of bishops who, in turn, think that they have to thank the Pope for it by means of a childish submission. Perhaps they could have read my book The Pope. Mission and Mandate (Herder Verlag; is it available in German and Spanish; the Italian and English translations are being currently made). Then we could continue to discuss things on that level.

The Magisterium of the bishops and of the Pope stand under the Word of God in Holy Scripture and Tradition and serves Him. It is not at all Catholic to say that the Pope as an individual person receives directly from the Holy Spirit the Revelation and that he may now interpret it according to his own whims while all the rest are to follow him blindly and mutely. Amoris Laetitia has to be absolutely in accordance with Revelation, and it is not we who have to be in accord with Amoris Laetitia, at least not in the interpretation which contradicts, in a heretical manner, the Word of God. And it would be an abuse of power to discipline those who insist upon an orthodox interpretation of this encyclical and of all the papal magisterial documents. Only he who is in the state of Grace can also fruitfully receive Holy Communion. This revealed truth cannot be toppled by any power in the world, and no Catholic may ever believe the opposite or be forced to accept the opposite.

LifeSite: In which fields were you yourself as the Prefect of the CDF the most opposed to innovations that were proposed for the Church? Which parts of your witness do you think, looking back, contributed most to your being dismissed and treated in such a manner that you were not even given any alternative position in the Vatican?

Müller: I did not oppose any innovation or reform. Because reform means renewal in Christ, not adaptation to the world. I was not told what the reason was for the non-renewal of my mandate. This is unusual because the Pope otherwise lets all the prefects continue their work. There is no reason which one would dare mention without making oneself look ridiculous. One cannot, after all, state in stark contradiction to Pope Benedict, that Müller is lacking the sufficient theological qualifications, that he is not orthodox, or that he is neglectful in the prosecution of crimes against the Faith and in the cases of sexual crimes. That is why one prefers to be silent and leaves it up to the left-liberal media to make spiteful and gloating comments.

LifeSite: Some observers are currently comparing your removal from your important position in the Vatican – which certainly is also due to your own polite resistance concerning Amoris Laetitia – with the lenient treatment that someone like the former Cardinal McCarrick has received. Even now, he has so far not yet even been laicized, in spite of his criminal conduct. So, it seems to some that those who try to preserve the Catholic teaching concerning marriage and the family as it has always been taught are being set aside, while those who are in favor of innovations in this moral field are being leniently treated or even promoted – as, for example, Cardinal Cupich and Fr. James Martin. Would you like to comment on this?

Müller: Everybody can reflect upon the criteria according to which some are being promoted and protected, and others are being fought and eliminated.

LifeSite: In the context of the seeming suppression of orthodox Churchmen and the promotion of progressive representatives, Father Ansgar Wucherpfennig, S.J. has just now received from the Vatican the permission to go back to his position as the rector of the Jesuit graduate school in Frankfurt, in spite of the fact that he argues for female ordination and the blessing of homosexual couples. He is now even asked to publish articles on these matters. How would you comment on this development?

Müller: This is an example of how the authority of the Roman Church undermines itself and how the clear expert knowledge of the Congregation for the Faith is being pushed aside. If this priest calls the blessing of homosexual relationships the result of a further development of doctrine, for which he continues to work, it is nothing but the presence of atheism in Christianity. He does not theoretically deny the existence of God, but, rather, he denies Him as the source of morality by presenting that which is before God a sin as a blessing.

That the recipient of the Sacrament of Holy Orders has to be of the male sex is not the result of cultural circumstances or of positive, but changeable, Church legislation, but, rather, it is founded in the nature of this Sacrament and its divine institution, just as the nature of the Sacrament of Matrimony requires the difference of the two sexes.

LifeSite: From your observations, do you think the Church is getting close to having sufficient and consistent control over the abuse crisis and has found the right remedies; or what do you think is so far still the major obstacle for a substantial improvement? How can the Church gain back her trustworthiness in the eyes of Catholic families?

Müller: The whole Church, with her priests and bishops, has to please God more than man. The obedience in the Faith is our salvation.

[LSN] 2258.3b

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Humanae Vitae

 

JAMES KALB, author of 'The Tyranny of Liberalism' and 'Against Inclusiveness', delivers his talked entitled 'The Challenge Goes Deep.' Mr. Kalb's talk was part of the Challenging the Secular Culture Conference, sponsored by the Veritas Center for Ethics in Public Policy at Franciscan University of Steubenville.

 

 

[Franciscan University of Steubenville] 2258.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

China supplement

 

The Church throwing Chinese Christians to the lions

FAY VOSHELL writes for LifeSiteNews - It is important Christians recognize the broader implications of the disastrous capitulation of Pope Francis to the Chinese government's ideological agenda.

By allowing China's government to appoint bishops, he has given over the authority of the church to an oppressive regime and has handed over Catholic dogma to communist spin masters who will shape Christian doctrine according to Chinese President Xi Jinping's 'Sinicization' program.

Xi's Sinicization program permits only one viewpoint; namely, that which adheres to Communist dogma as understood by the Chinese government. The Pope has by his actions at least implicitly endorsed an anti-Christian agenda that includes an all-out attempt to convert Catholics into acolytes of the Chinese government, which seeks through its social credit system to Sinicize everyone, conforming every single Chinese to its ideology. Xi's Sinicization is essentially a revival of Mao Zedong's approach to China's internal affairs, but even more hideously strengthened by technological surveillance Mao could only dream of. The new social credit system, in which a person's every word, deed and thought are evaluated according to conformance to government policies, with rewards and punishments being handed out according to performance on demand, now includes Christians who are expected to work for social credit, also known as government approved behavior. To be authentically Christian is to not receive any social credit.

As Sinicization defined by adherence to communist ideology as promoted by the Chinese government proceeds to infiltrate the church, what policies will the Catholic Church in China be required to accede to in order to retain state favored status? What are the larger implications of the pope's ceding control of the Catholic Church to the Chinese government?

They are much the same as the results attendant to the capitulation of the Catholic Church when Cardinal Pacelli, the Vatican's Secretary of State and future Pope Pius XII, signed the Reichskonkordat of 1933. By surrendering the Church's moral authority and its ability to rebuke and to confront the Nazi state, the church as an institution wound up bearing responsibility for the persecution of the Jews. While individual priests, nuns, laymen and laywomen often stood against the persecution of the Jews in acts of supreme heroism and sacrifice, the hierarchy of the Church sacrificed the moral stand of the Church against the evil of the Third Reich.

The German Catholic laity were out on a limb which the church hierarchy sawed off.

As David B. Green notes, ' … (T)he discussions 'were conducted exclusively by Pacelli on behalf of the Pope over the heads of the faithful, the clergy and the German bishops.' (Readers will note a similar hijacking of the moral authority of the laity and bishops is occurring as the Vatican overrides the American conference of bishops meeting to confront the current sex abuse scandal.)

Green continues:

'As James Carroll wrote in 'Constantine's Sword,' his 2001 study of the Church's relationship with the Jews, 'The Recihskonkordat effectively removed the German Catholic Church from any continued role of opposition to Hitler. More than that, as Hitler told his cabinet on July 14, it established a context that would be 'especially significant in the urgent struggle against international Jewry.''

Those who know 20th century history know how the struggle against 'international Jewry' turned out. Millions died.

In a similar manner, by handing over control of the Church to the Chinese communist government in exchange for a tenuous and doubtless soon to be violated agreement to be left alone, the Church commits itself at least tacitly to unseeing the horrors of the Chinese government's Two Child policy, which in practice is the same as the One Child policy put in place in the 1980s.

The Chinese government has been responsible for the abortion of millions of unborn children, skewed sex ratios due to preference for boys, and for the control of every Chinese woman's or man's sex life. Sinicization of the Catholic Church means Catholics will be 'encouraged' to go along with to China's population control policies, which are remarkable for their vicious brutality. Chen Guangcheng, a blind lawyer and human rights advocate, put it bluntly: 'First the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) would kill any baby after one. Now they will kill any baby after two.'

As the Charlotte Lozier Institute reports, Stephen Mosher has been eyewitness to the grim results of the One Child Policy since the late 1970s. He has seen forced abortions, sterilizations and third trimester abortions done by C-section. The babies were killed at birth. He concludes: 'Regardless of whether Party leaders allow Chinese couples to have one, two, or even three children, the underlying policy has not changed - and probably will not change.'

Reggie Littlejohn, who is founder and president of Women's Rights Without Frontiers, clarifies just what the Two Child Policy means. All pregnancies must be permitted by the government, which requires a permit. Women who have pregnancies not permitted by the state are subject to forced abortion. No Christian woman can plead freedom of conscience and the intrinsic value of her child's life.

Social credit goes to Chinese who follow the state's draconian Two Child Policy, which is backed up by countless spies and enforcers, as Mosher related in his first book on China's One Child Policy, Broken Earth; as well as in his most recent book, A Mother's Ordeal. Mosher states: 'The history of the People's Republic of China (PRC) has been marred by a long series of violent political campaigns, but none has been more violent, none has claimed more victims, and none lasted a fraction as long as the one-child-policy (now the Two Child Policy). He goes on to note that even the carnage enacted by Mao Zedong was not as great as that resulting from the Chinese government's efforts to control its people by forced abortion, sterilization and infanticide.

In sum, allowing Catholic bishops to be appointed by the Chinese government amounts to capitulation to abortion and infanticide characteristic of the Two Child Policy, which in turn is part of the all-encompassing social credit system enforced by the Chinese government.

Whether intentionally or not, Pope Francis has thrown all Christians to the lions, including the 30 non-government approved Catholic bishops as well as the burgeoning underground Chinese evangelical and Catholic movements. He has given the papal blessing to state controlled registered churches while at least tacitly giving the imprimatur to state persecution of the entire Christian underground.

By going along with the Chinese government's goal to Sinicize religion, he is gutting human rights groups, including Christians battling for human rights. As the Washington Times reported, 'Several Chinese human rights lawyers jailed for their work, including Jiang Tianyong and Li Heping, are outspoken Christians. So too are many Hong Kong pro-democracy activists, not least among them 2014 protest leader Joshua Wong … Chinese leaders have always been suspicious of the political challenge or threat that Christianity poses to the Communist regime.'

The pope may be interested in ameliorating the suspicions of the Chinese leaders concerning Christianity, but by his actions, he is in danger of eliminating the Catholic Church's moral authority in China altogether, particularly when it comes to the matter of the infinite value of human life as proclaimed by Christian doctrine.

Noble intentions and sterling motives often are smoke screens that obscure and sometimes even encourage disastrous results. It is hard to avoid the suspicion that Pope Francis has sided with the world, the flesh and the Devil in handing the appointments of bishops over to the Chinese government.

Thus, as noted above, it is hard not to see a repeat of the actions of Pope Pius XII when he signed the Reichskonkordat in 1933. The parallels are there for all to discern. As Robert A. Krieg noted some 15 years before the current actions of Pope Francis:

'The Concordat of 1933 embodied a problematic theology of the Church, for it implicitly reduced the Church to an organization concerned solely about a private, otherworldly realm unrelated to the social and political aspects of human life.'

Krieg goes on to note that while Pius XI and Pacelli may have thought they were protecting the Church as an institution, they wound up severing the Church from its advocacy for human rights, thus lessening 'the role of the Church as a proponent of universal human values as embodied in natural law.'

Students of Church history have seen the results of the Catholic Church's cooperation with an oppressive regime. The outcome of the current pope's decision may be similar to the Reichskonkordat of 1933: The persecution of faithful Christians and the mass slaughter of innocent lives.

It is up to the faithful Christians within and outside of the Catholic Church to protest the pope's potentially fateful decision. History must not be repeated.

[Fay Voshell holds a M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary, which awarded her its prize for excellence in systematic theology. Her thoughts have appeared in many online magazines, including American Thinker, National Review, The Christian Post, LifeSiteNews, RealClear Relgion, CNS and Russia Insider. She may be reached at fvoshell@yahoo.com]

[LSN] 2258.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

Despite Vatican-China agreement, police kidnap bishop to undergo government indoctrination

DOUG MAINWARING reports for LifeSiteNews– For the fifth time since Pope Francis appointed him bishop in 2016, a faithful Chinese prelate has been taken into custody by police for interrogation and indoctrination.

The bishop who has been a member of the underground Church – faithful to the Holy See during decades of communist government persecution – will be “coerced to submit to the religious policy of China, which requires registration with the government and membership of the Patriotic Association (PA),” according to Asia News, which first broke the story.

The kidnapping of Pietro Shao Zhumin, bishop of Wenzhou, on November 9 occurred despite the Vatican having entered into an agreement in September with the communist government, whose heavy-handed, oppressive tactics regarding the Catholic Church appear to remain in full effect.

Despite the agreement which the Vatican has hailed as a positive step forward for the Catholic Church in China, reports of the destruction of church buildings continue and clergy who have resisted joining the government-run PA have mysteriously disappeared and undergone similar periods of detention for indoctrination. The deal reportedly allows the communist government, rather than the Catholic Church, to select bishops.

Children under 18 years of age continue to be barred from entering churches for religious services.

“After the agreement between China and the Vatican on the appointment of bishops, the PA has stepped up controls and the persecution of underground communities,” according to the Asia News report.

Cardinal Joseph Zen of Hong Kong has been vocal in his criticism of the deal since it was first announced, asserting it is “a major step toward the annihilation of the real Church in China.”

The faithful in China are now coming under increasing pressure after the communist government tightened regulations on the practice of religion in February.

According to Zen, the environment for practicing Catholics has grown so toxic in recent months that priests who were members of the underground Church are warning parishioners not to attend Mass in order to avoid arrest.

More recently, Zen revealed that “underground clerics have cried to him” since the Vatican signed a deal with China on the appointment of bishops.

“They said officials have forced them to become open, to join the [schismatic] Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association and to obtain a priest's certificate with the reason that the pope has signed the Sino-Vatican provisional agreement,” Cardinal Zen told the Union of Catholic Asian News (ucanews.com).

Because the agreement is not public, the legitimate Catholic clergy do not know what the Holy Father wants them to do.

“Some priests have escaped, and some have disappeared because they do not know what to do and are annoyed. The agreement is undisclosed, and they do not know if what officials say is true or not,” Zen said.

Some of the clerics’ hardships enumerated in Zen’s letter are confiscated money, clerics’ relations being harassed by civil authorities, imprisonment, and even execution.

“But the Holy See does not support them and regards them as trouble, referring to them causing trouble and not supporting unity. This is what makes them most painful,” said the cardinal.

Chinese officials have remained silent on Bishop Zhumin’s abduction and detention, according to an AP report. While he is expected to be held in custody for no more than 15 days, his most recent detention lasted seven months.

[LSN] 2258.5b

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

News from around the world

 

Canada Homosexualist activists are coming after Christian churches next…and it's already happening

JONATHON VAN MAREN reports for LifeSiteNews - Over the past decade, attacks on Canada's Christian communities by LGBT activists have escalated significantly. In Alberta, Education Minister David Eggen is threatening to defund and possibly shut down religious schools that do not accept Gay-Straight alliance clubs. Canada's Supreme Court recently ruled against Trinity Western University, a private Christian institution in British Columbia, for having students agree to a lifestyle contract upon enrollment. And of course, attempts to force schools to teach gender ideology are taking place simultaneously in nearly every province across the country.

I've seen many Canadian Christians post articles describing these events on social media, often accompanied by the million dollar question: 'What's next?' I suspect that I've known the answer to that question for some time, but recent events in Ontario indicate that it could happen sooner than I'd thought. The potential catalyst is a story that has been reported on breathlessly by Canadian media for just over a week now.

A Bowmanville woman, Kimberley Mills, was attending the Calvary Baptist Church in Oshawa, Ontario. Calvary Baptist, like most churches (and all Christian churches for the past two thousand years prior to a few decades ago) holds to the traditional biblical teaching on sexual morality. Mills, however, has been in a relationship with her partner Meghan Fowler for several years. Despite the many liberal churches she could have attended that would have been more than thrilled to celebrate her relationship, Mills chose to attend a church that adheres to what the Bible says about sexuality, and even to serve as youth leader.

After sharing with people in her church that she was in a long-term same-sex relationship, she was removed from the membership rolls of Calvary Baptist Church in November, and received a letter from the church leadership informing her of this fact. This is standard practice for many churches: Membership is voluntary, but members must abide by the rules of the church community. As reported by the Toronto Star:

'It is a very serious matter to remove a member for discipline as you will note in the 1 Corinthians 5:5 text, and our hearts are broken over it,' said the letter signed by Dr. Tim Wagner, deacon chair.

Representatives from the church released a followup statement to say that everyone is welcome to attend Sunday services, regardless of whether they are members. However, the church does have the option to remove someone from membership - a 'voluntary association of like-minded individuals.'

'We love and care for everyone since we are all made in the Image of God,' said the Calvary Baptist Church statement. 'Those who choose to become members of Calvary Baptist Church share our theological and doctrinal beliefs and agree to live in accordance with those beliefs. When an individual ceases to hold those beliefs or live in accordance with them, as has recently happened, that individual may be removed from membership but always remains welcome to attend our services and other programs.'

The letter informed her that she was 'living in disobedience to the Scriptures,' which made Mills very upset. The Star noted that this conflict 'thrust [her] into the role of gay rights advocate,' and quoted Mills explaining that, 'It's clear that something needs to change. I feel that God designed me the way I am and He's going to love me the way I am.' She promptly went public on social media, and says she has been (predictably) receiving much public support, as well as getting many messages from pastors informing her that they were in complete approval of her relationship. Again, it is difficult to understand why Mills did not choose to attend a church presided by over one of those pastors to begin with.

Mills now says that she had 'started to be concerned about coming out at the church when a sermon took a strong stand against homosexuality,' and 'felt like she wasn't able to be true to herself while at church.' (This is understandable, as biblical churches do not exist to help people feel 'true to themselves,' but rather speak of the need for repentance and obedience to God.) Mills had several discussions with church leaders that she found unsatisfactory, and instead decided to leave the church-'but she plans to continue speaking out about her experience.'

That experience has already attracted the attention of one gay activist, who has now put Calvary Baptist Church in his crosshairs:

'Oshawa community advocate Mac Moreau has launched a letter-writing campaign asking the Canada Revenue Agency to review the charitable status of Calvary Baptist Church. As a registered charity, churches receive significant tax breaks from the provincial and federal government - with the requirement that churches devote all of their resources to charity.

'The church has allowed its resources to be used for activities that promote hate and intolerance,' said Moreau. 'If you are going to promote hate and intolerance, you shouldn't receive benefits from the Canadian government that all Canadians contribute to.'

'Moreau said the letter - and potentially ensuing CRA assessment - isn't meant to close the Calvary Baptist Church. The aim is to support other gay parishioners who are feeling pushed out of their churches, and to hopefully serve as a warning to all churches that preach intolerance.

'This isn't meant to destroy a church family,' said Moreau, who attended the Calvary Baptist Church as a child and said he later left over concerns about the messages of obedience and intolerance. 'This is simply to say in this day-and-age, when you're receiving benefits from the public purse, this is not acceptable.'

This will be the next strategic move on the part of Canadian LGBT activists. Justin Trudeau's Liberal government has already placed an ideological litmus test (which includes LGBT issues as well as abortion) as a prerequisite for gaining access to the Canada Summer Jobs Program, and soon enough LGBT activists will turn their attention to those churches (and other religious institutions) that still hold to the traditional biblical teaching on sexuality. Perhaps Kimberley Mills will be the catalyst, or perhaps somebody else will. But it will happen, and probably sooner rather than later.

LGBT activists will soon demand that governments strip charitable status from any church or institution that disagrees with their ideology of sexuality, and will accuse any politician who declines to do so of being a homophobe or a transphobe. They will claim that these churches make the lives of LGBT people miserable, and that they should be condemned by all people of goodwill. Any good that these churches do, they will say, is vastly outweighed by their fundamental bigotry. And if the past is any indication, Canada's spineless politicians will fall into line and do just that.

[LSN] 2258.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

Kenya Marie Stopes ordered to 'immediately cease and desist offering any form of abortion services.'

SPUC reports : 'In a significant development Marie Stopes International has been banned from offering abortion services in Kenya, and has been reprimanded for breaking the Republic's laws.

The declaration came from the Kenya Medical Practitioners and Dentists Board (KMPDB), after a public outcry over the fact that Marie Stopes Kenya's advertisements promoted abortion, which is largely illegal in the country.

The KMPDB convened a Special Preliminary Inquiry Committee after attention was drawn to the fact that Marie Stopes had adverts running on various radio stations, despite a ban on all abortion advertising by the Kenya Film Classification Board.

The complainant in the case is Ann Kioko of CitizenGo Africa, which had run a petition calling on the Health Secretary to investigate the adverts and ban Marie Stopes from operating in Kenya. She gave evidence of adverts promoting abortion on radio, newspapers and social media, and said she had personally called Marie Stopes' switchboard and been told that she could have an abortion for 5000 Kenyan shillings (£38).

Revealing just how long Marie Stopes has been flouting the law in Kenya, a woman testified that she was given an abortion at a Marie Stopes clinic in Nairobi 22 years ago. She said that the abortion had led to 'profound psychological and spiritual effects' that she battled with for years. An obstetrician reminded the committee that the constitution of Kenya recognises the right to life and that life begins at conception. Dr Ngare also said that the World Health Organisation gives no definition of 'safe abortion' that Marie Stopes claims to provide, not least because abortion is never safe for the unborn child and the women who suffer psychological trauma.

The Chairman of Marie Stopes Kenya admitted running adverts promoting 'safe abortion' and said they did not halt them as they had not received the letter from the Kenya Film Classification Board instructing them to do so. This statement was contradicted by a representative from the Board, who said that the Country Director of Marie Stopes Kenya had acknowledged receipt of their letter.

[SPUC] 2258.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

Spain Vatican II decline ongoing: 341 religious houses closed in within 18 months

THRE HUNDRED AND FORTY ONE convents and monasteries were closed down in Spain between January 2015 and July 2016 according to Giuseppe Mineo (RedesCristianas.net, November 15).

270 of the closed houses belonged to female and 71 to male religious orders.

The most affected orders were the Daughters of Charity of Saint Vincent de Paul who closed 23 houses while the Dominicans closed 14 female and 14 male houses.

Most of the abandoned houses were simply abandoned as nobody could be found to buy or rent them.

[en.news] 2258.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

United Kingdom Bishops under fire for recognizing pro-transgender 'day of remembrance'

DOROTHY CUMMINGS McLEAN reports for LifeSiteNews - The Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales told its social media followers this week that Tuesday was the 'Transgender Day of Remembrance.'

According to the Catholic Calendar of the Saints, in England Tuesday was the Feast of St. Edmund, King and Martyr. In other countries, the feast day of St. Felix of Valois, St. Edmund Rich, and a number of lesser-known saints.

Nevertheless, the Catholic Bishops preferred to propagate to their flock a purely secular, and highly controversial, new devotion which was founded by a 'trans' activist named Gwendolyn Ann Smith in 1999.

'Today is Transgender Day of Remembrance and we pray for all people who are ill at ease with their gender, seek to change it, suffer for it and have been persecuted, and also killed,' said the bishops' tweet.

'All people are loved by God and are valued in their inherent God-given dignity,' it concluded.

The tweet was welcomed by American LGBT activist Father James Martin, SJ., who tweeted in response, 'I join with the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales in praying for all transgender people, especially those who are persecuted in any way. May you know that you are all God's beloved children.'

However, English Catholics were less enthusiastic at what some construed as a blurring of Catholic doctrine on human sexuality.

Author and speaker Father Marcus Holden responded to the bishops' tweet by saying that the secular holiday is part of an 'ideological colonisation':

'While we must pray for everyone who has died and fight against persecutions of any group of vulnerable people, 'Transgender Remembrance Day' is part of an 'ideological colonisation' which Catholics cannot support,' he wrote. 'I'm surprised to see this here.'

The English priest concluded with a link to the wikipedia page about the secular, pro-LGBT innovation.

After initial support from other English Catholics, Holden was then attacked through Twitter by a number of Fr. Martin's followers, invited by a woman named Julia Mooney to 'come help even it up a little.'

English apologist Deacon Nick Donnelly saw the tweet as evidence that Catholics should be alarmed that the bishops of England and Wales are trying to drive the Church into the LGBT fold.

'This tweet confirms reasons for alarm that the Bishops of England & Wales as a conference are co-opting the Church into the LGBT political movement,' he wrote on Twitter.

Referencing a pro-homosexual curriculum introduced in UK Catholic schools with episcopal support, he continued, 'The determination to push the @CathEdService LGBT 'Made in God's Image' program for schools was worrying enough. Now this!'

LifeSiteNews reached out to the media office of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales but did not receive a response by press time.

Endocrinologist: The concept of 'gender identity' is a 'fantasy or superstitious belief'

In 'The Gender Identity Phantom,' an article published in MercatorNet on November 12, endocrinologist Michael Laidlaw explained that medical treatment attempting to 'change' one's sex is dangerous and unscientific.

'Comprehensive gender affirmative therapy is a high risk, experimental therapy based on low quality evidence and represents a treatment for a condition which cannot be diagnosed by any doctor,' he stated. (Some of the left's preferred terms for medical 'treatment' that does not affirm someone's gender, but actually denies it, are 'gender affirmative therapy' and 'gender confirmation surgery.')

In his essay, Laidlaw contrasts the evidence a doctor would present to convince parents that their child has cancer and needs treatment with a conversation a doctor might have with parents about a child's belief he or she is 'really' of the opposite gender.

Laidlaw called the concept of 'gender identity' a 'fantasy or superstitious belief.'

While recognizing that 'variations in gender expression' - meaning 'behaviors that fall outside sex stereotypes' - are a normal part of human diversity and that no child should be bullied 'for failing to conform to sex stereotypes,' Laidlaw said children should also be supported in the reality of their biological sex. He also suggested that 'current treatment of gender identity' is worthy of inclusion in a classic study of mass hysteria.

'There is a classic work from Scottish journalist Charles Mackay entitled 'Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds,'' he wrote.

'It is a study of crowd psychology and discusses irrational economic fads such as the Dutch tulip mania and pseudo-scientific belief systems such as alchemy. If someone decides to revise or add to this classic work, then the 21st century treatment of gender identity will certainly be worthy of the chapter,' he continued.

As Catholic writer Christina Mead put it in an article for teens:

If you are having a transgender experience right now, that doesn't mean it's permanent. God has given us the gift of science and the wisdom of doctors to help us heal where we need healing. Doing harm to your healthy body and hormones is not the answer. Your healthy body doesn't need healing. There are other options to help you manage. There are other steps you can take to help your mind not be at war with your body.

We humans are integrated beings. That means our souls don't reside in a round glowing ball in the middle of our chest. Our bodies aren't something to detest, something that holds our soul for now but isn't important.

We are one being. So just as much as your soul is you, so is your body you. What we do with our bodies matters. You don't just hurt my nose if you punch my face, you hurt me. If someone uses my body sexually for their own gratification, it's not just my body that is affected, I am affected - my whole personhood has been hurt by being objectified.

When someone is having a transgender experience, it may feel like sex reassignment surgery, or hormone therapy will heal your body to be more in line with your perceived gender identity. In reality it is hurting the dignity of who you are, body and soul.

[LSN] 2258.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

United States Cardinals Cupich and Wuerl propose alternative sex-abuse response plan. Is anyone really surprised?

STEVE SKOJEC reports for OnePeterFive : 'It's a story I've seen described as both a 'shock' and a 'bombshell.' But is it really?

Catholic News Agency (CNA) reported yesterday that Chicago's Cardinal Blase Cupich and the disgraced-into-resignation-but-kept-in-power-anyway Cardinal Donald Wuerl 'collborated extensively on a recently proposed policy for handling abuse allegations against bishops'.

To cut to the quick, the American bishops had a plan that involved an independent commission lead by the laity to look into allegations of abuse against Catholic bishops. The Wuerl/Cupich plan, on the other hand, pushed responsibility for investigations to metropolitan archbishops - a hierarchical structure most Catholics these days don't hear much about. Metropolitans, if accused, would be investigated by senior suffragan bishops.

According to CNA:

'Sources in Rome and Washington, DC told CNA that Wuerl and Cupich worked together on their alternative plan for weeks, and presented it to the Vatican's Congregation for Bishops before the U.S. bishops' conference assembly in Baltimore. Cupich and Wuerl are both members of Congregation for Bishops'.

And while Cupich has certainly taken the lead on this particular dance floor - EWTN's Fr. Raymond de Souza described his abrupt intervention on the first day of the meeting as 'a manifestation of influence and assertion of power' - sources inside the Congregation for Bishops told CNA that the idea was known as 'Wuerl's plan.' The picture that comes into sharper focus upon reviewing the reporting from the annual fall bishops' meeting is that there were a handful of players at the conference who were in the know about what Rome wanted, and then there was everyone else. As Fr. de Souza noted:

'It would stand to reason that, if the Holy See entrusted the Chicago archbishop with the news that the U.S. bishops were to be blocked in their reform proposals, Cardinal Cupich's proposals also originated in the Holy See and are a preview of the path the Holy Father intends to take in February 2019'.

Although many seem taken aback at Wuerl's continued involvement, I admit that I am somewhat mystified by their surprise. We have seen orchestration, manipulation, and the ecclesiastical version of political theater from this Vatican time and time again. Cronyism is, and has been, a driving force behind much that has transpired in this papacy, and Francis is known to reward even his most repellent allies, which explains why Cardinal Godfried Danneels - caught on tape trying to talk a sex abuse victim out of going public - was standing next to him on the loggia the night of his election to the papacy, and was also invited personally by the pope to both family synods. Danneels had helped see to it that Bergoglio became pope. His loyalty was rewarded. It was the same story with McCarrick, until the rug was swept out from under him by the revelation of allegations that he abused minors. which surfaced earlier this year.

Wuerl, like McCarrick before him, is a power player. Unlike McCarrick, Wuerl's connection to the sex abuse scandals is apparently distant enough - despite his significant role in the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report - that he has not fallen completely from grace. Bishop Martin Holley, recently removed from his post at the diocese of Memphis, publicly stated his suspicion that Wuerl, through his position on the Congregation for Bishops, saw to his ouster in retaliation for Holley's earlier opposition to Wuerl being appointed to the Vatican Secretariat of State. True or false, the fact that the accusation is credible is evidence of just how influential Wuerl remains from the shadows beyond the resignation of his see - a see, I would remind readers, he still controls until a replacement is named. That replacement, incidentally, was expected during this week's meetings, but as of yet, no name has been forthcoming. One of the most strongly-rumored frontrunners, Cardinal Joseph 'Nighty Night Baby' Tobin of Newark, New Jersey - who faces a petition drive with thousands of signatures from Catholics opposing his appointment to the Washington Archdiocese - flatly denied to George Neumayr of The American Spectator that he would be taking Wuerl's place in DC. But if not him, then who, and perhaps more importantly, when? Media sources I spoke with who were reporting from the bishops meeting said that no mention was made of a replacement, nor when an announcement could be expected.

Which brings us back to the pre-meeting collusion between Wuerl and Cupich. Though it is not surprising, it is certainly a matter for concern. Many of the faithful believe that the bishops can't be trusted to police themselves on these matters, and that kicking these allegations upstairs is only going to lead to more of the bad 'clericalism' the pope pretends to care so much about. More good old boys clubs. More obscurity. More CYA. Less transparency. More incredibly poor decision making. Exactly the sorts of things prelates of his stripe seem to be in favor of.

One Church leader who has been outspoken on the issue is Bishop Strickland of Tyler Texas, who was also the first to support the Viganò allegations earlier this year. Strickland tweeted about the Wuerl/Cupich story. 'Watch this closely. This crisis needs the strongest lay voice possible.'

The silver lining in this dark cloud is that these clandestine attempts to hold on to power are having an unanticipated effect. The absolute hubris of the bishops most closely aligned with Rome is keeping the issues in play - and the anger that comes from how they have been handled - front and center in the Catholic consciousness. Every time that anger begins to cool a little, they enthusiastically stoke the fire. And if what we're seeing really is a preview of the meeting between the pope and the global heads of bishops' conferences in February, that's not going away any time soon.

Until they give us real solutions, we mustn't let off the pressure. And though they have other sources of income, we should ensure our money goes to worthy causes - namely, causes from which the bishops have nothing to gain.

Update : Crux reports Cupich denies he and Wuerl hatched rival plan before Baltimore

NEW YORK - Cardinal Blase Cupich is firing back against claims that he sought to advance an alternative proposal for bishop accountability ahead of last week's meeting in Baltimore, in place of the plan put forth by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

'The allegation is false,' the archbishop of Chicago told Crux on Sunday, in response to a Catholic News Agency (CNA) report that he and Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington collaborated on a separate proposal.

'At no time prior to the Baltimore meeting did the two of us collaborate in developing, nor even talk about, an alternative plan,' he said.

 

Reckoning with the Baltimore Fiasco

STEPHEN P. WHITE writes for The Catholic Thing : 'The credibility of the American episcopate is at a low ebb. Expectations are high, patience is running short. Amidst the outrage and anger, Catholics are pleading for shepherds who will stand up for them.

Our bishops were painfully aware of this as they convened last week for the annual general assembly of the USCCB in Baltimore. They were hoping to take some concrete steps toward accountability and regaining lost trust. As they gathered for a day of prayer and reflection on Monday, there was a palpable sense among the bishops themselves that something must be done.

Then came the surprise announcement from Cardinal DiNardo: at the insistence of the Holy See, the bishops would not be voting on proposed plans for addressing episcopal malfeasance –specifically, standards of accountability for bishops and lay-led review board for handling allegations against bishops – at least until after Pope Francis meets with the heads of the world’s episcopal conferences in Rome in February.

Taken in isolation, the unexpected delay might be brushed off. But it came on the heels of Pope Francis denying Cardinal DiNardo’s request for an apostolic visitation to investigate the McCarrick affair. And it’s no secret that Rome is furious over what it perceives as an inadequate response from the U.S. bishops to the Viganò testimony, not so much because it’s false but because he showed disloyalty in calling for the pope to resign.

And then there was the announcement that Pope Francis was sending the preacher of the Papal Household to direct a week-long retreat for the American bishops and that Cardinal Cupich would have the honor of hosting the retreat. . .in Chicago. . .in January.

So when Cardinal Cupich appeared completely unsurprised by Monday morning’s announcement that the Holy See was forestalling the USCCB vote – indeed, he had a proposal for Plan B ready and waiting to go while the rest of the conference was still wondering what had just happened – the rest of the bishops took notice.

Noticing a pattern isn’t impugning motives, of course. And, for what it’s worth, Cardinal Cupich’s Plan B was relatively good: Given the urgency of the issue and the costs of delayed action, the bishops should proceed to vote on the action items, but as non-binding resolutions. That way the bishops could signal their collective intention to take definitive action as soon as possible without seeming to oppose Rome’s wishes. At the same time, a non-binding vote could give a clear mandate to Cardinal DiNardo, who will represent the USCCB at February’s meeting in Rome.

Even if one assumes the very best of intentions on the part of Rome, it is hard to see how humiliating the bishops – and whether that was intended or not, that’s what Monday was – helps the American flock. If Rome thinks delaying action by American bishops or weakening conference leadership is in the best interests of American Catholics, then they are gravely mistaken. The last thing American Catholics need right now is to treated as pawns in an ecclesiastical power struggle.

Our bishops, for their part, tried hard to make lemonade. Monday was scheduled to be a day of prayer and reflection, and the bishops had much to ponder. They heard from a representative of the National Advisory Council: hard words for the bishops. They heard from survivors of clerical sexual abuse: shame and sorrow from the bishops. There was genuine resolve among the bishops to do something.

By Monday evening, some bishops were floating the idea of moving into executive session on Tuesday morning. The conference’s executive sessions are closed, and the bishops would be able to speak frankly about what to do next without cameras and reporters watching their every move and dissecting their every word. That didn’t happen.

Instead, the bishops continued with the agenda, more or less as it had been planned, all through Tuesday. They debated the action items even though they knew they wouldn’t be voting on them. And to the bishops’ credit, the discussion was frank and open. There was a genuine spirit of urgency and candor. One seasoned veteran of these gatherings told me he had never seen bishops so willing to speak plainly with one another.

Rome may have stymied the bishops’ plans for a vote on their reform agenda (the vote was never taken) but as more than one bishop quipped, it had accomplished something else: Rome’s curveball had united the conference. By Wednesday, it seemed something might get done after all.

Even more than the Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report, the career of Theodore McCarrick represents the failure of the hierarchy to police itself. He is the reason everyone is asking: “Who knew what and when?” He is the reason for the Viganò testimony. Given that Rome is conducting an investigation into the McCarrick affair, why not convey a message from the united conference asking, not just for the conclusions of that investigation, but for the utmost transparency and the fullest disclosure of documentation possible?

It wasn’t much, but it was something. And something must be done.

So a resolution was drafted and put forward: “Be it resolved that the bishops of the USCCB encourage the Holy Father to release all the documentation that can be released consistent with canon and civil law regarding the misconduct of Archbishop McCarrick.”

Amendments were offered. Objections were raised. Concerns were voiced. In the end, the bishops finally got their chance to show their seriousness about reform. However toothless and symbolic the gesture, this was their moment to act.

Alas, it was not to be.

If Rome is worried about resistance from the American bishops, it shouldn’t be. Our obsequious shepherds voted overwhelmingly against their own resolution, 83-137, out of fear it might appear to be showing up the pope.

As the bishops return to face their flocks, they will have questions to answer: “Did you stand up for your flock? Did you gain for us what we’ve been pleading for?”

“Did you even have the courage to ask for it?”


[Stephen P. White is a fellow in Catholic Studies at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington]

[1P5 / Crux / The Catholic Thing] 2258.10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

What fear smells like: Our US bishops, God’s frozen people

DOUG MAINWARING reports for LifeSiteNews – I was with the bishops in Baltimore for their annual fall assembly. Paralyzing fear was palpable among the prelates. The air was thick with it, permeating the general sessions, lobby, and corridors of the hotel where they met, ate, and slept.

They have proven it was necessary for Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to have exhorted them to confront sex abuse as “courageous shepherds” rather than “frightened sheep.”

What are they afraid of? Just about everything.

Members of the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB) are scared to death of the people back home who hold them accountable for the existence and perpetuation of the clergy sexual abuse crisis. Along with the general public, lay people are incredulous that now-disgraced Archbishop Theodore McCarrick could abuse boys and seminarians for decades while ascending to the cardinalate.

If his brother bishops knew and did nothing, that’s a horrible scandal. And if they didn’t know, it’s a scandal of equal proportions because it reveals these men have no brotherhood at all.

USCCB members are scared of the priests in their own dioceses who now face this crisis on their own. They’ve had to endure painful “listening sessions” with angry and dispirited members of their parishes, some of whom risk losing their faith. In a sense, these priests have been hung out to dry.

These priests, mostly undeservedly, have also come under suspicion by parishioners and the general public who wonder if there might not be more priest-predators hidden under their noses.

Their priests needed them to make headway on dealing with the crisis in order to dispel the widely-shared notion that it continues unabated, out of control. Yet the bishops had to return to their dioceses with the news that they basically accomplished nothing while in Baltimore.

During this past week in Baltimore, access to our U.S. prelates was severely limited. Journalists were warned not to approach bishops one-on-one with our questions at any point during the five days we shared a hotel, restaurants, and elevators with them. Contact could only be made by submitting electronic request forms, most of which were ignored.

We were limited to, “Nice to see you, Your Excellency” as we rode elevators together in the luxurious waterfront Marriott Inner Harbor Hotel.

All that said, here are their three biggest fears.

The bishops fear offending the Holy See. Despite whatever ferver was ignited in many after being informed that the Vatican had pulled the carpet out from under their plans to deal with the sex abuse crisis, the bishops could not even agree on a sentence or two of “encouragement” to Pope Francis, asking him to release the Vatican’s documentation on McCarrick.

The discussion revealed not only disarray and a directionless, wandering in the desert as the Israelites once did. It revealed a lack of manliness.

Very little courage was on display last week, but when it was, it was magnificent. Five courageous prelates stood out: Bishop Stickland of the diocese of Tyler, Texas; Bishop Cozzens of Saint Paul and Minneapolis; Bishop Daly of Spokane, Washington; Bishop McKnight of Jefferson City, Missouri; and Bishop Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois.

 

 

And the reason they stood out is because they acted like men. Catholic men. Vicars of Christ.

The bishops were also paralyzed when it came to discussing homosexuality. Most can’t even utter the “h word,” yet it remained the elephant in the room. Only one – Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco – dared to use the term on the second day of their gathering, but he then concluded his remarks by obscuring the fact that homosexuality stands at the heart of the current mess the Church now faces.

Their omission states volumes about the depth of their fear of the gay lobby within the Catholic Church. By not speaking directly about homosexual priests and prelates who, as grand jury reports and independent studies have revealed, have been responsible for 80 percent of clergy sexual predation over the decades, they give cover to forces within the Church seeking to promote homosexuality as fully normal.

Their fear raises the question: “Why?”

Why do they fear unchaste gays within the ranks of clergy more than they fear abandoning Church teaching and their roles as shepherds?

The bishops fear protesters who seek faithful shepherds
In the days before they gathered in Baltimore, the USCCB contacted the Baltimore Police Department expressing their fear of the protesters who planned to hold a rally on a pier opposite the hotel.

The Baltimore Police Department was told that the bishops' conference was considering changing venues at the last minute.

“Officials at the bishops’ conference informed the Baltimore Police that attendees at the rally were going to disrupt the bishops meeting and ‘throw blood on the walls,’” according to a report by Church Militant.

“The effort by the bishops’ representatives to try and paint faithful Catholics as a physical threat, planning to storm their meeting, throw blood on the walls and Heaven knows what else proves the point of how completely out of touch the U.S. bishops are,” the report continued.

The Silence Stops Now rally was held in a tent-like structure on a pier opposite the bishops’ hotel. A little pedestrian bridge over the water joined the hotel to the site of the rally.

But the bishops feared crossing that bridge to the laity. They were more comfortable remaining detached.

In the end, only one bishop cared enough to leave the hotel to greet the faithful, hear their concerns, and pray with them.

“My flock, back in Tyler, said ‘go and pray with those people,’” explained Bishop Strickland of Tyler, Texas, who spoke at length and then gave his blessing to participants of the Silence Stops Now rally as they filed into the MECU Pavilion.

Strickland’s trek across the bridge provides important symbolism, and not only because he was the only prelate who sought to be connected with laity who had traveled from all over the country to communicate with their bishops.

His action contrasts with other bishops and cardinals who have joined with Father James Martin, SJ in his effort to “Build a Bridge” with the LGBT world, effectively dislodging Church magisterium, aggressively and increasingly brazenly seeking to normalize homosexuality within the Church.

Bishops fear treading bridges connecting them with their faithful block while happily building bridges to sodom.

One more bishop, Richard Stika of Knoxville, Tennessee, had the courage to emerge from the hotel to talk to rally goers after the event. According to the National Catholic Register:

“I believe Satan is behind all of this,” he said. Bishop Stika said Christ gives the Eucharist to feed the faith of his people – and to cut people off from the Eucharist and kill their faith, he is attacking the priesthood.

That the smell of fear was in the air among the bishops is certain. But might this also be the noxious smoke of satan filling our nostrils as it fills the Church?

[Contact Doug at doug.mainwaring@lifesitenews.com].

 

[LSN] 2258.10a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

United States Bishops Conference; How long can they deny the obvious?

GEORGE NEUMAYR writes for the American Spectator:: 'As I walked outside the hotel in Baltimore where the bishops gathered last week for their annual Fall conference, I noticed a couple of bishops taking a smoke break. One was puffing a cigar, the other a cigarette. I overheard one say to the other: 'What do you think of the conference so far?' The other responded: 'Long and tiresome.' ht Inside, the opinion wasn't much better. As I sat at the café near the Lobby, I overheard an adviser to one of the bishops fume: 'There is nothing show for this conference!' He was furious that even the toothless motion at the end of the conference - which merely asked Pope Francis to release McCarrick-related documents as soon as possible - failed. Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who stands to lose the most in credibility from the release of those documents, had dispatched proxies to kill the motion, such as Bishop George Murry of Ohio.

Wuerl served as a puppetmaster at the conference, yanking on this or that string attached to the backs of bishops who owe their elevations to his influence on the Congregation for Bishops. After the conference concluded, I saw Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, the ostensible head of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), sitting alone on a couch in the lobby waiting for his ride to the airport. I asked him why Wuerl and Cardinal Blasé Cupich, both of whom sit on the Congregation for Bishops, the body which officially ordered DiNardo to block any USCCB votes on the abuse scandal, left him in the dark concerning the Vatican's intentions. Unconvincingly, he claimed they hadn't. He said they didn't learn about it until he informed them of the Vatican's directive on the eve of the conference. How, then, did Cupich have a statement prepared in mere moments after DiNardo reported the Vatican's directive to the bishops? DiNardo turned dyspeptic at that question. 'I am not giving interviews,' he suddenly said and petulantly mused on my motives.

DiNardo's claim that none of the bishops knew the pope would put the kibosh on any abuse-related votes looks even less plausible in light of the news reported by the Catholic News Agency that Wuerl and Cupich had hatched a plan weeks ago to ensure that future investigations of depraved bishops remain firmly in the hands of other bishops. It is obvious that Wuerl and Cupich have a direct line to Pope Francis and his inner circle and knew exactly what would transpire at the conference. Cupich's body language was telling; he strode the conference as the Big Man on Campus, with a smile as shiny as his cuff links. He is feeling his oats. But one source connected to prelates not in the Wuerl-Cupich loop said he is hearing from 'livid' bishops who feel increasingly 'alienated' by Francis. 'They don't know who to believe anymore.' he said. 'This is going to catch up with Wuerl and Cupich.'

It appears that the influence of American cardinals under Pope Francis is in direct proportion to their guilt. The guiltiest call the shots while the least guilty dither in the dark. At times the USCCB conference in Baltimore resembled an Old-Timers' Day for derelict bishops. Even Cardinal Roger Mahony, whose shuffling of pedophiles and pederasts has cost Catholics hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements, got his turn at the microphone. Roger the Dodger is back in business under Francis (the pope is dispatching him to ceremonial events). Mahony had gushed at the beginning of this pontificate, 'So long Papal ermine, and fancy lace!'

But plenty of lace is still in evidence at the parties of the Gay Mafia, whose members feel emboldened by this LGBT-friendly pontificate. I continue to receive credible leads about double-living bishops and cardinals from concerned Catholics. One East Coast bishop has been carrying on with one of his former vocations directors; another is said to be a date rapist; and so on.

I wrote a week or so ago about Fr. Patrick Ryan, who left his parish in the New Jersey Diocese of Paterson for 'health reasons.' I was told by a well-placed source that the real reason is that Ryan has been embezzling money from the second collection at his parish and using the dough to sustain his gay lifestyle. When I saw Paterson Bishop Arthur Serratelli in the lobby of the Baltimore Marriott, I asked him about Fr. Ryan. Is he under state investigation for embezzlement? 'I won't answer that question,' he said before scuttling away.

Such scandals are legion in the Church. Yet Cardinal William Levada maintained to me with a straight face as he waited for a cab that it is only Archbishop Viganò's 'opinion' that a homosexual network of priests and bishops exists in the Church. 'I don't know that it exists,' he said. I pointed out to him that a gay pederast was his associate pastor at St. Mary's Cathedral during his tenure as archbishop of San Francisco. That got his attention. 'After Dallas, I told him that he had to leave,' he said weakly, referring to the charter adopted by the bishops in 2002.

Levada's denialism is typical of most of the bishops, though not all. I met outside the hotel Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas. He acknowledged the Gay Mafia crisis in the Church. 'Viganò has evidence for what he is saying,' he said simply.

 

Comment : Fr Mark Goring

 

 

[American Spectator / ] 2258.11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

United States Pope Francis is pleased the way Mexico is helping shuttle illegals into the United States

POPE FRANCIS has praised the attitude of the people of Mexico to the migrant caravan that crosses its territory to the United States, revealed the Mexican ambassador to the Holy See, Jaime del Arenal Fenochio, has revealed.

The pontiff expressed his appreciation for the solidarity of the Mexicans during a meeting with the diplomat that took place at the Apostolic Palace of the Vatican.

'He showed his concern for the migratory caravan that is crossing the country, he told me that he was very pleased with the attitude of the Mexican people towards this phenomenon, acknowledged that he behaved very well, so he told me literally,' the diplomat said in statements to Notimex

He said that the Pope also showed to be 'very well informed' about all the details regarding the migrant caravan and he especially highlighted the role of the Mexican Church in the attention to walkers.

Fulfilling the old papal protocol, the ambassador went on a 'farewell visit' to the Catholic leader , a few days after concluding his mission. During the meeting he was accompanied by his wife.

He maintained that the meeting 'was very cordial' and the Bishop of Rome dedicated a time despite the bulging agenda that had on Saturday, which included an audience with the members of the Blind Apostolic Movement and the delivery of the theology prize 'Joseph Ratzinger - Benedict XVI. '

Among other things, del Arenal assured the Pope that at the end of his service he left the relationship between Mexico and the Holy See 'at a very high level' , reminding him of the fulfillment of an intense program to mark the 25th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between both parties.

He even spoke of the 'jewel in the crown' of that program: a conversation on migration with the presence of the Mexican foreign secretary, Luis Videgaray Caso, and the Vatican secretary of state, Pietro Parolin, which took place at the Casina Pío IV of the Vatican on June 14.

'He also told me that he was asking the Virgin of Guadalupe for the people of Mexico, and on behalf of the Mexican government I gave him an impression, a lithograph of the Guadalupan image that he received with great pleasure,' del Arenal said.

'He guaranteed that I would continue to pray for Mexico, I insisted he pray for our country, for us.' In the end, he emphatically asked me: ' Please pray for me ,' he added. The Pope and the ambassador took the photo of the memory and then they said goodbye.

In the next few days, the diplomatic mission of Jaime del Arenal Fenochio will formally conclude, who presented his credentials to Pope Francis a little over a year ago, back on Friday, September 1, 2017.

Born in Mexico City on August 8, 1953, the diplomat is married and has three daughters. He has a degree in law from the Escuela Libre de Derecho , a master's degree and a doctorate in law from the University of Navarra (Spain, 1998).

Among other things, he has been a full-time professor and researcher at the Escuela Libre de Derecho (1978-2007), he also taught courses in that specialty at the Universidad Panamericana (1982-1985, 1989-2007) and worked as a research associate in the University Studies Center of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (1985-1989).

He served as director of the Institute of Mexican Culture in Spain and cultural advisor to the Embassy of Mexico in Madrid (2007-2013), as well as Mexican ambassador to Ecuador (2013-2017), before his appointment as representative to the Holy See.

For his part, the bishop of Saltillo, Raúl Vera , asks to receive the caravan of migrants 'with an open heart'. 'The caravan of migrants that crosses the country to the United States must be received with an open heart,' said the bishop of Saltillo, Raul Vera.

'We already have the Casa del Migrante full , every day with more than 150 people, the migrants are the new messengers of peace, of justice, of the real world that we have to have,' said the head of the Catholic Church in the city, after questioning him about the arrival of Hondurans in the northern zone of Mexico.

He added that migrants are fleeing from 'slave' jobs and the violence that is generated thanks to social inequality, 'for what they deserve to be received with an open heart,' he added.

[religiodigital] 2258.12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

United States The Catholic abuse crisis

FR. MARK GORING, CC, and Dr Taylor Marshall discuss the Catholic abuse crisis rocking the Catholic Church in the United States of America. They talk about how they each came to realize that the Church was in crisis after the news about Cardinal McCarrick and the letters of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano. They discuss the USCCB meeting and how we must fast and pray for true renewal

 

 

 

[taylormarshall] 2258.13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

International Michael Voris

Vade, propheta ad populum meum '. . flicking his whip at the Bishops, cutting them in tender places, throwing stones at Sacred Congregations, and discharging pea shooters at Cardinals' (Newman).

 

 

[CMTV] 2258.14

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

 

International gloria.tv.news

 

[gloria.tv] 2258.15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

International Some headlines of the week

 

Australia: Three plotted jihad massacre in crowded area, 'to kill a maximum amount of people'

Indonesia : Dozens of mosques attended by government workers preach jihad and attacks on non-Muslims

Pakistan : House-to-house hunt to find and kill Asia Bibi and her family

[CF News] 2258.16

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

International The World Over with Raymond Arroyo

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

[EWTN] 2258.17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Globe N A C F

 

Newman

 

Newman

 

Newman's Grammar of Assent and classical Christian education

LOUIS MARKOS writes for The Cardinal Newman Society: 'I have had the privilege over the last decade to speak for classical Christian schools across the country. Though nearly all of these schools share my own evangelical Protestant faith, they have all shown themselves to be open to learning from the great mother who gave birth to the Christian university during the Middle Ages: the Roman Catholic Church.

It is no exaggeration to say that classical Christian education represents a rebirth of true Jesuit education, but with a more Protestant inflection. That is why classical Christian schools, despite their often strong, reformed Calvinist orientation, do not hesitate to learn from Augustine and Boethius, Aquinas and Dante, Erasmus and Josef Pieper-not to mention Anglo-Catholics like C.S. Lewis, Dorothy Sayers, T.S. Eliot, and Catholic converts like G.K. Chesterton, Father Richard John Neuhaus, Peter Kreeft, and, above all, Cardinal John Henry Newman.

Indeed, any shortlist of books that offers a full and integrated vision of what a true classical Christian curriculum would look like must include Newman's Idea of a University. In that seminal book's nine discourses, Newman laid down, for all time, principles for building a course of study that unites the twin legacies of Athens and Jerusalem. But another Newman book, rarely read or consulted today, offers equally deep insights, not into curriculum building, but into how teachers can best minister to the hearts, souls, and minds of their students.

I suggest five principles that classical Christian teachers-whether they be Protestant or Catholic-can learn from Newman's An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent (1870).

I

Newman distinguishes between notional propositions (that are general and abstract) and real propositions (that are specific, concrete, and individual). He privileges the latter as being more vivid and forceful and as having the power to bring facts home to us and thus gain our assent. It is they which impress themselves upon our imagination and, by so doing, bring change to both the individual and society.

A schoolboy who studies only notional propositions may transform that knowledge into real assent if he takes up a trade for which he has a knack and into which he can enter. In a similar way, 'great truths, practical or ethical, float on the surface of society' until some galvanizing event brings them to life within the hearts of citizens. Such was the case with the slave trade's evils, which were understood in a notional sense but did not affect the imaginations of the British until Wilberforce made them concrete and personal. Only then, once the real assent of the British was gained, was the slave trade abolished.

One of the Holy Spirit's roles is to take Bible verses that seem only to be general and abstract and make them come vividly alive within our minds and hearts. Just so, the ideal classical Christian teacher finds ways to take his discipline's knowledge and make it come alive in the minds and hearts of his students: to transform it from a series of notional inferences to real assent.

In his 'A Defense of Poetry,' British Romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley argues that the modern world has more raw facts and abstract theories than it knows what to do with. Our technological age does not need more dispensers of knowledge; it needs poets who can synthesize and humanize that knowledge so that it can be absorbed and used by individuals.

Like Shelley's poets, classical Christian teachers need to move away from merely stuffing their charges with knowledge to impressing upon their imaginations the meaning of that knowledge and making that meaning vivid, intense, and personal.

II

Newman makes it clear that although real assent etches vivid impressions upon our imagination, it is not utilitarian: 'Strictly speaking, it is not imagination that causes action; but hope and fear, likes and dislikes, appetite, passion, affection, the stirrings of selfishness and self-love. What imagination does for us is to find a means of stimulating those motive powers; and it does so by providing a supply of objects strong enough to stimulate them.' That is to say, while assent is not practical in the narrow sense of the word, it lays a foundation within our psyche that predisposes and impels us to actions that are good and noble.

Real assent for Newman is synonymous with belief, and belief concerns itself not with abstract notions that float in the brain but concrete images that excite the mind. Belief 'has for its objects not only directly what is true, but inclusively what is beautiful, useful, admirable, heroic; objects which kindle devotion, rouse the passions, and attach the affections; and thus it leads the way to actions of every kind, to the establishment of principles, and the formation of character.'

Like assent/belief, a classical Christian education must not be viewed in narrow utilitarian terms. Teachers should envision themselves not as tutors imparting a skill but as artists who embody abstract notions in tangible images, poets who incarnate universal ideas in concrete words, and prophets who bring before the spiritual and physical eyes and ears of their students a vision of the good, the true, and the beautiful that is individual, urgent, and transformative.

A classical Christian school should strive to instill principles and establish character, but it can best do so through the medium of real assent, by charging the imagination with knowledge made flesh.

III

'The heart,' writes Newman, 'is commonly reached, not through the reason, but through the imagination, by means of direct impressions, by the testimony of facts and events, by history, by description.' This is so because 'man is not a reasoning animal; he is a seeing, feeling, contemplating, acting animal. He is influenced by what is direct and precise.'

Ultimately, we act not on the basis of knowledge but of faith; that is why the leaders we follow for good or ill, the great lawgivers who bind nations together, are those who not only possess real assent but can inspire it in others. Christianity is not a collection of abstract theories and doctrines but God in Christ working directly and supernaturally in time-space history.

A soldier stays at his post not because he works out abstractly in his head Kant's categorical imperative but because of a patriotic folk song or proverb he learned in his youth. C.S. Lewis expresses it best in The Abolition of Man: 'I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite skeptical about ethics, but bred to believe that a 'gentleman does not cheat,' than against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers.'

The job of the classical Christian teacher is to facilitate the breeding of such beliefs by first experiencing the subject matter of his discipline viscerally ('in the blood and along the heart,' to paraphrase Wordsworth), and then passing that experience on-intellectually, emotionally, spiritually-to his students.

IV

We all have a conscience, writes Newman, which manifests itself as a 'voice, imperative and constraining' that exerts an 'intimate bearing on our affections and emotions.' No other mental faculty acts on us in this manner: neither reason nor common sense nor taste can impress upon our imaginations and feelings both 'self-reproach, poignant shame, haunting remorse, [and] chill dismay,' and 'self-approval, inward peace, [and] lightness of heart.'

From the conscience-which Lewis links to the Tao, the universal moral code-comes our first perceptions of the image of God: an image that does not rest on reason or inference but which can be subsequently expanded and deepened 'by means of education, social intercourse, experience, and literature.'

Plato (philosophically) and Wordsworth (poetically) suggested that our mature growth and education rest on recollections and intimations of a time when our soul pre-existed in God-that each of us is not born as a blank slate (tabula rasa), but arrives on earth 'trailing clouds of glory.' Newman's more orthodox discussion of the conscience should inspire classical Christian teachers not only to put in but draw out from their students their essential, in-born capacity and yearning for a type of knowledge that is real, personal, and intimate.

V

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle speaks of a practical wisdom (phronesis) that is concerned with particulars learned through experience. Newman calls this the illative sense, the mental faculty through which we achieve real assent, but he gives it broader scope than Aristotle, linking it to truth and belief.

The illative sense deals not in generalizations or hypotheticals but is 'seated in the mind of the individual, who is thus his own law, his own teacher, and his own judge in those special cases of duty which are personal to him.' The basic rules of conduct are universal, but the illative sense makes them imperative for a single individual at a specific time.

As teachers, we must direct our students toward transcendent truths while also training them to use their illative sense to make those truths personal. We must not teach 'to thine own self be true' or 'think for yourself;' rather, we must help them forge connections between universal standards and personal decisions and inspire them to incarnate those standards in and through their particular gifting.

[CNS] 2258.18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Media

 

News

 

NBC News attacks LifeSiteNews, Church Militant, the Lepanto Institute as 'alt-right'

DOUG MAINWARING reports for LifeSiteNew - After consulting with mostly pro-homosexual fringe groups and individuals seeking to normalize homosexuality within the Catholic Church, NBC News declared LifeSiteNews (Ed. A backbone resourse of CF NEWS) to be 'alt-right.'

In an article titled 'How the Catholic 'alt-right' aims to purge LGBTQ members from the church,' NBC rendered the same judgement about Church Militant and the Lepanto Institute, claiming all three are 'ratcheting up the rhetoric with personal attacks on supporters of gay Catholics.'

NBC interprets defending Church teaching to be both 'ultra-conservative' and 'anti-gay.'

NBC sees our reporting on the bombshell Pennsylvania grand jury report exposing decades of clerical sexual abuse consisting mostly of priests preying on teen boys as 'weaponizing' the report to 'scapegoat homosexuals.'

'I call them the 'Catholic alt-right,'' Fordham University theologian Jason Steidl told NBC News. 'We haven't seen anything like this before. I think they are part of a bigger cultural movement. These people have hitched their wagons to Trump's presidency, to his tactics.'

Father James Martin, SJ, who is the Church's chief apostle of the normalization of homosxuality and transgenderism, told NBC, 'They inject fear, hatred and homophobia into religious discourse.'

NBC did not mention if their reporters asked whether Fr. Martin regularly injects lies, fear, hatred, and heterodoxy into religious discourse.

'They use the same tactics as the political alt-right: lies, personal vilification and demonization of minority groups,' continued the Jesuit, apparently oblivious to the fact that he had just done so himself.

Martin also accidently offered praise for LifeSiteNews, pointing out, 'Some bishops promote sites like LifeSite.'

'I know some people read them in Rome,' he added.

Another pro-gay activist told NBC that groups such as LifeSiteNews have been emboldened by President Trump, not recognizing that it is authentic Church teaching and the fullness of the Gospel which primarily inspire Catholics, not occupants of the oval office.

NBC cited New Ways Ministry, a dissident anti-Catholic group repeatedly banned from speaking in Catholic dioceses, asserting that 'gay' Church employees have lost their jobs due to stories published by LifeSiteNews and others. One of the Church workers the article cites as blaming his resignation on Catholic news sites actually gave an interview in 2015 to the Wall Street Journal about his open homosexuality and his bishop's knowledge of it, something the NBC article didn't mention.

NBC also failed to mention that New Ways Ministry was condemned in 2010 by then-president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, and in 2011 by Washington, D.C. Cardinal Donald Wuerl, then-chairman of the USCCB Committee on Doctrine.

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

Bishop Christopher Coyne of the Diocese of Burlington, Vermont, who served as USCCB spokesperson throughout the group's annual fall assembly in Baltimore last week, told NBC:

'The promotion and defense of the faith should invite an encounter with the merciful love of Christ and contribute to a more civil and peaceful dialogue in our church and society'.

Bishop Coyne's statement fails to consider the authentic 'love of Christ' which entails not just the easy parts of the Gospel, but the 'hard parts,' as Cardinal Robert Sarah has said. The Gospel makes huge demands on the life of the believer, as witnessed in the Cross of Christ.

The Church teaches 'things in the Catechism about homosexuality that some members of the clergy choose not to quote, including the clear warning: 'under no circumstances can [homosexual acts] be approved' (CCC 2357),' Sarah wrote in the forward to the book Why I Don't Call Myself Gay.

'The respect and sensitivity to which the Catechism rightly calls us does not give us permission to deprive men and women who experience SSA (same-sex attraction) of the fullness of the Gospel,' continued Cardinal Sarah, prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. 'To omit the 'hard sayings' of Christ and his Church is not charity.'

Bishop Coyne continued, suggesting that LifeSiteNews and others are guilty of 'digital stoning,' ironically casting a couple of stones himself against what are deemed to be conservative forces within the Church.

'I urge my brothers and sisters to exercise extreme caution before giving credence to anyone who instigates shameful, digital stoning as a way to defend the Church. Catholic participation in the public square should be marked by both fidelity to the Gospel and to charity toward all our fellow citizens'.

NBC cited the 2004 John Jay Report, commissioned by the USSCB in the aftermath of revelations of priest predation in the Archdiocese of Boston, as proof that there is 'no connection between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of children by priests.'

The John Jay Report revealed that