Thursday, May 29, 2014

EXCERPTS FROM NewChristorChaos

Thursday, MAY 29, 2014 Excerpts from NewChristorChaos.com Please go to the site www.newchristorchaos.com for the full article from Dr Droleskey May 29, 2014, the Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ: On the Road to Gehenna with Jorge, Abe and Omar, part four (the end, at last), is the conclusion of my four-part series covering the antipapal visit to the Holy Land that ended three days ago now, that is, on Monday, May 26, 2014, the Feast of Saint Philip Neri and the Commemoration of Pope Saint Eleutherius. There are a few loose ends found at the beginning of this concluding commentary concerning the reaction of some Zionists to Jorge’s recent trip found. Most of the commentary, however, is given over to “maturation” of the “vision” of dogmatic “evolution” that Giovanni Eugenio Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick had in mind when he genuflected before Athenagoras I on January 5, 1964, in Jerusalem. Remember, these sorts of articles are designed to provide information for the long term, meaning that material is included in them that has been used in other articles previously. This is done out of the awareness that readers forget things occasionally and that that are always new readers who have not seen the cited sources that might be familiar to attentive readers blessed with retentive memories. Each of these series could be put into a stand-alone book or pamphlet, which is something I may try to do in the month of June to provide readers with a means of having a resource available without having to search this site. Stay tuned. This is, of course, the Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s forty days’ of teaching the Apostles after his glorious Resurrection from the dead on Easter Sunday culminated this very day, Ascension Thursday, as He instructed the Eleven as follows before going up into Heaven from Mount Olivet at whose foot He had suffered His Agony in the Garden six weeks before as Saints Peter, James and John slumbered: And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Matthew 28: 16-20.) There is no “expiration” date on this command. Indeed, the commentary in the Bishop Richard Challoner version of the Douay-Rheims Bible explains that the command is in force until Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ comes in glory on the Last Day to judge the living and the dead and that His Church could never go astray, meaning, of course, that it is impossible for the Catholic Church to give any impression at all that God is pleased with false religions such as Mohammedanism and Talmudic Judaism, which is what Jorge Mario Begoglio did consistently throughout his pilgrimage to Jordan and Israel that ended three days ago now: “All power”… See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14. (Bishop Richard Challoner Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew.) The Catholic Church can never go astray. She is infallible. She does not give us any “new ecclesiology” or “hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity” to deconstruct the meaning of dogmatic truth, thus attacking the essence of the nature of God Himself, or false ecumenism. Her pastors do not esteem the symbols and values and places of false religions and they do not engage in “inter-religious” “prayer” services. Her pastors do not teach that false religions have a “right” from God to propagate their false beliefs publicly and they do not praise those false beliefs for being “able” to “contribute” to the building of a “better” world. Pastors of the Catholic Church insist always and at all times that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order with no equivocation, uncertainty, ambiguity or obscurity of any kind. As Pope Pius XI noted in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, there is need to “strain” to “find” Catholicism in the pronouncements made by Holy Mother Church: For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.) How did Jorge Mario Bergoglio protect the integrity of doctrine during his trip to Jordan and Israel? If you don’t know answer to that question after reading this four-part series, you really don’t want to have it answered for you. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Ascended into Heaven this day. We must ascend with Him in our thoughts and prayers at all times as we refuse to have our minds and hearts poisoned by the words and the deeds of the false shepherds of the counterfeit church of conciliarism who dare to blaspheme God so regularly and so openly and/or who refuse to open their mouths in defense of the honor and majesty and glory of God when He is so blasphemed and offended. [6] They therefore who were come together, asked him, saying: Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? [7] But he said to them: It is not for you to know the times or moments, which the Father hath put in his own power: [8] But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth. [9] And when he had said these things, while they looked on, he was raised up: and a cloud received him out of their sight. [10] And while they were beholding him going up to heaven, behold two men stood by them in white garments. [11] Who also said: Ye men of Galilee, why stand you looking up to heaven? This Jesus who is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come, as you have seen him going into heaven. [12] Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount that is called Olivet, which is nigh Jerusalem, within a sabbath day’ s journey. [13] And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James. [14] All these were persevering with one mind in prayer with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. (Acts 1: 6-14.) Yes, we can’t stand around all day long looking into the sky. There is work for us to do before Our Lord comes for us at the moment of our own Particular Judgments, which can come at any hour and on any day, and at the end of the world to judge the living and the dead. The work that we have to do is to sanctify and to save our immortal souls as members of the Catholic Church, work that requires us to be attentive to the graces that were won for us on the wood of the Holy Cross by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord Saviour Jesus Christ’s Most Precious Blood and the flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. And to cooperate with the graces that Our Lady sends we must be fortified in prayer, which is one of the reasons that we must keep most assiduously the first Novena in the history of the Church, the Novena to God the Holy Ghost. Our Lady was separated from her Divine Son when He Ascended to Heaven. She was united to Him, however, by means of her reception of His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in Holy Communion. She was united to the Apostles and the others who prayed in the same Upper Room where He had instituted the Holy Priesthood and the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday. She is united to us. She is our Blessed Mother. We need to ask her for all the graces that we need to save and to sanctify our souls as we eschew worldliness, which is the theme of today’s slightly revised article, and as we refuse to participate in the fraud of a false religion, conciliarism, that is replete with daily outrages given to her Divine Son, starting with the outrage that is the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service, and as we make much reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves Christ the King through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. A blessed Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to you all!

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

ALL TRADITIONAL CATECHISTS BELIEVE THE SAME ABOUT VATICAN COUNCIL ii

e Hijacking of St. John XXIII’s Ecumenical Council This is a Guest Post By David Martin When the announcement was made on September 30, 2013, that Pope John XXIII was going to be canonized, glaring eyebrows went up in the Traditionalist camp. After all, saints are usually martyr figures that are persecuted for their uncompromising fidelity to the Faith, and Pope John is generally regarded as the flaming modernist who compromised the Church by convoking the Second Vatican Council on October 11, 1962. There is no disputing the disaster wrought by Vatican II and how it set into motion an insidious departure from tradition that has left the Holy City “half in ruins.” Even as we report on the canonization of John XXIII, the gale force of “his” conciliar tempest continues to uproot the Faith, blow apart revered Catholic practices, topple the Church's edifice, and spread doctrinal debris throughout the Church. So why the tribute? Should his “aggiornamento” be rewarded this way? Pope John deserves tribute, but it’s important that people see his canonization in the right light and that they have the inside scoop on his true intentions for Vatican II, otherwise it will appear that heresy and modernism are being glorified. For he is known as the founding father of Vatican II, which is why modernists are now beaming over the prospect of his canonization, because their hope is to see Vatican II “canonized.” But the good Lord has His own reasons for glorifying His servant John, as we will see shortly. Good Intentions The fact is that Vatican II was started with the best of resolves. Pope John’s purpose for convening the Council was not to change the Church but to restate Holy Tradition, evidenced in his opening speech on October 11, 1962: “The major interest of the Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred heritage of Christian truth be safeguarded and expounded with greater efficacy.” (John XXIII) Without diluting the Faith, the pope was simply trying to adopt a more effective means of projecting the orthodox Faith to the modern world. His “update” did not include the watering down of doctrine or the alteration of liturgy, but consisted in utilizing the media and state-of-the-art technology to better project the light of tradition to a spiritually darkened world. After all, there were dangers threatening the Faith at that time, especially the evils of evolution and abortion. Apostasy was forthcoming and man was already on the eve of forgetting his Maker, so the pope was making a special effort to dispel the ensuing darkness and uphold the orthodox Faith “with greater efficacy.” To this end he and his best men worked arduously for almost three years to draft up the outline for the Second Vatican Council, known as the 72 schemas or schemata. According to the most conservative thinkers of Rome, the preparatory schemata were orthodox and worthy of use, but modernists were enraged that the Holy Father had put together the preparatory outline without conferring with them beforehand. Hence a decision was made before the Council to block Pope John’s plan for Vatican II. Council Hijacked According to Michael Davies and many others, a number of "suspect theologians" hijacked the opening session of the Council by seizing control of its drafting commissions, thus enabling them to scrap Pope John's plan and draft a new agenda of their own. A key instigator of the pack was Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx of the Netherlands, a known heretic who denied the historicity of the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, and the Eucharist (Transubstantiation), and who had drafted and disseminated a 480-page critique aimed at rallying the progressive “Rhine bishops” to reject the original plan for Vatican II. The design of these progressivists was to revive Luther’s Reformation under the pretext of a renewal, something that Schillebeeckx openly confessed to. Pope Benedict himself pointed out in 2013 how a “virtual council” had risen up to usurp the “real Council” at Vatican II, and lamented how “it created so many disasters, so many problems, so much suffering: seminaries closed, convents closed, banal liturgy.” (Benedict XVI, addressing the parish churches of Rome, February 14, 2013) This echoes the words of Paul VI who stated that the good efforts at Vatican II were hampered by “the devil” who came along “to suffocate the fruits of the Ecumenical Council.” (June 29, 1972) Hence it is worth recounting the opening session so that we have a clearer perspective of what really took place at the Second Vatican Council. At the center of the coup to overthrow the Council were Cardinals Alfrink, Frings, and Lienart of the Rhine Alliance. A crucial vote was to be taken to determine the members of the conciliar drafting commissions when Cardinal Lienart, a 30th degree Freemason, seized the microphone during a speech and demanded that the slate of 168 candidates be discarded and that a new slate of candidates be drawn up. His uncanny gesture was heeded by the Council and the election was postponed. Lienart’s action deflected the course of the Council and made history, and was hailed a victory in the press. The date was October 13, 1962, the 45th Anniversary of Our Lady’s last apparition at Fatima. (Fr. Ralph Wiltgen, the Rhine Flows into the Tiber) In his February 14, 2013, address to the clergy of Rome, Pope Benedict brilliantly recounts this incident at Vatican II: “On the programme for this first day were the elections of the Commissions, and lists of names had been prepared, in what was intended to be an impartial manner, and these lists were put to the vote. But right away the Fathers said: 'No, we do not simply want to vote for pre-prepared lists. We are the subject.' Then, it was necessary to postpone the elections, because the Fathers themselves…wanted to prepare the lists themselves. And so it was. Cardinal Liénart of Lille and Cardinal Frings of Cologne had said publicly: no, not this way. We want to make our own lists and elect our own candidates." The above statement is of no small significance. Herein Benedict confesses that Lienart and his clique rejected the list of candidates that John XXIII had rightfully approved in an “impartial manner,” so that they in turn could create their own list and elect their own candidates in a partial manner. And that’s exactly what they did! When the "election" resumed, a number of radical theologians were then appointed to chair the commissions, including Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, de Lubac, Schillebeeckx and others whose writings had been blacklisted under Pius XII. The liberals now occupied nearly 60% of the seats, giving them the needed power to steer the Council in their direction. Thereupon they proceeded to trash the pope’s carefully prepared agenda that had taken nearly three years to formulate. Through deceitful promises and skillful use of the media, the Council approved their plan for a new Mass on December 7, 1962, known as the “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” and this became the hub of the liturgical reform that was to set the Church on a new revolutionary course of change. The Constitution was principally the work of the infamous Annibale Bugnini whom the pope had earlier removed from two posts because of sinister activity. It in fact was the outgrowth of the one preparatory schema, drafted by Bugnini, which Vatican liberals had spared because of its designs for a new Mass. Note that Bugnini, and not the pope, was the author of the New Mass. What is mind boggling is the dictatorial force wherewith the conciliar elite took the law into their own hands and were able to junk Pope John’s outline for Vatican II without a rebuttal. With the procedural rules laid down by the pope a mere one-third vote was needed to get the schemata passed, which in fact did pass by a 40% vote. But the Rhine fathers stirred up a ruckus and insisted that this minority vote not be honored in favor of the 60% vote against the schemata, even telling the pope, “This is inadmissible!” They abhorred the orthodoxy of the preparatory outline with its strict formulations and resented the idea of having it imposed upon them by a pope who “clung to the old absolute traditions.” The pope, fearing a tumult, backed down and consented to let the Rhine fathers have their way against game rules. Though he had planned it differently, his strength failed him at this point, thus allowing the pirates of reform to wrest the Council from his hands. Hence the most meticulous and painstaking preparation ever undertaken for any council of Church history was suddenly dumped to the glee of this Council confederacy. Only the liturgical schema remained. We gather that Cardinal Tisserant, the key draftsman of the 1962 Moscow-Vatican Treaty who presided at the opening session, was at the center of this coup to usurp the Vatican Council. According to Jean Guitton, the famous French academic, Tisserant had showed him a painting of himself and six others, and told him, “This picture is historic, or rather, symbolic. It shows the meeting we had before the opening of the Council when we decided to block the first session by refusing to accept the tyrannical rules laid down by John XXIII.” (Vatican II in the Dock, 2003) This story of what happened at Vatican II is well documented and has been told in great depth by the most qualified witnesses, including Father Ralph Wiltgen, Monsignor Bandas, Michael Davies, Cardinal Heenan and many others. Archbishop Lefebvre who was on the Central Preparatory Committee for checking and overseeing all the Council documents had this to say: “From the very first days, the Council was besieged by the progressive forces. We experienced it, felt it…We had the impression that something abnormal was happening and this impression was rapidly confirmed; fifteen days after the opening session not one of the seventy-two schemas remained. All had been sent back, rejected, thrown into the waste-paper basket…The immense work that had been found accomplished was scrapped and the assembly found itself empty-handed, with nothing ready. What chairman of a board meeting, however small the company, would agree to carry on without an agenda and without documents? Yet that is how the Council commenced.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Open Letter to Confused Catholics, 1986) And this is how the modern reform was born. Pope John’s agenda for Vatican II would never resurrect from that point, but would remain buried even to this day. The rebellious “virtual council” would now proceed to put together the Vatican II we know today, including its sixteen documents and its reform of liturgy. The documents would contain elements of orthodoxy here and there, but this would only be done for cosmetic purposes. Under the pretext of a “restoration” or “reform,” the documents would apologize for tradition and attempt to unite the Catholic Church with other world religions on secular terms. That is to say, the documents themselves, and not any misinterpretation thereof, would generate the problems ahead since they would largely be penned by Peter’s enemies, and not his friends. “By their fruits you shall know them.” (Mt. 7:20) Pope John XXIII’s reluctance in releasing the Third Secret of Fatima in 1960 undoubtedly caused him unspeakable sorrow for the rest of his life, for he was now witnessing the tragic fulfillment of the Fatima Secret. The very forces of hell marched into Rome to take the Holy City captive, which was accomplished through the conciliar apparatus provided them by the rebellious Rhine fathers and their periti. This is not to say that the gates of hell had fully prevailed against the Church, but that we had arrived at that point in history when the Church would be handed over to the Gentiles, at which time “they shall tread the holy city under foot two and forty months.” (Apocalypse 11:2) It is said that the pope was struck to the heart, and in great pain, so that the cancer he had earlier contracted was greatly augmented now, leaving him only eight months to live. On his deathbed he cried out: “Stop the Council, Stop the Council,” but his “trusty” aides made sure that this didn’t circulate to the other cardinals. The Council was already too well advanced, the liberals had put too much stock in their revolution, so they weren’t about to give up their fun at this point. Fissure Created Pope John certainly made some mistakes, he wasn’t perfect. Perhaps the biggest mistake he made was to convoke the Second Vatican Council, since it provided an opening for the hidden enemy to infiltrate the Church. According to Pope Paul VI, the Council of Vatican II was that “fissure” through which “the smoke of satan entered into the temple of God.” (June 29, 1972) Even the future Pope Paul was alarmed when he learned in January 1959 that Pope John had announced the upcoming Council, to which he responded: “This holy old boy doesn’t realize what a hornet’s nest he’s stirring up!” Clearly he didn’t realize it. Nay, the calling of Vatican II wasn’t too smart, but was a huge blunder which showed poor judgment and terrible foresight. We might even say the pope was playing Russian roulette with the Church, literally. Were not the representatives of the Soviet Union present at Vatican II with a plan to get their clenched fist agenda implemented in a spiritual way with “human rights” and the “empowerment of the laity?” Maybe Pope John should have heeded those prophets that had been forecasting disaster. Popes Pius X, XI, and XII had all refrained from calling a council, fearing it would hatch the very problems we have today. But the pope somehow believed it was now time for a Council. However we have to remember that saints are not canonized for their smarts, talents, or administrative skills, but for their charity. And this, Pope John was loaded with. He was big hearted and wanted to extend the benevolence of God to all, and somehow was convinced that a united effort at the Vatican Council would avert the impending doom that hung over the world. Unfortunately his “virtuous fault” of refusing to see the evil in his fellow man blinded him to the reality of infiltrated Judases, and allowed these enemies to countermand and overrun him. Pope John has sometimes been criticized for quietly lifting the ban on some of these suspect theologians whose activities were formerly restricted by Pius XII, but conservatives have faltered in not recognizing his good intentions. The traditional Monsignor Rudolph Bandas who was one of the brilliant and outstanding periti at Vatican II understood clearly how John XXIII was being overrun and abused, and had this to say: “No doubt good Pope John thought that these suspect theologians would rectify their ideas and perform a genuine service to the Church. But exactly the opposite happened. Supported by certain Rhine Council fathers, and often acting in a manner positively boorish, they turned around and exclaimed: ‘Behold, we are named experts, our ideas stand approved.”’ Pope John’s vision of Vatican II was truly noble and well intending, though he was naïve. This excerpt from his opening speech nicely reflects his pastoral spirit: “The great desire, therefore, of the Catholic Church in raising aloft at this Council the torch of truth, is to show herself to the world as the loving mother of all mankind; gentle, patient, and full of tenderness and sympathy for her separated children.” Unfortunately this kind of talk made Vatican II progressives sick. The good pope didn’t realize he was going to get clobbered for this. The fact is that Pope John XXIII was viciously stabbed in the back by those he trusted. When they wanted their way with him they would crouch and kiss his ring, and in the next hour or minute they were plotting on how they would take Vatican II away from him. For instance Monsignor Bugnini, a notorious Freemason and sweet-talker, assured the pope that he was most committed to fostering a deepened love and appreciation for the liturgy. So the pope blindly entrusted to him the task of heading the new Preparatory Commission on the Liturgy that was established on June 6, 1960, believing that a deepened love for the old Mass would result from this. But what he failed to realize is that Bugnini and his cohorts were secretly at work drafting up a new Mass for the Church which they were determined to get passed at Vatican II. And it did pass with flying colors! The Bugnini Schema superseded all the other schemas and became the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy on December 7, 1962. (Later called Sacrosanctum Concilium) This was the document that directly led to the implementation of the New Mass in the vernacular. Yet the pope in 1960 had no idea what Bugnini and his men were cooking up for the Council. The conservative Cardinal Heenan of Westminster even says in his autobiography that “Pope John did not suspect what was being planned by the liturgical experts.” If it wasn’t bad enough that the good pope had to endure spiritual martyrdom from the devil and his agents, let us take a look at his actual death on June 3, 1963. The unofficial word is that Pope John XXIII was murdered. For when he began crying out from his deathbed to “Stop the Council,” his death suddenly ensued. Though he was ill with terminal cancer, he wasn’t supposed to die quite so soon. As they saw it, it was urgent that his outcry be silenced, so they gave him a little extra sedative to calm his nerves. We have to remember that euthanasia didn’t start with Obamacare, but existed in the hospitals even back then. Needless to say, John XXIII was persecuted and laid low. The allegations from the Sedevacantist camp that he was a Freemason display ignorance and have contributed to his martyrdom of spirit. It was the Freemasons that generated the revolt at Vatican II, but a key part of their plan was to hide and shift the blame onto the pope in order to sell their revolution and smear the pope’s reputation. Pseudo traditionalists by their detraction have effectively and unknowingly assisted the Masonic plan to discredit the papacy in these latter times. The Pope’s own Words If nothing else convinces us of Pope John’s innocence, we turn to his own words: “I repeat once more that what matters most in this life is: our blessed Jesus Christ, his holy Church, his Gospel, and in the Gospel above all else the Our Father according to the mind and heart of Jesus, and the truth and goodness of his Gospel, goodness, which must be meek and kind, hardworking and patient, unconquerable and victorious.” This angelic philosophy echoes what the saints of history have said concerning our purpose in life. Sanctity means being Christ centered with a burning aspiration to bring all men to the love and knowledge of God. With this very aspiration the pope in his opening speech at Vatican II expressed the intentions of the Council: “Its intention is to give to the world the whole of that doctrine which, notwithstanding every difficulty and contradiction, has become the common heritage of mankind—to transmit it in all its purity, undiluted, undistorted. It is a treasure of incalculable worth, not indeed coveted by all, but available to all men of good will.” Are these the words of a Freemason, a Judas, a progressivist? Or are these rather the words of a saint? Would that the pope and bishops of today would speak this way! The Church’s mission for 2000 years has been precisely to bring this deposit of Faith to mankind so that, if it were possible, the entire earth would be enkindled with its flame. The Traditional Roman Faith is that sacred legacy which God originally intended as “the common heritage of mankind,” though the Reformation did much to destroy this ecclesial unity, as did its reemergence at Vatican II. What is needed today is a true renewal of Catholic tradition, so that the Mystical Body can once again be whole as in former times, with unity and soundness. What is needed is what John XXIII originally prescribed in his opening speech at Vatican II: “…that this doctrine shall be more widely known, more deeply understood, and more penetrating in its effects on men’s moral lives. What is needed is that this certain and immutable doctrine, to which the faithful owe obedience, be studied afresh.” As John XXIII is raised to the altars of Holy Mother the Church this April 27, 2014, let us be encouraged to assume a new perspective of holy pontiff whereby we cease from blaming him for all the problems that have ravaged the Church since Vatican II. He made some mistakes which he had to pay dearly for. May he now be rewarded for all the good he proposed and all the evil he endured. And especially, may we be resolved to assist him and his Maker in the cause of restoring the Holy Roman Catholic Church to its former glory. St. John XXIII, pray for us! About the Author Matthew Matthew lives in the Greater Chicago Area. Matthew's personal interests include seeking a preservation of traditional Catholicism as practiced before the Second Vatican Council. He attends the Tridentine Latin Mass offered by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), and various other orders and priests. Matthew is available to assist any parishes seeking to start the Tridentine Latin Mass or those looking for religious education materials. Specific requests should be directed to Matthew through email, as should any and all advertising inquiries. He is a postulant for the Militia Sanctae Mariae.

Tuesday, May 6, 2014

DOES THIS MEAN THAT GOD IS A HOMOPHOB???

EXCERPTS FROM Clerical Whispers: Mexican Bishop Calls Homophobia a “Mental Illness” Bishop Jose Raul Vera LopezA Mexican Catholic bishop who has been a strong supporter of LGBT issues has declared that homophobia is a “mental illness.” Is that really an accurate classification? The Billerico Project is reporting on an interview given by Bishop Jose Raul Vera Lopez to a television show, “Terra Mexico,” in which he stated: “Why would I immediately think a gay or lesbian person is perverse or depraved the moment they approach me? That’s how people who are homophobic react. It’s a mental illness in which you see gays as depraved and promiscuous. You have to be sick in the head for that.” You can view a two and a half minute video clip from the interview complete with English subtitles here: Here are some other notable quotations from the interview in regard to lesbian and gay people: “They are human beings and deserve respect. The Holy Father knows it’s a. . . .I am certain he knows because the reality is that many in the church do not want to acknowledge the scientific reality on the issue of sexuality. They want to keep homosexuality as a form of human perversion, an illness. But that is no longer the case, scientifically speaking. “ Bishop Vera Lopez also commented on Scripture citations which seem to condemn gay and lesbian persons: “We just have to read the Bible more carefully within a historical context and within a real context. The Biblical texts we have used to bash the heads of homosexuals to say they are condemned by the Bible? We have to read them much more carefully.” It is wonderful to know that this bishop is speaking out so strongly for lesbian and gay rights. One caution: I don’t think that he was using “mental illness” as a technical or clinical term. From the manner in which he is speaking on the video, he seems to be using it as a rhetorical flourish, more than a diagnosis. It is interesting to see him turn the tables on homophobic people: it is usually they who are calling lesbian and gay people “mentally ill.” And because lesbian and gay people have so often been so mislabeled with that diagnosis, I think we have to be very careful of labeling their opponents in the same way. In my experience in working with LGBT issues, homophobia is more often a result of ignorance and misguided piety than by a clinical disturbance. Another comment worth noting is that during the interview, Bishop Vera Lopez discusses the genesis of sexual orientation as being a result of hormonal influences in the womb. With all due respect to the bishop, while that is one theory, it is still simply a theory, and not totally conclusive as the effective cause of one’s homosexuality. The scientific community is still debating various theories as to the origin of sexual orientation in an individual. Despite these cautions, I am delighted to read these statements from this courageous bishop. Our church needs more leaders like him who are willing to approach LGBT issues from a knowledgeable and compassionate perspective. Bishop Vera Lopez has spoken out many times before on lesbian and gay equality. In fact, he was even summoned to the Vatican to defend his point of view, but no sanctions were administered to him.

REALLY?? LADY GAGA AS A CATHOLIC ROLL MODEL??

(EXCEPTS FROM www.newchristorchaos.com BY DR. THOMAS DROLESKEY) Saint Mary’s Institute is the Catholic grade school in my wife’s New York hometown, Amsterdam. It is affiliated with Saint Mary’s Catholic Church, whose pastor Rev. John Medwid pens the opening to the Saint Mary’s Institute annual newsletter. “In September at the opening Mass I officially announced that this was going to be the Year of Our Lady at SMI,” the letter began. How nice. Except that’s not what he wrote. There was someone else he had in mind to honor besides the Virgin Mary. “In September at the opening Mass I officially announced that this was going to be the Year of Lady Gaga at SMI.” That’s what he proclaimed. Apparently during mass, too. Why Lady Gaga? Was every other living or dead female or male on planet Earth or anywhere else unavailable? The answer, he explains, is “complex,” which is a euphemism for scandalous. First, he writes, “many people may not realize that Lady Gaga is the product of Catholic education.” (To which the response would be: so was Hitler.) Her real name, he tells us, is Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, as if she were some obscure Italian saint. She is a graduate of the Convent of the Sacred Heart, where — and here we’re getting to the point — “she was someone who followed her own path … It takes a great deal of courage especially for young people to blaze their own trails in life!” Exactly which trail blazed should Catholic children find commendable? Was it her attire during the nationally broadcast MTV Video Music Awards last year, watched by millions of children — a thong? Was it her video earlier this year in which she simulates all manner of sexual activities while bizarrely “resurrecting” from their tombs Michael Jackson, Mahatma Gandhi and — maybe this was it? — Jesus Christ? Was it her song “Judas” in which she proclaims: “I’m still in love with Judas, baby. Jesus is my virtue,” but “Judas is the demon that I cling to”? Was it how she constantly promotes gay themes in her music and bashes the military for its treatment of gays? Or maybe she’s a trailblazer of another sort. Speaking at a gay-left dinner in 2011, President Barack Obama began by joking, “I took a trip out to California last week, where I held some productive bilateral talks with your leader, Lady Gaga.” Medwid’s second reason for having a Catholic grade school honor Lady Gaga is also vague. It is “to highlight her immense creativity.” Was Medwid impressed when Lady Gaga said of Pope Benedict XVI, “What the Pope thinks of being gay does not matter to the world”? Maybe it was the video “Alejandro” he found so immensely creative. In it she dressed in a nun’s habit, swallowed a rosary and engaged in simulated erotic activities with her male backup dancers. As the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue put it, Lady Gaga “has now become the new poster girl for American decadence and Catholic bashing.” Maybe it was her “Marry the Night” music video in which she depicts herself having an abortion. Maybe it was the song she deliberately released on Christmas Day, “Stuck on F—-in You” (and no, nothing’s edited in the song). Maybe it’s other creative talents grade school children can admire. A couple of years ago Lady Gaga released a new fragrance called “Fame.” She referred to the scent as “a very slutty perfume.” She boasted: “It was taken out of my own blood sample, so it’s a sense of having me on your skin. I wanted to extract sort of the feeling and sense of blood and semen … “ Or is it just her mind we should celebrate, as when she stated on an MTV program in 2010: “For me this evening, if we don’t stand up for what we believe in, and if we don’t fight for our rights pretty soon, we’re going to have as much rights as the meat on our own bones. And, I’m not a piece of meat.” That statement by Lady Gaga makes just about as much sense as a supposedly Catholic grade school, bearing the highest of responsibilities – providing a moral education to children — honoring her. (Conciliar School Celebrates Year of Lady Gaga.)

Thursday, May 1, 2014

TEARING APART OUR CATHOLIC CHURCH

I pray for our Pope's Benedict, and Francis, every night, but I feel that Pope Francis is doing to our religion exactly what the Democrats are doing to the USA. Weakening it, and eventually destruction. A good example it the canonization process: Prior to Vatican II the Pope (and prior to the Middle Ages, the Bishops) needed to sign off on the process of canonization, you were required to have two or more miracles performed throughout your life (it's only one miracle now), two or more miracles after you were beatified (now it's 1), witnesses had to attest to these miracles, and there had to be a written history of the persons life and miracles. I'm not sure if these last two are requirements today...doesn't seem like it to me. In 1234 Pope Gregory IX made the Holy See the only authority on canonization (e.g. the Pope was now the only one who could canonize). The Congregation of Rites was formed in 1587 and it was given authority over canonization, more specifically, they (I think they were bishops) were in charge of verifying miracles and virtues. Medical examiners were also part of this Congregation. Traditionally people were canonized 180+ years after they died. A rule in 1917 was made that required you to wait 50+ years before even putting forth a candidate for canonization, this was to guard against imposters etc. It was a centralized process with the Holy See as the main authority. After Vatican II the process was decentralized, the Pope still reviewed everything, but local church officials are now in charge of gathering and verifying evidence. The wait period was reduced to 5 years. The congregation for the Cause of Saints was formed, it consists of 25 cardinals and Bishops, and they decide if the individual led a virtuous life. If no miracles were performed then the individual is deemed "Venerable." If the individual performed one miracle while living and one after beatification then they are considered a saint. There were reforms in 1983 that allowed beatification to take place anywhere in the world without the Pope's presence. The average beatification rate (beginning in the 1500's, no formal records exist before then) per Pope prior to John Paul II was 0 to 2, meaning that each Pope only canonized 2 people maximum during their tenure. The number spiked up to 12 for John Paul the II and 11 for Pope Benedict XIV. John Paul the II canonized approximately 3 people per year and Benedict canonized 6. All the math and stuff is in the 2nd link. http://www.vatican.edu/roman_curia/congregations/csaints/documents/rc_con_csaints_doc_07021983_norme_en.html Outline of what's required today and the steps. http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/barro/files/saints_paper_020910.pdf Old requirements compared to new.