The Jacobin "Spirit of the Council"

According to Cardinal Suenens the II. Vatican Council had been the '1789' of the Church. Is Liberté the same as indifferentism, égalité the same as destruction of hierarchy and fraternité the same as "ecumenism" polytheism?

The Ingratiation to the French Mob of 1789 has decayed the
Church from within and out. [photo: kreuz.net.info archive]

"The Second Vatican Council is the 1789 of the Church"

The liberal-reformist Cardinal Léon-Joseph Suenens, who was after all, one of the four council moderators, the Council rewrote much saying: "This is the 1789 Vatican II the Church." [Quoted in Marcel Lefebvre: Open Letter to Catholics, 2nd Edition, Stuttgart: Sarto, 2004, pp. 141]

If that is indeed the case, as the Second Vatican Council's strictest faith and ecclesiastical corrosion can be rejected.

The following article is a call to dialog, to Pope Franciscus's demand for comprehensive dialogue. We would like to address the following text  to the Holy Father with the request for a rebuttal.

The Jacobin "Spirit of the Council"

What is the "Spirit of the Council"? It is the "spirit" of the opening of the Church to the world, whose ruler is Satan. This spirit of the Council is summoned far more than the Holy Spirit.

Instead of being open to Jesus Christ, the Church is opened to the anti-Christian lodge opened.

With the Second Vatican Council, the idols of the anti-clerical Freemasonry, namely, "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" have been incorporated into the Church. These corrosive idols of Freemasonry have entered into the Church internally as "religious liberty, collegiality, ecumenism". What was required prior to the Second Vatican Council, has been actively repressed.

Coming in the Anschluss of the Second Vatican Council a provincialist, modernist liturgy has degenerated into a kind of cult of revolution and all the enemies of the revolution (of the Tridentine Mass, keep the faith) are persecuted with the means of the terror within the Church.

Such apparent decline in the Church is in accordance with the recognized religious prophecies of Our Lady of La Salette: "Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist." [?]

In addition, the Virgin at La Salette communicated to us that "the false light enlightens the world." The Masonic "Enlightenment" is the light that leads to eternal darkness.

The "Council-Demon"

Pope Benedict XVI. described the pastoral spirit of the Council consequently as "Council-Demon". [Konzils-Ungeist]

The Second Vatican Council, the Church's Magisterium has fraternized with the Jacobean Magisterium and the idols of the French Revolution's mob has increased within the church:

• The Mob-Idol of religious freedom is a decomposition of the truth "extra ecclesiam nulla salus." The word "religion" is a word that can exist in the plural only hypothetically. In the scriptures it says namely: "And in none other is there salvation. For there is no other name given among men under heaven by which we must be saved "(Acts 4:12). On the subject of religious freedom it can be said: "O Liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name!"
• The Mob-Idol of collegiality undermines the authority of the earthly Vicar of Jesus Christ, the Pope, and is a kind of democratization through an enabling act of fellow bishops, who probably prefer to put on an all red Phrygian cap of equality as they proclaim its gospel. Strictly distinct hierarchies are only in inhumane Masonry and exploitative financial system.
• The Mob Idol of "ecumenism" denies the first Commandment of God and replaces it with a Masonic "universal brotherhood" (Nostra Aetate). As is known, Freemasonry puts Jesus Christ, Buddha, Plato, Confucius, FC Bayern Munich, Karl Marx, Mohammed or Zarathustra at one and the same level. 

The religious meeting in Assisi illustrates this world wide, Masonic chain of brotherhood of most diverse "religions", in which the most diverse worship "gods" are convened.

But a real brother is the one who does the will of our Heavenly Father: "For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother" (Matthew 12:50).

When the religious meeting of the chain of brotherhood in Assisi took place,  the impression likely to be created was that God has lost the good pleasure of His Church, and now every wannabe Religion is pleased, though He says in Scripture: "I am the way and the truth and the life No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6).

The three Masonic Mob idols would supplant Christianity, which in the German tax-Church goes counts for success.

People Worship Service Instead of God

The eternal yesterday "spirit" of the Council is the "spirit" that opens the churches to empty them and to deify the mere world: Nostra Aetate, the word "man", occurs 29 times more than "Jesus", which occurs only once, while the word "Muslim" appears at least 3 times. The ratio of the responses of God to man is, according to Nostra Aetate, at least 1 to 29.

A so blatant self-aggrandizement of the people of God (as we know it coming only from the Lodge), can not be understood as an opening to Jesus Christ, but quite the opposite.

Link to kreuz.net...

© kreuz-net.info, EMail: redaktion@kreuz-net.info, Impressum

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com  

AMGD

Footballer Sets Himself on Papal Throne -- For Fun

(Vatican) On 14 August, Pope Francis, received the players of the Argentine national team. The footballer Pocho Lavezzi desired a very special souvenir photo. He sat down abruptly on the papal throne and was surrounded by his fellow players, take a photo. The casual player put one knee over the other and felt the midst of his "royal court" clearly happy in the Apostolic Palace. The photo of course he published immediately online. Argentina's press is boiling over with enthusiasm: "Papa Pocho??" asks the sports news paper "Olé" or "Lavezzi 'Steals' the Pope's Throne" subtitled "Ambito financiero".

The image is reminiscent of an American soldier at the end of the Second World War, after the discovery of the imperial regalia, he wore the imperial crown of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation and posed for photos. The image made history, but was regarded as an expression of great disrespect by many Germans and not only because it was committed by a victor over the vanquished. Even today, many feel a heavenly ecstasies when a visitor slips into the treasury of the Vienna Hofburg through the show rooms where the regalia are exhibited.

The Catholic culture critic Francesco Colafemmina, compared the usurpation of the Pope's throne, the image of the empty throne in the Pope Paul VI Hall to when Pope Francis on the 22nd of June called off attending a classical concert on short notice, which was given in his honor.

I could have made hall my warehouse ...

by Francesco Colafemmina

With only the most possible respect for His Holiness, I still allow myself to point out that Pope Francis, who stayed away from an occasion organized a concert in the Aula Nervi for the Year of Faith in his honor two months ago, but can't stay away from football players of all types. Of those with players from Inter Milan or Juventus, Lazio Roma and AS Roma, etc., etc.

I can not understand why a concert of classical music should be a "glamorous" event, when in contrast an encounter with footballers who are multimillionaires is an urgent pastoral responsibility with the best of intentions. Some will recall that in connection with the classical concert cancelled by the Pope, there were circulating rumors that he had said: "I'm not a Renaissance prince. I won't go to the concert."

But that's not all: This time the footballer has struck a chord. He sat on the "throne" of Pope Francis, had himself photographed and put the photo on the internet.

The spontaneous question intrudes - it is premised that I am neither a prude nor a bigot: How long can the Church still bear to sink into the abyss of ridicule, in a dimension of a dubious caricatural pastiche? According to the bishops in the "Gnam Gnam style", as Blondet passingly defined it, we are experiencing now, that even the Apostolic Palace and even the signs and symbols of papal authority become the objects of boasting and ridicule by four footballers.

The Church's Dignitas seems to be a concept significantly degraded recently. Just as the love of art and culture, which is instead replaced by the sports and subculture of pubescent performances.

I understand well that Beethoven will not draw the same "mass" of people as the football, but then one should openly admit that the Church in search of a "consensus of the masses" really is and therefore seeks "worldliness". Too bad that the "worldliness" often consists of silliness and vanity, love of money and exhibitionism.

Would it therefore not be ultimately preferable to participate in the more sober "worldliness" of a Beethoven concerto, rather than allowing the irreverent fun young retarded football player hospitality?

On the other hand, it is Beethoven himself, who, well interpreted the character of this with the following Sonata, which he Church has been made of by this event, simply "Pathetique"!

Text: Fides et Forma Einleitung/Übersetzung: Giuseppe Nardi Bild: Fides et Forma Translation: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com AMGD

The Holy See's Diplomatic Net. Latest Acquisition: Russia

Over half a century, the pope's ambassadors in the world have doubled. Bilateral diplomatic relations have tripled. Failing to answer the summons are China, Saudi Arabia, and a few other states. The double game of Vietnam: while it is negotiating with the Vatican, it is assailing Catholics

by Sandro Magister



Read article...

Catholic Dissenters Define "Catholic" Education

At least they're dying out at a prodigious rate, but Gnosticism, like Modernism of old, is as old as the pyramids.

Catholic Educators who Aren't Catholic

In an editorial eulogizing the late Mary Daly, the Boston Globe lets the cat out of the bag. Daly “came to describe herself as a ‘radical lesbian feminist’ and a ‘post-Christian,’” the Globe notes. How, then, did she justify her position in the theology department at Boston College: a nominally Catholic school? The Globe has its answer:

Daly was one of many scholars who, through their efforts to use their positions at Catholic universities to pull the church leftward, tacitly acknowledged its central role in the lives of the faithful, and its vast influence in society at large.

Exactly. Like all too many of her colleagues in Catholic theological circles, Daly used her academic post not to build up the faith but to tear it down—or, to be more accurate, to exploit it for other purposes. At a time when St. Josemaria Escriva was urging his followers in Opus Dei to turn the ordinary work of the secular world to the purposes of the Church (that is, their sanctification), leftist professors were encouraging students to turn the work of the Church to the purposes of the secular world (that is, their politicization). The Globe editorial puts it differently, but the message is recognizably the same:

Daly was in the thick of a vibrant debate within the Catholic world over how to respond to the social changes of the era.

In academic life, Daly and her allies had ample opportunity to influence the world: to “pull the Church leftward.” They not only trained the next generation in their classrooms, but by controlling the levers of academic power they determined who would be given the appropriate credentials—the PhDs—to teach the following generations as well.

For years, a fifth column has been active in Catholic academic circles. By the 1970s, the damage they had done was evident enough to a few perceptive Catholic scholars, who began founding a new generation of Catholic colleges and universities explicitly devoted to the teaching magisterium of the Church. But at established schools like Boston College, Notre Dame, and Georgetown, the subversion continues.

The influence of these “post-Catholic” scholars extends beyond academic life, too. The Boston Globe is not ordinarily interested in theology; the editorial tribute to Mary Daly was obviously written by someone who had drunk deeply from those intellectual streams. (Notice the awkward use of the adjective "vibrant," a dead giveaway that the author is a liberal Catholic.) Nancy Pelosi can cite professors at Catholic schools to justify her political stands.

The treason of Catholic scholars is not news. What is new, in the Globe editorial, is the candid acknowledgement that some Catholic theologians are motivated not by a different vision for the good of the Church, but by a cynical desire to exploit the Church for the sake of their favored social causes. They acknowledge the Church as a potential force for social change, not as the Bride of Christ, the Mater et Magistra. They are opportunists, not Catholic theologians.

Still, rest assured that they will continue cashing their paychecks, and miseducating our children, for as long as we afford them the opportunities.

Link to Catholic Culture...

The World of GK Chesterton And What's Wrong With It

Guardian

This year is the centenary of one of Chesterton's oddest, but most intriguing, booksRenewal of interest in the work of GK Chesterton continues apace. The writer whose career began when he dictated his first story to his aunt Rose at the age of three started early and aimed high, and his intellectual development was among the more conspicuously interesting of the Edwardian age. His Orthodoxy of 1908 has become a sort of touchstone text during the present vogue for philosophical theology, much cited by the likes of Slavoj Zizek and the radical theologian John Milbank, while oddball novels such as The Napoleon of Notting Hill (1904) and The Man Who Was Thursday (1908) retain the power to entertain and bemuse in equal measure.This year, however, sees the centenary of one of his rather less high-profile publications. What's Wrong with the World represents an extrapolation of Chesterton's original response to a query posed in so many words by the Times to a selection of eminent writers and thinkers of the day. "Dear Sirs," ran GK's succinct rejoinder, "I am". The publication of the book suggested that, on reflection, there might have been more to say on the subject.The Chesterton offered us by his latter-day biographers and critics is a lost proto-radical, if we could but make him out as such. Along with his close friend Hilaire Belloc, he was the proponent of a species of Third Way politics avant la lettre, a plague-on-both-your-houses confutation of capitalism and socialism known as distributism. Drastically simplified, the vision was of an atomised entrepreneurialism in which as many individuals as possible pursued the goal of profit, so as to wrest capital accumulation from both a few vastly powerful interests (such as "Jewish banking families") and a monolithic socialist state.What's Wrong with the World opens with an analysis of the predicament of modern humanity, too obsessed in the great age of political idealism with visions of the future. Has the Enlightenment ideal of continual social progress been a reality, or has it all been a piece of western myth-making? "Are we still strong enough to spear mammoths, but now tender enough to spare them?" he wonders. But then again, "Does the cosmos contain any mammoth that we have either speared or spared?"What it does contain is the wreckage of half-realised ideals. There is a lack of conviction in attempts to enact the radical doctrines of Christianity or of political justice, and too often the espousal of great causes results in panic at the consequences of one's own actions. Where national leaders paid lip-service to such humanist ideals as egalitarianism, they came to rue their faith in humanity. "Joseph of Austria and Catherine of Russia quite agreed that the people should rule; what horrified them was that the people did."Much in the section on women would take a lot of swallowing today. Woman is naturally thrifty, as against the prodigality of man, "the aim of the good woman [being] to rummage in the dustbin". This is cognate with her moral inclination to chastity in the face of masculine concupiscence. There is scarcely any point in female suffrage (the burning question of the day) where it is so little wanted. The saving grace of not having the vote is that it allows a woman to remain above the level of the baying mob. What she really needs is liberation from drudgery. A paradise of domestic labour-saving devices will spread more spiritual freedom than would the vote. Where many saw the constitutional equality of the sexes as an ideal, meanwhile, Chesterton suspected only the urge to "plodding, elaborate, elephantine imitation" of the male by the female. "Boys play football, why shouldn't girls play football … boys go to Oxford, why shouldn't girls go to Oxford – in short, boys grow mustaches, why shouldn't girls grow mustaches[?]"The cumulative impact of the book is a little like reading a supremely elegant, aphoristic Nietzsche, but one domesticated for the English gentleman's study. There is the same vertiginous thrill at lurching from exemplary declarations of universalist ethics ("Men have never wearied of political justice; they have wearied of waiting for it") to the flared-nostrilled defence of Edwardian privilege, such as public schools. But for its sober humanism, as much as its infuriating patrician conservatism, it deserves to be read.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2010/jan/08/gk-chesterton-world-whats-wrong

He Knows His Neoconservative Bootlickers

Welcome to Vienna: If Cardinal Christoph Schönborn participates in the unrest of a foreign Diocese, then other Bishops may do the same in Vienna.

Kreuz.de Commentary

While photos are being published of the Vienese Cardinal in Medjugorje, there was a protest in Vienna.

It was directed against the honouring of a notorious child slaughterhouse by the unscrupulous Viennese blood-mayor.

The old liberal and politically devious Archbishop of Vienna, Christoph Cardinal Schönborn did everything in order to put stones in the way of the Catholic supervisors of the demonstration.

He even forbade admitting Salzburg's Bishop Andreas Laun to participate in the demonstration against the infamous commemoration.

In a private discussion the Cardinal explained himself in this way: „I won't permit in any event a bishop to drive here from three hundred kilometers away into my Diocese and blame the mayor.“

The Bishop obeyed.

Why, however, does Cardinal Schönborn travel 800 kilometers, in order to incite unrest in another Diocese: was it clear from the beginning that it would stir a wasp's nest?

The answer is found fast.

A goal of this exercise of the old liberal of a Cardinal was to pull disappointed neoconservative Catholics over the table.

Because in the meantime the most naive neoconservative truth denier must have recognized that Cardinal Schönborn works against the Church.

In December 2004 he stabbed the pro-life organization `Youth for Life' in the back, when it demonstrated against the introduction of the child slaughter at the Salzburg national hospital.

In October 2005 the sacrilegious pancake Consecration was effected by the Cardinal followed during one of his youth fairs.

In February 2006 Cardinal Schönborn permitted a homo-perverse mating in his Cathedral blessing.

In the December of the same year he defended deprivation of fluids and sustenance for the terminally ill.

When Catholics demonstrated in February 2007 before a child slaughterhouse in a Viennese shopping center, Cardinal Schönborn as expected, stabbed them into the back.

Then the inexpressible exhibition in the Viennese Cathedral museum in March 2008, which showed the Apostles as homo-perverse piglets and Christ as bound masochist with an erection.

Despite world-wide protests the Cardinal did not stop this outrage.

Besides he denied the Church's mission to convert the Jews in April 2008.

The award of the Papal Gregorian Medal followed to the baby-murdering, Viennese Ideologue, Comrade Renate Brown in June 2008.

As a Pope Benedikt XVI, highly regarded priest of Windischgarten, Mons. Gerhard Wagner, appointed to Linz Diocese, found Cardinal Schönborn in prominent place busily preventing his appointment.

In May 2009 the honoring of the Viennese Martyr Sister Restituta Kafka followed. You Cardinal, seemed to miss the demonic and bare breasted representation, which got the name in Vienna of "Prostituta".

But the Cardinal is smart enough, in order to know that its neoconservative bootlickers have a short memory and are stupid.

It is sufficient to throw to them a Medjugorje bone at his feet so that they forget the old liberal changes of the church in Austria, he has made.

After his Medjugorje journey the Viennese Cardinal can turn, therefore, again unimpaired to the cocktail parties with comrades and abortion politicians and work on the next plot against Catholics.

Because the neoconservative dullards are for a further seven years in the seventh Medjugorje heaven.

However, the resounding slap, which the Cardinal received after his Medjugorje visit from bishop Ratko Perić from Mostar Duvno, neither will resound for long:

"I regret it that the Cardinal with its visit, his appearance and his explanations added the present suffering of the local Church anew, which does not contribute to the necessary peace and to the Diocese.“


Cardinal Schoenborn plans to return to Medjugorje.

Despite actual Vatican condemnation of the priest chiefly associatd with this "Apparition", the Cardinal actually intends on creating quite a bit of a fuss. The Catholic Online report reads:

In a statement posted on the website of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno, Bishop Peric explained that Fr Vlasic has been reported to the CDF "for the diffusion of dubious doctrine, manipulation of consciences, suspicious mysticism, disobedience toward legitimately issued orders", and accusations of sexual immorality.

The Catholic Review Online, the Baltimore Diocesan Newpaper has this interesting piece of information to add to the rest, despite going on a bit about the good things that are attributed to the shrine, which may, it is not reported, have more to do with the intention of the pilgrims and the pre-existing shrine than the things that Fr. Vlasic and the Seers are up to.

Bishop Peric, who repeatedly has questioned the authenticity of the apparitions and struggled to limit the influence of religious living in the diocese without permission, issued a statement Jan. 2 saying that while he recognized the right of a cardinal to celebrate Mass anywhere in the world, “there also exists a certain etiquette in the church” that encourages a visiting cardinal to discuss a visit with the local bishop. He said neither the cardinal nor anyone from his office contacted him.

In addition, Cardinal Schonborn’s visits to unauthorized religious communities “could be interpreted as supportive,” Bishop Peric said.

Deal Says the USCCB Had to Keep Stupak on Task

From tomorrow's New York Times comes a story by Jodi Kantor about Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI).

It contains the following very interesting tidbit:

Mr. Stupak says he urged the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to toughen its stance on the legislation; representatives from the conference and the National Right to Life Committee did not return calls

The parenthesis are from the original story. Why are they there? Perhaps Kantor did not know what a bombshell this statement from Stupak would be among many Catholics.

It makes you wonder what Stupak thought the USCCB should be tougher about? The abortion issue? Or abortion and other issues as well? And did Stupak mean the USCCB should be tougher behind the scenes or in the public eye?

But if Stupak feels he is hanging tougher than the USCCB then how do you make sense of all those stories about lobbyists from the USCCB keeping Stupak on message?

Certainly the USCCB has studiously avoided a tough public stance, preferring not to risk their internal negotiating position.

I wish Kantor explored Stupak's meaning here -- perhaps Stupak went off the record at this point, and Kantor had to call the USCCB and National Right to Life for comment.

That the USCCB did not return her call is surprising given the prominence of the NYT and the importance of the issue raised by Stupak.

Link to original Inside Catholic...

The Anglo-Catholic reflects on the events Thiberville

The response to the usual ecclesiastical bullying on the part of modernist ordinaries at places like Thiberville has precedent in history. At some point people get fed up and decide to do something against the effrontery of a class of sneering ecclesiastics who wish merely to subvert and destroy. Their sly jibes, administrative demotion of actual Catholicism, petty persecution of its exponents is designed to make Catholicism go away while they wed what remains of its physical plant to the predominant secular vision; it would explain why so many of them are so keen on advocating the same sorts of things throughout the world, as if a mock magisterium were giving some order to their efforts on behalf of the religion of man. Again, it's the part of Catholics to resist these things.

It reminds us of that time when the SSPX stormed and took over a church not so long ago. This is a response they don't expect.

The Anglo-Catholic

The events of Thiberville have provoked me to a reflection about the pastoral ministry in the diocese and the parish. I find parishes and pastoral matters as fascinating as theology and liturgy. I think this issue is highly relevant in our present Anglican communities and the future Ordinariates we hope to become in the near future. I have touched upon the issue of Thiberville, which is not that of the traditionalist reaction, but rather a conflict between two ecclesiologies and pastoral visions. We are moving towards the communion of the Catholic Church and must be open-eyed about what this means, both at the level of the Universal Church and the local diocesan Churches.

We know that what is distinctly Catholic about the Church is the liturgical and sacramental life that owes everything to the Apostolic Priesthood. If there were no priesthood, there would be no Eucharist, and without the Eucharist, there is no community or communion. This Catholic notion of the Church is founded upon the presence of the incarnate Christ in the Church on earth.

[cut]

This is the war, the battle, the real enemy we have to fight with spiritual weapons. That is why the Pope needs traditional Anglicans as much as he needs traditional Catholics and the Orthodox. All hands on deck!

Read entire article...

Related Stories:

Arm in Arm in France, Norman townsfolk block Bishop from entering sanctuary, here.

More response on the event in Thiberville here.

Introduction: democratic despostism comes of age by Roger Kimball - The New Criterion

Introduction: democratic despostism comes of age by Roger Kimball - The New Criterion

That Fraud Called “Liberty”

by Christopher A. Ferrara
December 11, 2009
In the public schools that are temples of the civic religion of secularism in the post-Christian West, schoolchildren imbibe a fairy tale.

According to the fairy tale, the downtrodden masses of the 18th and 19th centuries, “yearning to be free,” threw off the “tyranny of priests and kings” and established “government of the people” for the first time in human history, thus achieving the sacred Liberty for which — so the children are told incessantly — men have laid down their lives in countless wars.

But how is it that Liberty has meant more bloodshed than any king ever inflicted, including the French Revolutionary Wars, with their millions of victims, and the American Civil War, with 600,000 dead — the bloodiest civil war in human history up to that time?

How is it that Liberty has meant a level of taxation and government intrusion into daily life that the kings of old would have considered madness?

How is it that Liberty has meant less and less freedom for the good, the true and the beautiful, and more and more freedom for the bad, the false and the ugly, with each passing year?

And how is it that those who heap endless praise on Liberty do not seem to notice the vast pile of bodies sacrificed in its name, including hundreds of millions of unborn children, the victims of “reproductive choice”? (And let us not blame only the Supreme Court for the abortion holocaust, since abortion is more or less legal in all fifty states and every Western nation by the “will of the people.”)

Most Americans are unaware that Spain still has a king, Juan Carlos, who still has the right under the Spanish Constitution of 1978 to promulgate the laws passed by the Spanish parliament, without which the laws do not become effective. Yes, according to the fairy tale of Liberty, there is still a “tyrant” on a throne in Spain.

But how is it that that “tyrant” is himself the victim of tyranny? For by the “will of the people,” the Spanish parliament, under the socialist Zapatero government, has enacted a liberal abortion law, and the king is now expected either to sign it or abdicate.

Yes, the “tyrant” must bend to the “will of the people” and authorize the mass murder of innocents, or else abandon his “tyrannical” throne, so that the killing can begin in the name of Liberty.

As LifeSiteNews observes, however (December 7, 2009), Juan Carlos the “tyrant” is too weak to stand up to the forces that demand the shedding of innocent blood. While “Prominent Spanish Catholics are calling on the king to refuse to sign the law,” Juan Carlos has already signed into law the “gay marriage” legislation enacted by the Zapatero government, stating: “I’m not the king of Belgium.”

Juan Carlos was referring to the “tyrant” King Baudouin of Belgium, who in 1990 (as LifeSiteNews notes) “temporarily renounced his throne rather than sign his country’s law liberalizing abortion.” Then there is that “tyrant” Henri, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, “who refused last year [2008] to sign the duchy’s law legalizing euthanasia and who may be stripped of his constitutional powers as a result.”

And this is the “freedom” from the “tyranny of kings and priests” that we are expected to celebrate as our “leaders” tax us, regulate us, wage war after war, and oppress us in a hundred ways no king of Christendom would even have dreamed of imposing on his subjects.

Behold the fraud called “Liberty”, whose very essence is a negation of the true freedom of which Our Lord — the King of all creation — spoke: “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

Link to original...

Cloudy, USCCB Study on Clerical Sex Abuse

An impressionistic but very extensive and expensive study indicates that the abuse of [homosexual] clergy dropped off after 1985 and that it was most prevalent beginning with the Age of the Big Baby Boomer. It indirectly points the finger at that popular post-war generation, but shouldn't it also include "homosexuals"?

It's unclear why the Bishops had to spend all of this money to determine what the problem was. Referring to the historical nature of the problem, they would have disclosed that it was not foreign to the Middle Ages or the Ancient World and was often seated, along with homosexuality, in the actual practice of Witchcraft and the consequent diabolism or insanity, if you wish. The methods for dealing with these individuals, who in some cases murdered and raped children, as what the case with the a friend and companion of Joan of Arc, Baron Gilles de Rais and his friends, was burning at the stake.

Would that the Bishops would spend more time being environmentally as well as economically conscious and spare us the time of moving such individuals from parish to parish to escape the long arm of the law by simply handing them over to the secular arm for due punishment after an admissible ecclesiastical trial.

Strangely, the report also offers a solution, in terms of formation, related to a mysterious "human formation preparation". It sounds like something that might have caused the problem in the first place.

We don't know, but perhaps if they spent as much time affirming the truths of the Catholic Faith as they did avoiding it out of what, embarrassment (?), they might have an easier time helping people understand whether or not they're useful in the first place.

Link to spero article...

US Women Religious: Dysfunctional Family Values

Congregation heads no longer required to supply ownership, asset, age information

Women religious will still have to answer other questions related to how they conduct their ministries, but like alcoholics, the mentally ill and habitual miscreants, they don't like being held accountable, and perhaps, like an overly permissive parent, Sister Millea, who is overseeing the visitation has caved into the complaints requesting asset, age and ownership information.

It's hard to understand why they would object to such requests for this information, unless, contrary to popular belief, a life of poverty is out of the question.

U.S. women religious superiors will no longer have to supply to the Vatican some of the most controversial information it had requested as part of a three-year study of religious congregations.

Word of the change in procedures came in a letter dated Nov. 5 sent to the women religious superiors by Apostolic Visitator Mother Mary Clare Millea.

It's good to see, however, that there will still be other questions, like the following, still trying to hold rebellious nuns accountable for their manifest failure to follow the rules and live lives that have more than an impressionistic resemblance to the visions of the founders of their communities.

Part B involves some 60 subjective questions regarding vocations, governance, financial, liturgical and spiritual life within the congregations. For example, questions include the following:

How often is the Eucharist celebrated in primary houses of the unit whether a mother house, formation house, retirement facility, skilled-care facility, etc.?

Do your sisters participate in the Eucharistic liturgy according to approved liturgical norms? [We know that in most cases this is, "No"].

Despite having serious disciplinary, doctrinal, honesty and emotional problems, US Women religious have some pretty serious enablers in their corner who are willing to help them on the path of destruction, like liberal family member, Fr. McBrien of Notre Dame who teaches "theology" to unsuspecting students, who's willing to step in and give a defense of the US women religious which not surprisingly attacks the Church as "sexist". Of course, he begins his article by citing another article from a Sacred Heart Sister who teaches at Berkley. She doesn't believe that many people with an opinion have the back ground to make their judgements, she says, "too many critics of religious life in the United States "have no lived experience of or academic competence" in regard to it.

But she doesn't stop there. She wants to talk about religious habits and cloisters from a feminist perspective that boarders on the pathological. Her issues with religious habits and religious discipline are almost too stupid and inaccurate to mention, especially for someone who holds others to high standards when it comes to judging her and her consorors' work in the US, like a lot of charlatans, she tries to slither behind academic degrees and hope that she won't be challenged. It has often been the case that such women and men in the Church, like Fr. McBrien, have gone unchallenged. It's time that was ended. If you don't really believe the Church is good for humanity, why bother with it? Get out. Please.

It's typical for dysfunctional family members to cover for their relatives' sins and crimes. In this case, it seems clear that misrepresentation and malfeasance is one possible accusation and the natural tendency is to defend one's self or others who are guilty of the same crimes you are.

Well, now US Women Religious have to be held accountable because their decadence and dysfunctionality has grown to such catastrophic heights that you don't need to be a person with trained proficiency to know that US Women's Religious are in trouble. All you have to do is read one of Sister Joan Chittister's columns or take time to visit a nominally "Catholic" college where you can find Female Religious Professors who will admit to you that they want to destroy the Church.

Read the article here...

Beginning of end of English Reformation - Commentary

Beginning of end of English Reformation - Commentary

The Curious Cardinal

As providence would have it, there was an recently published interview in NCR about the aforementioned Cardinal George whose statement on interreligious dialogue with the Jews leaves us in little doubt that he has a very circumscribed notion of the Church's mission to the world, including the Jews.

John Allen's soft-ball interview leaves some questions unanswered, but does admit a blithe admonition to an indeterminate and perhaps fabled duality in the American Church, those elusive Liberals and Conservatives. Incredibly, the Cardinal accuses the mythical polarity of focusing too much on Bishops, assuming that they have more power than they have and an obligation to correct and on the other hand wishing they didn't have too much power. He admonishes both of these legendary antognists to focus more on Christ, but doesn't fail to relinquish responsibillity for the problems he identifies, feebly, like Catechesis, the sorry state of Catholic Charitable institutes, and Liturgy.

Considering the Cardinal's more recent "clarifications" on Interreligious Dialogue with the Jews, he's talking about himself when he describes Liberals. Wishing he had less authority than he does, perhaps, or still worse, wishing that since, "the conservatives wish to descend into sectarianism" that all of these distinctions between the beliefs of various religions are meant to be ignored. Somehow, our focus on Christ and work among with poor with a leftist missionary organisation like St'Egidio will cause us to forget those petty doctrinal problems and the poor showing so many priests make when it comes to the Liturgy. In all of this, he strikes me as a less potent, understated, and therefore perhaps more dangerous version of his sulferous predecessor, Cardinal Berardin.

What this all amounts to, more than a fawning softball interview by a bootlicking journalist, is the Bishop telling the laity that things will continue basically as they have and that they need to keep giving and obeying.

Moreover, by the end of this interview, I was still in the dark about what His Lordship meant by improving Evangelization. I think he's implying that we need to be less Catholic and more Universalist, that we can leave behind this implausible sectarianism as the dusty relic of a bygone age and other such cliché. Perhaps his "plant" is that there is no plan, or at least not one he's going to tell anyone else.