3

Countess Von Zeppelin Accuses Theodore Roosevelt

 

Countess Isabella Von Zeppelin through her attorney and medium Gloria “no spectral ambulance should go unchased” Allred, today accused former President Theodore Roosevelt of groping her.  Through unearthly sobs, the spirt of the Countess wailed, “It was while he was a student in Germany.  He asked me if I wanted to see his collection of stuffed animals.  Always having an interest in taxidermy I followed him into his room.  While I was admiring a stuffed owl, the American swine had the effrontery of tapping me on the shoulder to direct my attention to a stuffed raven.  I off course fled the room in tears.  I have remained silent for well over a century with this shame and I now had to speak out.”

Ms. Allred then challenged Congress to conduct a séance to bring President Roosevelt back from the dead to face ex post facto impeachment.  Repeated requests for comment from the former President have gone unanswered.

1

Moore and Kennedy

Yeah, yeah I know, Tu quoque, and I don’t care a red cent.  Kennedy was regaled as the Lion of the Senate.  At his death he received a virtual canonization mass:

 

 

My favorite sendoff for Kennedy, to highlight the difference in treatment of Moore and Kennedy, came with this piece of bilge written by Melissa Lasky at Huffington Post:

 

Mary Jo wasn’t a right-wing talking point or a negative campaign slogan. She was a dedicated civil rights activist and political talent with a bright future — granted, whenever someone dies young, people sermonize about how he had a “bright future” ahead of him — but she actually did. She wasn’t afraid to defy convention (28 and unmarried, oh the horror!) or create her own career path based on her talents. She lived in Georgetown (where I grew up) and loved the Red Sox (we’ll forgive her for that). Then she got in a car driven by a 36-year-old senator with an alcohol problem and a cauldron full of demons, and wound up a controversial footnote in a dynasty.

We don’t know how much Kennedy was affected by her death, or what she’d have thought about arguably being a catalyst for the most successful Senate career in history. What we don’t know, as always, could fill a Metrodome.

Still, ignorance doesn’t preclude a right to wonder. So it doesn’t automatically make someone (aka, me) a Limbaugh-loving, aerial-wolf-hunting NRA troll for asking what Mary Jo Kopechne would have had to say about Ted’s death, and what she’d have thought of the life and career that are being (rightfully) heralded.

Who knows — maybe she’d feel it was worth it.

When liberals attempt to assert the moral high ground in regard to Moore, please always recall that for most of them such maneuvers are merely tactical in nature.

8

November 17, 1973: I Am Not A Crook

The Nixon tragedy: A man of unsurpassed courage and outstanding intelligence but without vision. An opportunist who missed his greatest opportunity.

Eric Hoffer

 

 

 

 

Hard to believe that it is forty-four years since the infamous “I am not a crook” news conference of President Nixon.  The video clip gives a taste of the surreal quality of those times.  For the sake of attempting to cover up a politically inspired burglary in a presidential election that the Democrats were busily throwing away, Nixon in 1972 embarked on a cover-up that eventually destroyed his Presidency, with his resignation in disgrace coming in August of 1974.

Greek tragedy is too mild a term to apply when discussing the presidency of Nixon.  Dealt a bad hand in Vietnam, he extricated the country from Vietnam while building up the South Vietnamese military to the extent that they could hold their own against the North Vietnamese, as long as supplies kept flowing from the US and their ground forces were supported by American air power.  His diplomatic opening to Red China was a masterful, if fairly obvious, strategic win over the Soviets.  Talks with the Soviets helped lower the temperature of the Cold War.  Domestically Nixon was the liberal Republican he always was, with wage and price controls and an expansion of the Federal government.  Continue Reading

4

PopeWatch: Arms Race

It is always distressing to see how factually challenged the Pope tends to be.  For example:

 

Indeed, the escalation of the arms race continues unabated and the price of modernizing and developing weaponry, not only nuclear weapons, represents a considerable expense for nations. As a result, the real priorities facing our human family, such as the fight against poverty, the promotion of peace, the undertaking of educational, ecological and healthcare projects, and the development of human rights, are relegated to second place.

 

Go here to read the rest.  There is no arms race.  In the US the money spent on arms is dwarfed by social spending.  European nations spend next to nothing on their military compared to social spending.  As is often the case the Pope is shadow boxing with phantoms that exist only in his mind.

9

“By Man Shall His Blood be Shed, A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment” : A Review

A guest post by commenter Greg Mockeridge:

 

To say that confusion about what the Church really teaches about the death penalty is a real problem in Catholic circles today is an understatement of biblical proportions. This confusion has been fostered by the oft-repeated opposition of the US. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) as a whole, individual bishops and, to a lesser extent, Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. Pope Francis has compounded the problem even further with some of his recent statements.

The recently published book, “By Man Shall His Blood be Shed, A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment” by Dr. Ed Feser and Joseph Bessette makes a significant contribution in the much-needed effort to dispel this confusion.

Dr Edward Feser is Associate Professor of philosophy at Pasadena College in Pasadena, CA. Joseph Bessette is the Alice Tweed Tuohy Professor of Government and Ethics at Claremont College Prior to that he worked for nine years in criminal justice, on the staff of Cook County, Ill. State Attorney Richard M. Daley (1981-1984) and then as Deputy Director and Acting Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics in the U.S. Department of Justice (1985-1990).

As the credentials of the two authors seem to imply, this book approaches the issue of capital punishment from both the perspective of Catholic teaching and secular jurisprudence and makes what I believe is an airtight case on both grounds. In the interest of full disclosure, I am coming to this with a decidedly pro-death penalty viewpoint. But if my judgment is clouded as a result of that, it should be plain to any objective observer. However, I, like the authors, believe it is legitimate for a Catholic to oppose capital punishment as a matter of policy, but not in principle.

Among those who give words of praise to the book are well-known Catholic figures like Frs. James Schall, Gerald Murray, and Robert Sirico, as well as canonist Dr. Ed Peters. Not one bishop is included amongst the names. Gee, why am I not surprised?

The introduction on page 12 states: “Yet traditional natural law reasoning is simply not widely understood today even among most Catholics. Moral thinking about capital punishment, even among Catholics, is often guided instead by what amounts to little more than platitudes lacking any clear content or rational foundation or by ethical theories that are incompatible with Catholic teaching.” In my experience, not only is this true, but it understates the problem. For example, about two years ago, I had a brief e-mail exchange with a priest friend of mine on capital punishment. This priest has formal training in Rome in moral theology, but yet he exhibited the same platitude-laden thinking devoid of both rational foundation and understanding of traditional Catholic teaching decried by the aforementioned quote. When someone like myself, who barely graduated high school in the Detroit public school system, displays a better grasp of how both the natural law and traditional Catholic morality approaches this issue than a priest educated in Rome, we have a serious problem!

In this light, it is only proper that the first chapter deals with the natural law. While I personally think the chapter could have been shorter and its language simplified, it is well worth the somewhat laborious read. In this chapter, the authors go to significant lengths to criticize the so-called New Natural Law Theory (NNLT) whose proponents include Drs. Germain Grisez, William May, E. Christian Brugger, Robert P. George, and others. In general, they posit, per the authors, that capital punishment not only shouldn’t be administered in practice, but that it is not even morally permissible in principle. This view puts them at odds with what the Church has traditionally taught regarding the death penalty. And yet these men all have established reputations for Catholic orthodoxy! Strange orthodoxy!

In the following chapter,”Church Teaching and Capital Punishment” they continue their criticisms of the NNLT. On page 143, they state: “Indeed, in our view it is surprising that the new natural law position on capital punishment has not generated more vigorous opposition among Catholics concerned with faithfulness to tradition and to the Magisterium.” While I would wholeheartedly agree that lack of opposition to this on the part of faithful Catholics is a problem, it is not at all surprising when you consider that the NNLT proponents are feted by many American bishops. This includes bishops who are considered heroes by many orthodox Catholics like, for example, Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia. Chaput endorses Dr. Brugger’s work. Brugger also was Cardinal Francis J. Stafford Chair of Moral Theology at St John Vianney Seminary in Denver from 2008 (while Archbishop Chaput was still the Ordinary in Denver) to around 2016. I would not be surprised if Chaput was instrumental in Brugger’s hiring at SJV. What I find surprising is that the authors are unaware of this. This is a significant problem I have with this book. The authors downplay the scandalous conduct of the bishops (although such accusations can be deduced from their treatment of the bishops’ position) on this issue. I will have more to say about this later. But I have to wonder if this is the decision of the authors or the powers-that-be at Ignatius Press.

The chapter does do an excellent job at decoding what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says regarding capital punishment. I say decoding because it mixes the prudential judgment of the Church hierarchy with doctrinal imperatives in such a way that can be difficult to distinguish. I have personal experience with this very thing in trying to explain to fellow Catholics what the Church actually teaches on the subject. It is a necessary task fraught with frustration.

One of the claims made by anti-death penalty activists is that it devalues human life. On the surface, this claim sounds plausible. And it would be true if the death penalty were carried out in an unjust or in a careless way. But such is certainly not the case in the U.S. On page 65, the authors give a brilliant response:

The opponent of capital punishment might acknowledge that the murderer has forfeited his right to life but argue that even if murderers deserve to die, we only perpetuate the “cycle of violence” if we kill them. Once again, though, if this were a good objection to capital punishment, it would be a good objection to any other punishment. It is like saying that imprisoning kidnappers further erodes respect for human freedom, or that fining thieves perpetuates the cycle of theft. Of course, no one speaks of a “cycle of theft” or a “cycle of kidnapping”, precisely because everyone knows there is a crucial moral difference between the innocent and the guilty, and thus a crucial moral difference between the way criminals treat the innocent and the way public authorities treat the guilty. When we punish, we simply are not, from a moral point of view, doing the same thing to offenders that they did to their victims and thus are not furthering any morally problematic “cycle”. But this is as true of the penalty of death as it is of any other punishment. Talk of a “cycle of violence” papers over the crucial moral difference between the innocent and the guilty and thereby falsely insinuates that execution is morally on a par with murder. In fact, just as incarcerating kidnappers affirms the value of human freedom and fining thieves affirms the value of property rights, so too does executing murderers affirm the value of human life.

As far as the “cycle of violence” claim goes, Archbishop Chaput makes this claim in language that is suggestive of moral equivalence “What the death penalty does achieve is closure through bloodletting and violence against violence—which is not really closure at all, because murder will continue as long as humans sin, and capital punishment can never, by its nature, strike at murder’s root. Only love can do that.”

 
In fact, stronger arguments can be brought forth that opposition to the death penalty has often been motivated by a devaluing of innocent human life. Most opponents of the death penalty are pro-abortion and have effectively used that issue to drive a wedge between pro-lifers. On page 206, the authors quote the late Cardinal Avery Dulles: “The mounting opposition to the death penalty in Europe since the Enlightenment has gone hand in hand with a decline of faith in eternal life.” And there is no greater attack on human life than the attack on faith in life eternal.
 

No book written making a Catholic defense of the death penalty by American authors would be complete without an extensive treatment of the opposition to it by the USCCB. Chapter 4 is entitled “The American Bishops Campaign Against the Death Penalty”. The authors point out how markedly different the U.S. bishops position nowadays is from that of what American Catholics were taught less than sixty years ago. It is also different from what many American bishops held less than two generations ago. On page 284 the book points out:

The American bishops first addressed the subject in a general meeting in 1974. Philosopher-theologian Germain Grisez (the founder of new natural law theory and a prominent Catholic opponent of the death penalty) was commissioned to write a background study. He submitted a fifty-one-page document, from which a committee produced a seven-page brief against the death penalty, including scriptural, theological, and practical arguments for its abolition. The statement proved to be highly controversial. Some bishops objected that it “implied rejection of the teaching of the church regarding the limited right of the state to take life”. Others objected to the interpretation of scriptural passages. A cardinal questioned “whether the reference to capital punishment being discriminatory was sufficiently compelling” and “whether there was sufficient evidence to say that capital punishment was not being applied in an even-handed application”. The next day, after the document was revised, the same cardinal “noted that the reference to deterrence in the statement ignored the legitimate vindictive aspect of punishment”.

On Page 285: “As Archbishop Francis Furey of San Antonio, Texas, an outspoken proponent of the death penalty, wrote in 1977: ‘It is a divisive issue in the Church in this country. Perhaps that is as it should be. There are arguments on both sides. However, to say that the U.S. hierarchy, as such, is opposed to capital punishment, is just a plain lie.'” It would be unimaginable today for an American bishop to speak the way Archbishop Furey did a mere forty years ago.

It would be practically impossible for any honest reader to read this chapter as well as what the bishops say about capital punishment that the bishops’ statements are an affront to the traditional teaching of the Church. For instance, on page 310-311 we read: 


Consider these passages, quoted above, from the USCCB’s Responsibility, Rehabilitation, and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice (2000), the bishops’ most extensive treatment of criminal 
justice in the United States:

We seek justice, not vengeance. We believe punishment must have clear purposes: protecting society and rehabilitating those who violate the law. . . . [Jesus] rejected punishment for its own sake, noting that we are all sinners (Jn 8). Jesus also rejected revenge and retaliation and was ever hopeful that offenders would transform their lives and turn to be embraced by God’s love. . . Punishment for its own sake is not a Christian response to crime. Punishment must have a purpose. It must be coupled with treatment and, when possible, restitution. . . . We ask all Catholics—pastors, catechists, educators, and parishioners—to join us in rethinking this difficult issue and committing ourselves to pursuing justice without vengeance.


Apart from the unjustified inference that Christ’s refusal to countenance the stoning of the adulteress (Jn 8:1-11) was a biblical teaching about punishment (see our earlier discussion), what does it mean to say that Christ rejected “punishment for its own sake” or that “punishment for its own sake is not a Christian response to crime” because “punishment must have a purpose”? What kind of punishment, exactly, was Christ supposedly rejecting in the 

bishops’ view?

Apparently, he was, in their view, rejecting purposeless punishment, which Christians should always reject. When the bishops formally address the matter (most fully in their first systematic treatment of the death penalty in 1980), they identify three key justifications for punishment: “retribution, deterrence, and reform”.63 These are the purposes that punishment is meant to serve, all of which the bishops accept as legitimate. What, then, counts as punishment without a purpose, and who has ever urged that criminals be punished for no purpose? Who today calls for punishing criminals—whether with the death penalty, prison, or fines—for no reason at all? Surely, those in ancient Israel who wished to stone adulterers had a very specific purpose in mind: to discourage adultery. Perhaps the key to understanding the force of the bishops’ point is the sentence that follows “Punishment must have a purpose” in the document we cite: “It must be coupled with treatment and, when possible, restitution.” Retribution has seemingly disappeared from view, even though, as we have seen, the bishops themselves elsewhere acknowledge retribution as one of the legitimate purposes of punishment, and, as we showed in earlier chapters, it is in the Catholic tradition the chief purpose.

 

The current Catechism of the Catholic Church reaffirms this traditional view: those responsible for “safeguarding the common good” have “the right and the duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense” (CCC 2266). We should not be surprised if most readers interpret the bishops’ phrase “punishment for its own sake” as code for retributive punishment. Unfortunately, then, the bishops’ statements strongly imply that Christ was simply opposed to retributive punishment, a position quite contrary to traditional Catholic teaching.

Absolutely correct, but the authors follow that up with this: “We hasten to emphasize that we do not believe that the bishops intend in statements like this to contradict the Church’s traditional teaching. Rather, we think that, in their zeal to rally others to the abolitionist cause, they have too frequently resorted to making statements that have rhetorical and emotional force, but that are theologically highly imprecise and misleading.” (emphasis in original.)

Well, I would say the authors are being hasty themselves in the above statement. These are Catholic bishops. How can they not know that at the very least the upshot of their statements run afoul of Church teaching? And the USCCB statement they cite above is far from the only statement from the bishops conference as a whole as well as individual bishops that, practically speaking, is contrary to Church teaching. For instance, Archbishop Chaput, while acknowledging that capital punishment is not intrinsically evil, uses phrases like “Church teaching against the death penalty”  . Archbishop Chaput said this about the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s position on the death penalty: “Second, if we say we’re Catholic, we need to act like it. When Catholic Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia publicly disputes Church teaching on the death penalty, the message he sends is not so very different from Frances Kissling (of “Catholics for a Free Choice” fame) disputing what the Church teaches about abortion. I don’t mean that abortion and the death penalty are equivalent issues. They’re not. They clearly do not have equal moral gravity. But the impulse to pick and choose what we accept in Church teaching is exactly the same kind of “cafeteria Catholicism ‘in both cases.'”

Now, it would have been one thing if he took issue with the way the late Justice Scalia portrayed St. Pope John Paul II’s statements in the encyclical Evangelium Vitae as an attempt on the pope’s part to change traditional Church teaching, as Cardinal Dulles did.  But to paint Scalia as dissenter from Church teaching in the way he did by comparing him to Francis Kissling of the hideous Catholics for Free Choice is both calumnious and mean spirited.

As far as John Paul II’s stated opposition to the death penalty is concerned, while I think he didn’t go nearly as far as many American bishops as he didn’t smear the pro-death penalty viewpoint like the bishops have and still do, it was rather irresponsible considering the kind of confusion it caused. Based upon what the authors say about JPII and the death penalty, they couldn’t credibly take issue with me on that. I have often wondered if Cardinal Ratzinger’s explicit inclusion of there being “legitimate diversity of opinion” with regard to the death penalty in the 2004 official CDF letter to Cardinal McCarrick on the Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion wasn’t an attempt at damage control.

During the Nov. 2016 election cycle, there were two ballot measures having to do with the death penalty in California, Prop. 62, which would have put a moratorium on the death penalty and Prop. 66 which called for a speeding up of the process between sentencing and execution. Thankfully, the former failed and the latter passed. To whip up support for Prop. 62, Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, another darling of the “orthodox” Catholic establishment, made a video where he claims that the Church teaches the death penalty is no longer acceptable. The Church teaches no such thing and Archbishop Gomez knows it. It is much more plausible in light of what the authors themselves say that “zeal for the abolitionist cause” is more important to the bishops than clearly conveying what the Church teaches on this matter. And the authors do their cause no favors by sugar coating the culpability of the bishops on this issue. Again, is this their idea or that of the powers-that-be at Ignatius Press? Certainly the latter is very plausible particularly in the case of Archbishop Chaput. Catholic World Report, which is published by Ignatius, ran a disgusting puff piece on Chaput penned by George Weigel. Weigel somehow forgot to mention how those orthodox Catholics who take a pro-death penalty and/or anti-illegal immigration view, both legitimately Catholic, are treated by the Archbishop.

Another startling, but all too common, act of episcopal malfeasance is the dutiful parroting of the fraudulent claims put forth by anti-death penalty activist groups like the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) and the ACLU, and several others. They often make the claim that the death penalty does not deter, is used in a racist manner against minorities, and that it is used unjustly toward the poor. For starters, all these claims should a least be met with enough skepticism to merit further investigation. But if you were to read only the claims repeated by the USCCB, you would be misled into believing that there are no valid arguments being made to the contrary. First of all, the prospect of the more extreme punishment is going to have a deterrent effect at least in general is just human nature. And you don’t get much more extreme than death. And the authors cite several peer reviewed studies that seem to support this idea. Surprisingly, there are two studies the authors do not mention, the 2005 AEI/Brookings Institute Study and one conducted by the University of Colorado in 2007. In the latter study, Naci Mocan, a participant in the study and death penalty opponent makes a key admission:

” ‘Science does really draw a conclusion. It did. There is no question about it,’ said Naci Mocan, an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver. ‘The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect.’A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. ‘The results are robust, they don’t really go away,’ he said. ‘I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) — what am I going to do, hide them?’ “

However the authors (Feser and Besette) do acknowledge that  “As this brief review demonstrates, from the perspective of quantitative social science, the deterrent effect of the death penalty is very much an open question.” (page 320) Given the very truncated application of how the death penalty is carried out, it would seem to me that the social science means of determining its deterrent effect is extremely limited.

Next is the race card. Given that we live a in a culture that is minority-sensetive to a fault, this claim ought to be viewed with suspicion barring solid evidence. Columnist and token conservative at the Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby once described this claim thus,  “The anti-black ‘racism’ of the US death penalty system is like the Abominable Snowman: ugly, alarming, widely believed in, and nonexistent.” Again, the numbers support that quip. Although, as the authors point out, whites are more likely to commit capital crimes at higher per capita rates, blacks commit these crimes at a rate disproportionately higher than their representation in the population. One would think if the bishops were really motivated by a genuine pastoral concern, they would be lamentingly asking why is this so. They might posit the fact that the breakdown of the black family is such that it lays the groundwork for dangerous criminal activity. And they would thus be able to credibly link family breakdown, which in large part is fueled by sexual promiscuity, with the culture of death that murder, not the just imposition of the death penalty, inflicts on black society. But they don’t. And that’s because, once again, their zeal for the abolitionist cause is more important to them than upholding the teaching of the Church on this matter. On pages 354 to 367, the book goes into great detail demonstrating both the racial breakdown of how the death penalty is meted out and how to interpret what the numbers mean. But this pretty much sums up their case “One can read widely in the literature on race and the death penalty and never learn that a federal judge, after extensive review, had found that the most famous of the studies purporting to demonstrate racism in the post-Furman era had not even made a ‘prima facie case of discrimination’.” (page 363)

The accusation that the death penalty discriminates against the poor is one that can, on its face, seem plausible. After all, wealthier people can afford more talented legal representation than those less wealthy. But this overlooks a basic truth as well, namely that this fact in itself doesn’t mean the poor are unjustly treated in capital cases. The truth is the exact opposite. It would be like saying the huge disparity between someone making ten million dollars a year and someone making five hundred thousand dollars a year is an injustice. But that is basically what someone claiming the death penalty unjustly discriminates against the poor would have to say if he were to be consistent. Again we should start out asking what are the causes and conditions of why the poor, like blacks, are disproportionately represented on death row. The authors ask and answer this crucial question thus:

“So, one wonders what kind of unfairness is demonstrated by the mere fact that death row inmates, like prisoners generally, are more likely to be poor than is the nation’s population. If males disproportionately commit more murders than females, we would expect them to be disproportionately represented on death row. Similarly, if the poor disproportionately commit more murders than the nonpoor, we would expect them also to be disproportionately represented on death row. We should not be surprised that violent criminals, and especially the worst among them, do not have stellar work histories. Many have been in and out of prison for much of their adult lives, have been deeply involved in the drug subculture, have drifted in and out of the job market, or have otherwise lived on the fringe of society. They tend to lack the very character traits that have moved tens of millions of Americans from modest beginnings into a solid middle-class life. Thus, it is not that poverty has driven these offenders to crime; rather, the same bad character traits that have led them to crime have also led them into poverty.” (page 368) And the numbers back this up.

Like with the sad fact that blacks are disproportionately represented on death row, the bishops could credibly posit that the breakdown of the family has consequences that pose grave danger to society. But no, they act like loyal leftist ideologues on the issue of capital punishment.

There is more that can be said about this book than I have covered here. The book, “By Man Shall His Blood be Shed” is a must read for anyone who earnestly desires to understand both Catholic teaching on the subject of capital punishment and the wider societal ramifications. But its failure to explicitly call out the bishops conference, as well as individual bishops who have reputations for orthodoxy like Chaput, Gomez, and Wenski by name, for episcopal malfeasance as opposed to being merely misguided significantly undermines the credibility a book of this caliber should have.

13

The Case of Judge Roy Moore and the Divorcee

 

 

Some interesting facts came out yesterday in regard to Moore and his accuser of sexual assault Beverly Young Nelson.  Apparently Judge Moore, when he was a local trial judge, presided over Ms. Nelson’s divorce case in 1999, a factoid that Ms. Nelson did not mention in her tearjerker appearance with Gloria “no ambulance should go unchased” Allred.  Based on my experience of 35 years in the law mines that, alone, is enough to torpedo her accusation.  First, because if it were true her attorney would immediately have filed a motion for substitution of judge.  Second, because it gives her a motive to lie.  Judges rarely make friends when presiding over a divorce case, and they often make lifelong enemies from one of the participants who believe they got the raw end of the stick.  This was a simple fact to find out, and it says all you need to know about the lynch mob media that none of them bothered to even do a cursory investigation of Beverly Young Nelson.

Moore’s attorney, in the above video, also notes that Judge Moore’s signature on the divorce dismissal, had DA stamped after it, the initials of his then administrative assistant.  Here is his signature in that case:

 

 

Moore’s attorney also called for the year book to be placed in neutral hands to be examined by experts in handwriting and ink.  Here is the spluttering reaction of  Gloria “no ambulance should go unchased” Allred to all that.

 

 

Friends, on the question of whether Judge Moore ever assaulted anyone this is a railroad job pure and simple.  Did Moore seek dates with legal teenagers, yeah, I believe that.  Did he ever sexually assault anyone?  Not from the evidence I have thus far seen.

5

PopeWatch: Shhh!

Wow, twice in a week where PopeWatch agrees with the Pope:

 

On Wednesday, Pope Francis called out the common habit of chatting with people around you before Mass, stressing that this is a time for silent prayer, when we prepare our hearts for an encounter with the Lord.

“When we go to Mass, maybe we arrive five minutes before, and we start to chit-chat with those in front of us,” the Pope said Nov. 15. However, “it is not a moment for chit-chat.”

“It is a moment of silence for preparing ourselves for dialogue, a time for the heart to collect itself in order to prepare for the encounter with Jesus,” he said, adding that “silence is so important.”

 

Go here to read the rest.  Silence is usually golden, but at Mass it is priceless

4

November 16, 1940: Mad Bomber of New York Plants First Bomb

George Metesky, the most disgruntled of all disgruntled workers, planted his first bomb at a Consolidated Edison power plant on Manhattan.  A former Marine, Metesky had worked for Consolidated Edison and been injured at a work place accident in 1931.  Consolidated Edison successfully defeated his legal attempt to obtain compensation, his last appeal occurring in 1936.  (He waited too long in order to file a claim under workers compensation.)  He developed a strong hatred for the company, and decided to use homemade bombs to get his vengeance.  His first bomb was a crude one, a brass pipe filled with gunpowder, with an ignition mechanism consisting of batteries and sugar.  The bomb was discovered before it could go off.  It was wrapped in a note signed F.P. stating :  CON EDISON CROOKS – THIS IS FOR YOU.

 

 

 

In September 1941 the police found a similar bomb, this time a dud, without a note, laying in the street, five blocks from Consolidated Edison headquarters.

Shortly after Pearl Harbor, Metesky sent a note to the police stating:  I WILL MAKE NO MORE BOMB UNITS FOR THE DURATION OF THE WAR – MY PATRIOTIC FEELINGS HAVE MADE ME DECIDE THIS – LATER I WILL BRING THE CON EDISON TO JUSTICE – THEY WILL PAY FOR THEIR DASTARDLY DEEDS… F.P.

He kept his word, and took a ten year hiatus from planting bombs.  Between 1951-1956 he planted at least 31 bombs in New York City, twenty-two of which exploded.  Mercifully no one was killed, but fifteen people were injured.

The public was getting hysterical due to the police inability of stopping the bombings, the New York City police being surrounded by blind leads and a wave of false confessions.  They turned to criminologist James Brussels who worked out a profile of the bomber that was published in newspapers by the police:

Male, as historically most bombers were male. Well proportioned and of average build, based on studies of hospitalized mental patients. Forty to fifty years old, as paranoia develops slowly. Precise, neat and tidy, based on his letters and the workmanship of his bombs. An exemplary employee, on time and well-behaved. A Slav, because bombs were favored in Middle Europe. A Catholic, because most Slavs were Catholic. Courteous but not friendly.

Has a good education but probably not college. Foreign-born or living in a community of the foreign-born – the formal tone and old-fashioned phrasing of the letters sounded to Brussel as if they had been written or thought out in a foreign language and then translated into English. Based on the rounded letter “w’s” of the handwriting, believed to represent breasts, and the slashing and stuffing of theater seats, Brussel thought something about sex was troubling the bomber, possible an oedipus complex – loving his mother and hating his father and other authority figures.

A loner, no friends, little interest in women, possibly a virgin. Unmarried, perhaps living with an older female relative. Probably lives in Connecticut, as Connecticut has high concentrations of Slavs, and many of the bomber’s letters were posted in Westchester County, midway between Connecticut and New York City.

Pleased by all the publicity, Metesky entered into a taunting correspondence with the police by sending letters to the New York Journal American.  A Consolidated Edison clerk, Alice Kelly finally broke the case.  She had been assigned to examine files in which injured workers had made explicit or implicit threats.  She noticed that some of the phrases used in Metesky’s letters to Consolidated Edison matched the correspondence  sent by F.P. to the New York Journal American.  Police arrested Metesky on January 21, 1957.  He made a complete confession and told the officers that F.P.  stood for Fair Play.  Found to be insane, Metesky spent 25 years in a mental hospital before being released, having been unresponsive to therapy but otherwise a model inmate.  He died twenty years later in 1994, age 90.

2

Vices of the Articles of Confederation

On November 15, 1777, two hundred and forty years ago, the Congress approved the Article of Confederation and sends them to the States.  The Articles would not go into effect until March 1, 1781, after being ratified by all of the 13 States.  It is interesting to note, and a truly remarkable fact, that the American Revolution was almost entirely fought with the government of the Union, what little there was of it, being the temporary expedient of the Second Continental Congress.

 

 

In April 1787 James Madison wrote a very interesting document outlining the vices of the political system of the United States under the Articles of Confederation.  It is fascinating to read in light of the Constitutional Convention later that year, and also in light of our experience with the Constitution for over two centuries: Continue Reading

0

PopeWatch: Emptied of Content

Edward Pentin interviews Cardinal Burke at the National Catholic Register.  PopeWatch was struck by this statement of the Cardinal:

 

 

Over and above the moral debate, the sense of the ecclesial sacramental practice is increasingly eroding in the Church, especially when it comes to the sacraments of penance and the Eucharist. The decisive criterion for admission to the sacraments has always been the coherence of a person’s way of life with the teachings of Jesus. If instead the decisive criterion were now to become the absence of a person’s subjective culpability — as some interpreters of Amoris Laetitia have suggested — would this not change the very nature of the sacraments? In fact, the sacraments are not private encounters with God, nor are they means of social integration into a community. Rather, they are visible and effective signs of our incorporation into Christ and his Church, in and by which the Church publicly professes and actuates her faith. Thus, by turning a person’s subjective diminished culpability or lack of culpability into the decisive criterion for the admission to the sacraments, one would endanger the very regula fidei, the rule of faith, which the sacraments proclaim and actuate not only by words, but also by visible gestures. How could the Church continue to be the universal sacrament of salvation if the meaning of the sacraments were to be emptied of its content?

Go here to read the rest.  Catholicism Lite is a religion which masquerades as Catholicism but only has surface similarities.  Recall the mode of operation  of the Left:

 

1. Target a respected institution 2. Kill & clean it 3. Wear it as a skin suit, while demanding respect.

 

 

 

24

Roy Moore: Send in the Clowns

Every good dog and pony show should have a clown interlude and that was supplied yesterday by Gloria “No ambulance should go unchased” Allred.

 

 

 

 

 

Go here to read the accusations of Beverly Nelson Young, who, coincidentally (?), was in the same high school class as Moore’s future wife, who he married in 1984.  Moore has denied everything, and go here to look at a video of his statement.

 

What I find fascinating is the alleged signing by Moore of her yearbook.  I have long regarded handwriting analysis as at best an art rather than a science, but there are people on the internet pointing out facts that might indicate a forgery.  Go here to take a look at one of the posts alleging this.

 

I am not a handwriting analyst, and I will not play one on this blog, but I do have a few questions:

 

  1. Why would Moore sign himself as DA, rather than the Deputy District Attorney, the first full time one appointed in the history of Etowah County?  Attorneys tend to be precise about the offices they hold, and Moore, a newly minted attorney, would have been unlikely to claim the title of his boss.
  2. Why was the restaurant called the Olde Hickory House rather than the Old Hickory House, its correct name?  An odd mistake for Moore to make if he was a regular there, as the alleged victim claimed.  (Scratch this one.  An ad has appeared from 1978 in which the name of the business was spelled Olde Hickory House.)
  3. Handwriting tends to change as people grow older.  (I know mine has.)  How was Moore signing his name back in 1977?
  4. Why give a precise date, 12-22-77, after the note, when the note indicates it was written at Christmas 1977?
  5. OK, I will lapse into handwriting expert just once:  the 77 in Christmas 1977 and in 12-22-77 look different to my completely untrained eyes.
  6. Assuming that Moore had nefarious intent for the young lady, would he, as an attorney, have been stupid enough to give a potential written evidence hostage for the future?  I have been an attorney for 35 years and I can attest that most attorneys tend to be a cautious breed when it comes to protecting themselves.
  7. Why would the alleged victim treat the inscription like a family heirloom all these years?  Why didn’t she rip out the page, strike it out, or have colorful commentary by her written under it noting his attempt to rape her?

I have been involved in more than a few cases where a purported haymaker piece of evidence rebounds on those who seek to use it.  If I were Moore, and if I were innocent, I would demand that the yearbook be submitted to a panel of experts to analyze the handwriting and to attempt to determine the age of the ink.  Stay tuned for future developments in this ongoing soap opera.

 

 

13

PopeWatch: Sins

Catholic prelates in Germany are doing their worst to make Martin Luther seem a champion of orthodoxy by comparison:

 

According to the chairman of the Catholic bishops’ conference of Germany, the death of Jesus Christ was not a redemptive act of God to liberate human beings from the bondage of sin and open the gates of heaven. The Archbishop of Freiburg, Robert Zollitsch, known for his liberal views, publicly denied the fundamental Christian dogma of the sacrificial nature of Christ’s death in a recent interview with a German television station.

Zollitsch said that Christ “did not die for the sins of the people as if God had provided a sacrificial offering, like a scapegoat.”

Instead, Jesus had offered only “solidarity” with the poor and suffering. Zollitsch said “that is this great perspective, this tremendous solidarity.”

The interviewer asked, “You would now no longer describe it in such a way that God gave his own son, because we humans were so sinful? You would no longer describe it like this?”

Monsignor Zollitsch responded, “No.”

Go here to read the rest.  As that noted philosopher Homer Simpson once said:  “This isn’t America!  This isn’t even Mexico!”  This isn’t Catholicism, this isn’t even Protestantism.  The Archbishop has zoomed beyond Christianity entirely and transformed the death of Christ on the Cross into some cheap political statement.  And so we go, down the primrose path, in the Age of Francis.

4

November 14, 1957: The Apalachin Meeting

A Mafia summit meeting was held at the home of Joseph “Joe the Barber” Barbara in Apalachin, New York on November 14, 1957.  Head of the Luciano crime family Vito Genovese  called the meeting to discuss various matters and to attempt to take control of the governing body of the Mafia in America, the Commission having long been divided between a “Conservative Faction” that wanted to run the Mafia in America as the Mafia was conducted in Sicily, and a “Liberal Faction”, led by Genovese, that wanted the Mafia in America to chart its own course free of any Sicilian traditions.  About 100 Mafiosi showed up, with local law enforcement and the New York State Police quickly wondering why all these expensive cars were showing up at a house in sleepy Apalachin.  “Joe the Barber” had been under occasional surveillance by the State Police prior to the meeting.  A raid was conducted and about 58 members of the Mafia, including Genovese, were picked up.  They all claimed that “Joe the Barber” had been sick and they had come to visit him.

 

 

For the Mafia the Apalachin meeting was a long term disaster as it confirmed in the public mind the existence of the Mafia.  After Apalchin, J. Edgar Hoover could no longer ignore the Mafia, and a long term war began between the Federal government and the Mafia which would eventually reduce the Mafia to a shadow of its former self.

10

PopeWatch: Father Perozich

A sign of the wretched times we are living in as Catholics:

 

An outspoken pro-life priest whose bishop banned him from writing bulletin columns is about to retire to Hawaii.

Father Richard Perozich received much attention from the pro-life movement just before the 2016 election when fliers were stuffed in his parish’s bulletins explaining the Democratic Party’s official support for intrinsic evils like abortion. The fliers warned Catholics they put their souls at risk by voting for Democrats. The Diocese of San Diego decried the fliers, which Perozich hadn’t authorized. 

Then, Perozich wrote a bulletin column defending Church teaching on moral issues. He also opined on matters of prudential judgment within Catholic teaching. This led his bishop, Bishop Robert McElroy, to order Perozich to limit his bulletins to “calendaring events.” 

“Bishop McElroy was very gracious in granting” me permission to retire, Perozich, who is nearly 66, told LifeSiteNews.

But Perozich was well-known to the Catholic faithful in the Diocese of San Diego for years before that incident. In his 25 years as a priest, he worked with the diocesan advisory board on Natural Family Planning, started a Courage chapter for people with same-sex attraction seeking chastity, did prison ministry, worked on ecumenical and interfaith efforts, and learned Spanish. 

The “most satisfying” part of being a priest was when Perozich could be “used as an instrument to draw someone to the Lord,” he said. The “best part of being a priest is when one of your people tell me that something I did or said brought you closer to Jesus. Sometimes it can be something I said in a homily, in Confession, [or] in counseling.”

In 2014, Perozich announced to his parish that he was not going to attend a convocation of priests because the speaker was Father Timothy Radcliffe, OP, who has said sodomy can express Christ’s “self-gift.”

Radcliffe “shouldn’t even be given a forum to speak because of his previous expressions on sexual issues and marriage and homosexuality,” said Perozich. “So if you’re going to do that, regardless of who’s going to speak, I’m not going to go.” 

He said he didn’t receive any pushback from the diocese for refusing to go.

“As a Christian, I need top-notch people who are real clear in the fullness of the Catholic faith to be my teachers and to express things,” he said. “I didn’t start a protest for other priests not to go, I didn’t tell anyone else not to go – I just told my parishioners that I wasn’t going.”

Changing language means changing meaning

Perozich said he’s always hopeful about the future, but “realistically,” it doesn’t seem that there will be doctrinal clarity any time soon in the Church.

“I don’t see much ability for that to happen because people are asking for changing of language in the Church,” he explained. “For example, our bishop asked that one of the things in the catechism be changed regarding homosexuality” because calling it “disordered” is “a philosophical term and people misunderstand it as a psychological term.”

“You really can’t change those things because they’ll change the meaning,” said Perozich. And the whole purpose of changing language about actions like same-sex activity is so “that you can indeed change the meaning, change the morality.”

The trend of clergy promoting homosexuality doesn’t seem likely to change, Perozich said. 

 

Go here to read the rest.  The heterodox are placed in charge and the orthodox are forced out.  God help us all.

1

Top Ten Posts of All Time on Almost Chosen People

 

 

I get in a stats mood every now and then.  Here are the top ten most viewed posts on Almost Chosen People, the American history blog I write with Paul Zummo:

  1.  Edmund Burke and the American Revolution is the top post with 13,306 views.  Go here to read it.
  2.  Jefferson and Rousseau-On Democracy comes in number two with 11,592 views.  Go here to read it.
  3.  Sam Houston and Secession is at number three with 10,615 views.  Go here to read it.
  4.  Magna Carta comes in at number four with 9,891 views.  Go here to read it.
  5.  Federalist 51-Madison comes in fifth with 8,708 views.  Go here to read it.
  6.  Washington at Prayer has had 7,316 views.  Go here to read it.
  7.  Edmund Burke’s Views on America has 6,525 views.  Go here to read it.
  8.  Lincoln on the Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas Nebraska Act comes in at 4,836 views.  Go here to read it.
  9.  George Washington in Trafalgar Square has 4,582 views.  Go here to read it.
  10.  Appropriately, Top Ten Movies for the Fourth of July with 4,194 views rounds out our top ten list.  Go here to read it.

I would note that my co-blogger Paul Zummo wrote the posts at 1,2,5, and 7 places and I drafted the remainder.

7

Not One Thin Dime

 

 

 

(This is a repost from 2014.  Nothing has changed in regard to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development and no faithful Catholic should contribute to it.  Go here to read a letter to the Bishops from the Lepanto Institute in regard to the CCHD.)

Between Thanksgiving and Christmas my bride and I usually send Christmas donations to groups we support.  This is the time when we also make a substitute donation to Catholic groups we endorse in lieu of contributing anything to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.  Despite window dressing efforts at reform, the CCHD is still in the business of handing out money, given by good-hearted Catholics who think they are contributing money to help people down on their luck, to left-wing pressure groups, many of whom espouse causes directly contrary to the teachings of the Church.

The Lepanto Institute gives us some details on just what a corrupt organization the CCHD is:

The newly launched Lepanto Institute published a report today, which shows a conflict of interest for Ralph McCloud, the Director of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.

McCloud, who approves grants distributed to community organizing groups on behalf of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, is a member of the board of directors of Interfaith Worker Justice (IWJ).  Two affiliates of Interfaith Worker Justice received CCHD grants for fiscal year 2014-2015.

The IWJ philosophy is another issue of scandal for an organization that is part of the Catholic Church.

“Ralph McCloud was provided with the facts in 2012, with our showing that the leadership of Interfaith Worker Justice is filled with self-professed pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Marxists,” said Michael Hichborn, president of the Lepanto Institute.  “By joining the board of directors of IWJ, McCloud has created for himself the very definition of a conflict of interest, and accepted the role of overseeing distribution of funds to an organization in conflict with the Catholic Church’s teaching.”

A report on the leadership of Interfaith Worker Justice is available here.

“In 2012, my colleagues and I published a report on one of the two IWJ affiliates that are currently receiving grants from the CCHD which are in violation of CCHD guidelines,” Hichborn said.

For Fiscal Year 2014-2015, two affiliates of Interfaith Worker Justice received grants from the CCHD totaling $85,000: Northwest Arkansas Workers Justice Center and The Micah Center.

“How can an individual serve the Church while sitting on the board of IWJ, and in fact approve grants for affiliates of this organization?  It seems impossible,” Hichborn concluded.  “Our Blessed Lord said that man cannot serve two masters, but in the case of IWJ and the CCHD, that is precisely what McCloud is trying to do.”

And this:

The Lepanto Institute issued a report exposing the activities of an organization which received a $35,000 grant from the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD).  According to the report, the Northwest Bronx Community & Clergy Coalition (NWBCCC) launched its own gay straight alliance in 2014, participated in a homosexuality activism coordination event in 2013, and its director of operations signed a letter supporting same-sex marriage.

“CCHD grant guidelines are very clear.  CCHD says it will not fund organizations which are taking actions in violation of Catholic moral teaching,” said Michael Hichborn, president of the Lepanto Institute.  “This is just one more in the long list of failures in the CCHD’s self-proclaimed rigorous screening process.”

The CCHD’s grant guidelines state, “Organizations that receive CCHD funds must not participate in or promote activities that contradict the moral and social teachings of the Catholic Church.”  The Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 2357 specifically states, regarding homosexual acts, “under no circumstances can they be approved.”

“What’s perplexing is that in 2012, The Reform CCHD Now coalition sent a profile on the problems with NWBCCC to the Archdiocese of New York, and the response we received was that they decided not to fund that organization before we even sent them the letter,” said Hichborn.  “So, why are they funding them this year, now that it’s clear that things have gotten worse?” Continue Reading

2

Virgins and the Thief in the Night

Jesus told his disciples this parable:
“The kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins
who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.
Five of them were foolish and five were wise.
The foolish ones, when taking their lamps,
brought no oil with them,
but the wise brought flasks of oil with their lamps.
Since the bridegroom was long delayed,
they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
At midnight, there was a cry,
‘Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’
Then all those virgins got up and trimmed their lamps.
The foolish ones said to the wise,
‘Give us some of your oil,
for our lamps are going out.’
But the wise ones replied,
‘No, for there may not be enough for us and you.
Go instead to the merchants and buy some for yourselves.’
While they went off to buy it,
the bridegroom came
and those who were ready went into the wedding feast with him.
Then the door was locked.
Afterwards the other virgins came and said,
‘Lord, Lord, open the door for us!’
But he said in reply,
‘Amen, I say to you, I do not know you.’
Therefore, stay awake,
for you know neither the day nor the hour.”

Matthew 25: 1-13

I have always liked the ending of the Church year, as we focus in the readings on the Four Last Things:  Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell.  In the above reading our Lord, in His usual manner of a parable, sketches out for us His Second Coming and the Final Judgment on the Last Day.  Saint Augustine interprets this for us:

 

They wished to go to meet the Bridegroom. What is the meaning of to go and meet the Bridegroom? To go with the heart, to be waiting for his coming. But he tarried. While he tarries, they all slept. What is all? Both the foolish and the wise, all slumbered and slept. Think we is this sleep good? What is this sleep? Is it that at the tarrying of the Bridegroom, because iniquity abounds, the love of many waxes cold? Are we to understand this sleep so? I like it not. I will tell you why. Because among them are the wise virgins; and certainly when the Lord said, Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold; He went on to say, But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. Where would you have those wise virgins be? Are they not among those that shall endure unto the end? They would not be admitted within at all, Brethren, for any other reason, than because they have endured unto the end. No coldness of love then crept over them, in them love did not wax cold; but preserves its glow even unto the end. And because it glows even unto the end, therefore are the gates of the Bridegroom opened to them; therefore are they told to enter in, as that excellent servant, Enter into the joy of your Lord. What then is the meaning of they all slept? There is another sleep which no one escapes. Remember ye not the Apostle saying, But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that is, concerning them which are dead? For why are they called they which are asleep, but because they are in their own day? Therefore they all slept. Do you think that because one is wise, he has not therefore to die? Be the virgin foolish, or be she wise, all suffer equally the sleep of death.

7. But men continually say to themselves, Lo, the day of judgment is coming now, so many evils are happening, so many tribulations thicken; behold all things which the Prophets have spoken, are nearly fulfilled; the day of judgment is already at hand. They who speak thus, and speak in faith, go out as it were with such thoughts to meet the Bridegroom. But, lo! war upon war, tribulation upon tribulation, earthquake upon earthquake, famine upon famine, nation against nation, and still the Bridegroom comes not yet. Whilst then He is expected to come, all they who are saying, Lo, He is coming, and the Day of Judgment will find us here, fall asleep. Whilst they are saying this, they fall asleep. Let each one then have an eye to this his sleep, and persevere even unto his sleep in love; let sleep find him so waiting. For suppose that he has fallen asleep. Will not He who falls asleep afterwards rise again? Therefore they all slept; both of the wise and the foolish virgins in the parable, it is said, they all slept.

8. Lo, at midnight there was a cry made. What is, at midnight? When there is no expectation, no belief at all of it. Night is put for ignorance. A man makes as it were a calculation with himself: Lo, so many years have passed since Adam, and the six thousand years are being completed, and then immediately according to the computation of certain expositors, the Day of Judgment will come; yet these calculations come and pass away, and still the coming of the Bridegroom is delayed, and the virgins who had gone to meet him sleep. And, lo, when He is not looked for, when men are saying, The six thousand years were waited for, and, lo, they are gone by, how then shall we know when He will come? He will come at midnight. What is, will come at midnight? Will come when you are not aware. Why will He come when you are not aware of it? Hear the Lord Himself, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons which the Lord has put in His own power. The day of the Lord, says the Apostle, will come as a thief in the night. Therefore watch by night that you be not surprised by the thief. For the sleep of death— will you, or nill ye— it will come.

Our time for preparing for the Second Coming of Christ is during this life.  Rather than speculating as whether we live during the Last Days, let us focus on the certainty that the Last Day will come upon us either before or after we taste death.  The exact time is the Lord’s and not ours.  Ours is the duty for us to prepare our souls for this inevitable event, whether it comes in the next second or a billion years from now.

 

 

3

PopeWatch: Butter or Margarine

From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:

 

Despite efforts to figure whether they were in a Catholic or Protestant service, local parishioners were left baffled after an “animated” man wearing vestments put on a head mic and began pacing back and forth as he delivered his sermon.

“The man looked like a priest and I was quite certain I was in a Catholic Church,” said longtime parishioner Joyce Parlin who had no clue as to what the hell was going on. “But he kept pacing back and forth, ending each statement with a ‘can I get an amen?’ No one was exactly sure what he was asking for. I overheard one gentleman respond, ‘yes, I suppose,’ but the priest or pastor or whatever he was kept desperately asking if he could get more amens.”

Parlin went on to add that the priest or pastor or whatever the heck he was continually used words like “fellowship” and “ministry” during his sermon, words, Parlin admitted, she had never heard before.

“He also used the phrase ‘saved by the Blood of the Lamb,’ which I suppose is some sort of Christian take on the TV show ‘Saved by the Bell.’ Hell, I don’t know.”

At press time, the band has begun singing praise a worship as beach balls are being thrown to and fro, confirming that the event is a Life Teen Mass.

 

Go here to read the comments.   PopeWatch called the Pope for comment, but when he answered he was either speaking in tongues or gargling and PopeWatch was unable to understand him.

6

Every Day Is Veterans Day

Something for the weekend.  Eternal Father.  Today I have the honor of delivering the Veterans Day speech in my village of Dwight.  The speech was written by  my son, Donald John McClarey, who was sworn in as an attorney on Thursday, and who will be joining me to work our law mines.  Here is the text of the speech:

 

 

It is the eleventh hour, of the eleventh day, of the eleventh month. Ninety-nine years ago today, the guns on the Western Front fell silent and World War One ended. After such a great and terrible war, it was only natural that this day became a holiday. Woodrow Wilson proclaimed today Armistice Day in 1919 and thirty states made it a state holiday that same year. In 1938, this day became a national holiday by act of Congress. In 1954, after World War Two, Armistice Day became Veterans Day, to honor all the veterans of all of America’s conflicts.

 

Falling as it does on the day World War One ended, a war that has so greatly shaped our world, as so many of our conflicts in the last century and beyond have, in a sense it is fitting that a holiday celebrating all veterans should be held today. However, in a larger sense, in a far greater sense, is there really only one particular day when we should honor our veterans? No, there is not. In reality, every day is Veterans Day, because the actions and sacrifices of our veterans mark every day we live. They have made the world we live in, and we must ever thank them for what they did for us, both at home and throughout the Earth.

 

 

This sounds perhaps overblown, but it is really just a statement of fact. Who is fighting the Taliban and ISIS? Who fought Communism and won the Cold War? Who fought the Nazis and the Empire of Japan? Who fought the Civil War? Who won our independence? The answer is always the same: veterans, American veterans. Most of them ordinary men, and sometimes ordinary women, at first blush no different from anyone you would meet walking around Dwight, who decided to do something extraordinary and stand up for the ideals this nation was founded on, to defeat tyranny and defend liberty, both here and abroad. These ideals are best summed up in the immortal words of Thomas Jefferson: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

 

 

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These words have always had an immense impact, with the sheer weight of what they promise to all of us, to all mankind. But it is all too easy to imagine worlds where these words are just empty, high-sounding ink on an old piece of parchment, no more important to us than a scribble on a post-it note that we have crumpled and thrown away. It scarcely bears imagining, worlds where the Declaration and everything it promised would be seen as just a historical curiosity, or, at worst, trash, consigned to the forgotten past by those who rule our world. In order to appreciate what our veterans have accomplished, let us imagine such bleak alternate worlds where the truths of the Declaration were defeated.

 

 

Imagine the Declaration under glass in a British museum displaying documents from a failed American colonial revolt in the 1700s, that was just a minor disturbance on the road to breaking the Thirteen Colonies to the distant will of London. Or, in another world, the Declaration being displayed in a different exhibit, one on the founding documents of a failed republic that tore itself apart over slavery in the 1860s, first in two, then into more fragments of a great nation, as secession became a valid option for any grievance, and states fled a failing Union. Or, worst of all, the Declaration being burnt to ashes as Fascist or Communist armies paraded through our streets, ushering in a new era of hideous nightmares for all mankind.

 

 

The last world is unquestionably the most terrifying because in our world those ideologies murdered hundreds of millions of people and terrorized billions more during the past century. One can only imagine the horrors that would have been unleashed in a world where their madness and evil ruled supreme, bringing all that misery and bloodshed right to our homes, to our families. I have no doubt most of us know loved ones who died fighting in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. I’d like you all to join me in a brief moment of silence for them and for everyone who has died because of those murderous ideologies our veterans fought.

 

 

But we, thankfully, do not live in any of those worlds. We do not live in those worlds because the generations here, and the generations before, did not let them come to pass. Veterans of the past and veterans of today, embodying that which is best in all of us, stood and fought on countless battlefields to preserve the ideals of the Declaration of Independence, bringing us the peace and freedom we enjoy in this country today.

 

 

We live in a world where America stands for freedom. Let me repeat that sacred word: freedom! Many in this day and age like to scoff at that assertion, but we know that no other nation enjoys such a bonding to that noble ideal. Our veterans and their deeds are living proof of that. If anyone looks at the battles they fought, and why they were fought, they will know that America fights for freedom. The victories of our veterans were not just victories for our freedom, but for the freedom of all humanity.

 

Men and women throughout the globe do not look to Britain, Germany, Canada, Mexico, or any other nation to serve as beacons of liberty, beacons for the rights of all. They look to America because they know that throughout its history American soldiers have always striven to uphold those ideals. And so, going back to the beginning of this speech, every day is Veterans Day, because every day we live in the world they made, under God, and for this our veterans deserve every honor we can bestow.

 

 

Everything we enjoy, our veterans gave to us, often at a high price for themselves. Our safety, our prosperity, and most importantly, our freedom, were all made possible by their blood and sacrifice. They made a world where this nation stands tallest among all others, and a world where all men, even if they still groan under a tyrant’s rule, know of the American promise of freedom. When our veterans signed up, they knew what high price their duty might demand to protect our homes and our loved ones. They answered the call, and we are ever in their debt. And so on this day, and on all days, we should thank our veterans, not only for their service, but for all we have. May God bless and cherish our veterans, and the country which they have so nobly served.

 

58

Roy Moore and Thirty-Eight Year Old Allegations

The Washington Post delivers a trade mark  eleventh hour hit piece on Roy Moore, the Republican candidate for Senate in Alabama:

 

Corfman, 53, who works as a customer service representative at a payday loan business, says she has voted for Republicans in the past three presidential elections, including for Donald Trump in 2016. She says she thought of confronting Moore personally for years, and almost came forward publicly during his first campaign for state Supreme Court in 2000, but decided against it. Her two children were still in school then and she worried about how it would affect them. She also was concerned that her background — three divorces and a messy financial history — might undermine her credibility.

“There is no one here that doesn’t know that I’m not an angel,” Corfman says, referring to her home town of Gadsden.

Corfman described her story consistently in six interviews with The Post. The Post confirmed that her mother attended a hearing at the courthouse in February 1979 through divorce records. Moore’s office was down the hall from the courtroom.

Neither Corfman nor any of the other women sought out The Post. While reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought relationships with teenage girls. Over the ensuing three weeks, two Post reporters contacted and interviewed the four women. All were initially reluctant to speak publicly but chose to do so after multiple interviews, saying they thought it was important for people to know about their interactions with Moore. The women say they don’t know one another.

Go here to read the rest.  The only story that has mileage is the one with Corfman who was fourteen at the time.  I am skeptical.  I have followed Moore’s career for a very long time.  He has been controversial for his stances, and hated for them, not only by Democrats, but by the Republican establishment in Alabama for decades.  Every piece of dirt imaginable has been thrown at him, but never a hint of sexual scandal, until yesterday.  If there were even rumors that he was chasing underage girls, this would have been front page news long ago.  For my sins, I have been an attorney for 35 years and I have learned that the older an allegation is, the more skepticism is warranted.  The burden of proof is on the accuser, and that burden isn’t close to being met.  Just one example is the undisclosed fact of who put the Washington Post in contact with Corfman and the other women.  If this allegation were brought in court it wouldn’t survive a motion to dismiss drafted by a new attorney who graduated last in her class.  In politics however, evidence and allegations are often not on speaking terms.

 

Update 1: 

One of Moore’s accusers is a far left partisan, now trying to conceal that fact.  Go here to read about it.  You can toss on the ash heap the myth that all the accusers are apolitical people, reluctant to come forward.  I am shocked, shocked I tell you!

 

3

PopeWatch: Pietro De Marco

 

 

 

Sandro Magister publishes a post by Pietro De Marco, one of the signatories of the Correctio who explains how the “spirit of Vatican II” is the source of the attempt by Pope Francis to transform the Church:

THE HERETICAL BACKGROUND OF MUCH OF TODAY’S PASTORAL PRACTICE

by Pietro De Marco

What convinced me to sign the “Correctio” is its doctrinal core, meaning the clarification of the “false and heretical propositions propagated in the Church” even by Pope Francis. The propositions under censure in fact have the value of going to the heart of intellectual opinions and attitudes of theological-dogmatic significance that for decades have been spread in the intellectual Catholic “koinè.”

Pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio participates spontaneously in this “koinè.” It is a result of what is currently called the “spirit of the Council,” meaning of the Council as constructed by the intelligentsia on the sidelines and asserted over the subsequent years. Whole generations, in particular those that are now growing old, have been impregnated with it and are still acting as its representatives with no self-criticism, as if the Church had not gone through more than half a century of travail on account of the errors and perverse effects induced precisely by that “spirit.”

With the current pontificate, a “conciliar” vision made of few formulas, mostly dismissive of that which is the essence of Catholicism – reason and institution, dogma and liturgy, sacraments and morality – is spreading and imposing itself as the public opinion of the Church, sure of the pope’s personal support, brimming with certainty, without discernment of the implications and not without conceit or disdain against those who are opposed to it: in fact, just like every ideology works.

In effect, one grasps an argumentary and rhetorical aspect of this not only of the pontiff’s opinings, but also in official documents like “Amoris Laetitia.” Thus, by way of example, the distinction between regular and irregular is taken as “artificial and exterior”; the age-old judgment on Protestantism is attributed to “fear and prejudice about the other’s faith”; respect for tradition means “keeping in mothballs, like a coating against parasites”; the age-old legitimization of the death penalty on the part of the Church is traced back to the “preoccupation to hold on to power and wealth”; and so on. A dismissive attitude and typical “grassroots” rhetoric, in addition to the anticlerical repertoire, that infested the 1960’s and ‘70’s (I have a detailed and abundant memory of this, between Florence and Bologna) from which the militant conciliar “momentum” never freed itself, but which were in decline until the election of Bergoglio as pope paradoxically re-legitimized them at the very top.

Premises and effects of this culture are indeed expressed in the propositions defined as “false and heretical” by the “Correctio.” Such propositions must be understood as implicit assumptions, or as major premises, of what that “conciliar” vision has for years consistently affirmed or proposed for belief, and implements on the so-called pastoral terrain. When word and practice are brought to their objective premise of a doctrinal nature, their erosive and destructive power appears. These are, in fact, the doctrinal chasms that for decades have made it possible for pastoral practice to drift along on formulas that are liberating, approachable, generous, accompanied by reassurances for the faithful relative to their “evangelical” foundation: a foundation that is taken as self-evident, given the conformity of Jesus, a Jesus weak and “sinful,” to the human as ordinarily experienced.

In the face of all this, the “Correctio” is like a little “Pascendi,” the anti-modernist encyclical of one hundred and ten years ago, but however – and dramatically – does not come from a pontiff but is addressed to him as a censure.

*

It has been pointedly noted how, precisely in the “critical” theological and pastoral cultures that accompany the action of the pope, always aimed at downgrading canon law, unprecedented attention is now being paid to norms. Why? Because the pastoral sensibility, devoid of any theological rationale, has become a pursuit of reduction, of exoneration.  The pastoral concerns that guide clergies and episcopates today consist in seeking to guarantee a sort of egalitarian treatment for the faithful, to gratify them with a public recognition of equal rights of which access to the Eucharist is only the tip of the iceberg, no matter what their situation with regard to moral theology and canon law.  Not many seem to realize this, not even the pope, but the pastoral practice of mercy today runs, particularly in the urban and secularized societies of the whole world, in the petit bourgeois “existential peripheries” more than in the “favelas,” precisely the perverse machinery of the hypertrophy of individual rights.

 

Go here to read the rest.

3

Happy 242nd Birthday to the Corps!

 

Some people work an entire lifetime and wonder if they ever made a difference to the world. But the Marines don’t have that problem.

President Ronald Reagan, letter to Lance Corporal Joe Hickey, September 23, 1983

 

 

 

 

 

On November 10, 1775 the Continental Congress passed this resolution authored by John Adams:

“Resolved, That two battalions of Marines be raised consisting of one colonel, two lieutenant-colonels, two majors, and other officers, as usual in other regiments; that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken that no persons be appointed to office, or enlisted into said battalions but such as are good seamen, or so acquainted with maritime affairs as to be able to serve with advantage by sea when required; that they be enlisted and commissioned to serve for and during the present War with Great Britain and the colonies, unless dismissed by order of Congress; that they be distinguished by names of First and Second Battalions of American Marines, and that they be considered as part of the number which the Continental Army before Boston is ordered to consist of.”

At the various birthday celebrations by the Marine Corps today, the song given pride of place will of course be the Marines’ Hymn.  The oldest of the official songs of a branch of the US military, the composer of the Marines’ Hymn is unknown, but is thought to have been a Marine serving in Mexico during the Mexican War, hence the “Halls of Montezuma”.  The music is taken from the Gendarmes Duet from the Opera Genevieve de Brabant, written by Jacques Offenback in 1859.

Prior to 1929 the first verse used to end:

” Admiration of the nation,
we’re the finest ever seen;
And we glory in the title
Of United States Marines”

which the then Commandant of the Marine Corps changed to the current lines.  On November 21, 1942,  Commandant Thomas Holcomb approved a change in the words of the first verse’s fourth line from “On the land as on the sea” to “In the air, on land, and sea”.

My favorite rendition of the hymn is in the movie The Sands of Iwo Jima (1949)  This film earned John Wayne his first Oscar nomination as best actor.  (Broderick Crawford would win for his stunning performance in All The King’s Men.)   Wayne was initially reluctant to take the role, partly because he had not fought in World War II, and partly because he saw script problems and didn’t like the character of Sergeant Styker as initially written in the screen play.  (There is evidence that Wayne, 34 at the time of Pearl Harbor, and with 3 kids, did attempt to volunteer in 1943 for the Marine Corps with assignment to John Ford’s OSS Field Photographic Unit, but was turned down.)  Continue Reading

10

Twenty-Eight Years Since the Fall of the Berlin Wall

 

Twenty-eight years ago today my bride and I arrived home from buying software for our Commodore 64  (Yeah, it is that long ago.) and watched stunned after we turned on the tv as we saw East Germans dancing on top of the Berlin War, tearing into it with sledge hammers.   It is hard to convey to people who did not live through the Cold War how wonderful a sight this was.  Most people at the time thought the Cold War was a permanent state of things.  Not Ronald Wilson Reagan.  He knew that Communism would end up on the losing side of history and throughout his career strove to bring that day ever closer.  His becoming President so soon after John Paul II became Pope set the stage for the magnificent decade of the Eighties when Communism passed from being a deadly threat to the globe to a belief held only by a handful of benighted tyrannical regimes around the world, and crazed American professors.  In most of his movies, the good guys won in the end, and Reagan helped give us a very happy ending to a menace that started in 1917 and died in 1989.

 

 

Here is an interview Sam Donaldson did with Reagan immediately after the fall of the wall:

Lech Walesa, a leader of that band of millions of heroes and heroines, at the head of which were Pope John Paul II and President Ronald Reagan, who won the Cold War, gave this salute to Reagan after Reagan died in 2004: Continue Reading

10

Clinton Health: The Inside Story

Remember last year when concerns about Clinton’s health were dismissed as right-wing rubbish by the mainstream media?

 

 

Former DNC chairman Donna Brazile says she doesn’t think Hillary Clinton would have remarked that half of Donald Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables” if she was in “better health.”

Brazile reveals in her just-released book Hacked that she saw Clinton right before she made the “basket of deplorables” comment, and it was the first time she noticed “Hillary did not look well.”

Brazile “noticed her face was puffy,” “her skin looked pale and papery,” and “her eyes were glazed.” She approached Clinton about her health before the speech and observed her to be “wobbly on her feet” with a “rattled cough” so bad Brazile suggested medical attention.

Go here to read the rest.  Always remember that one of the goals of most of the media is to protect Democrat candidates during elections from true allegations.

 

3

PopeWatch: Not a Show!

 

 

PopeWatch completely agrees with the Pope:

 

And furthering his comments on how, too often, the Mass is lived in a superficial way, Pope Francis remarked on the fact that the priest who celebrates says “Lift up your hearts” not “Lift up your cellphones  to take a photo!”

“This is a bad thing” he said, “It makes me very sad when I celebrate Mass here in the Square or in the Basilica and I see many cellphones raised. And it’s not only the faithful, but also many priests and bishops. Please! Mass is not a show!” 

 

Go here to read the rest.

 

0

Reb Marines

 

Born on March 16, 1861 by an Act of the Confederate Congress,  the Confederate States Marine Corps had an authorized strength of 45 officers and 944 enlisted men, increased in 1862 to 1026 enlisted men.  The Marines never had more than 600 men at one time during the War.  Throughout the War the headquarters and training facilities of the CSMC was at Camp Beal on Drewry’s Bluff and at the Gosport Navy Yard at Norfolk.  The Marines were led by Colonel-Commadant Lloyd J. Beall, a former major and paymaster in the United States Army.  Much of the records of the CSMC were destroyed by a fire in Beall’s home after the War in 1887, which also killed Beall. Continue Reading

0

Yankee Marines

 

 

 

During the Civil War the United States Marine Corp had its authorized strength increased to 3000 men, minuscule compared to the Union Army that reached over a million men.  Marine Commandant Colonel John Harris was a traditionalist who believed that the Marines should guard ships and man artillery batteries, leaving the numerous amphibious invasions that took place during the War to the Army.  Even with this restricted scope, 17 Marines earned the newly created Medals of Honor during the War.  Go here to read a comprehensive list of Marine participation in the Civil War.

 

11

More Than Conquerors

As faithful readers of this blog know,  I have often posted humorous videos from The Lutheran Satire.  The man behind the videos, Lutheran Pastor Hans Fiene, has a profound reflection on the Sutherland shootings at The Federalist:

 

So when a madman with a rifle sought to persecute the faithful at First Baptist Church on Sunday morning, he failed. Just like those who put Christ to death, and just like those who have brought violence to believers in every generation, this man only succeeded in being the means through which God delivered his children from this evil world into an eternity of righteousness and peace.

“We do not need to fear the day of persecution that’s coming to the church, because God said it’s going to come. He warned us over 2,000 years ago the day was coming. And rather than fear it, He said just endure it. Now ‘endure it’ is a hard word. ‘Endure it’ doesn’t mean that they might take your ice cream away today. ‘Endure it’ means it may be a rough day. It may be a rough few years. But the one who endures to the end will be delivered.”

 

These are words that First Baptist’s pastor, Frank Pomeroy, preached on October 19, 2014—a little more than three years before his 14-year-old daughter and 25 other members of his congregation were murdered. Despite the immense sorrow he, his family, and his congregation are now experiencing, I pray they will still trust in these words.

Despite the horror that madman made the saints of First Baptist endure, those who endured it with faith in Christ have received his victory. Although the murderer filled their eyes with terror, God has now filled them with his glory. Although he persecuted them with violence, God seized that violence and has now used it to deliver his faithful into a kingdom of peace. Although this madman brought death to so many, God has used that death to give them the eternal life won for them in the blood of Jesus.

 

Those who persecute the church and those who mock Christians for trusting in Almighty God rather than Almighty Government may believe that the bloodshed in Texas proves the futility of prayer. But we believers see the shooting in Texas as proof of something far different—proof that Christ has counted us worthy to suffer dishonor for his name and proof that no amount of dishonor, persecution, or violence can stop him from answering our prayer to deliver us from evil.

 

Go here to read the rest.

 

31What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? 36As it is written:

“For your sake we face death all day long;

we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.”j

37No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,k neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Romans 8: 31-39

 

 

9

PopeWatch: Stamp

 Is the Pope Catholic?  Remember when that was an adage to indicate the affirmative of a statement?
Antonio Socci:“The Vatican in a complete mess with its celebration of Luther the Heretic in the place of Our Lady.  Never-ending shame in the dark age of Bergoglio.
November 1, 2017
Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen. When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own”. (John 19,25-27).
 
 
This is one of the most fundamental moments in the Life of Jesus, the very apex of His redeeming mission. Mary is there and right next to Her is John. From that moment on Mary is the Mother of all those who are to come into the Church: Mater Ecclesiæ, as Paul VI called Her at the closure of the Second Vatican Council.
 
However,  Holy Mother Church, to commemorate the event of the 95 theses nailed by Martin Luther to the great door of the Wittenberg Church 500 years ago, thought well about issuing a fine stamp, through the Vatican Post Office. It is described like this in the official presentation:
“It depicts Jesus Crucified in the foreground on a gold, timeless background showing Wittenberg city. In an attitude of penance, on their knees respectively on the left and the right of the the Cross, Martin Luther holds a Bible, source and purpose of his doctrine, while Philip Melanchthon, theologian and a friend of Martin Luther’s, one of the most important protagonists of the Reformation, holds in his hand the Augsburg Confession, Confessio Augustuana, the first official exposition of the principles of Protestantism  which were drawn up by him.
Go here to read the rest at Rorate Caeli.  The Church is being led by fools and worse.
7

Every Day Heroes

The Sutherland shootings showed humanity at its worst and at its best.  Rich Lowry points out the best:

 

 

The response by the two by-standers who refused to stand by is something else entirely. It was a characteristically small-town American act of self-reliance that shows, no matter how tattered our civil society may be, it still produces people who will risk life and limb for others without hesitation, unbidden by anything other than their own sense of obligation.

When Stephen Willeford, 55, heard of the shooting, he left his house barefoot with his AR-15 and started exchanging fire with Kelley outside the church. An expert shot, Willeford hit Kelley and reportedly aimed for the gaps on his body armor.

When Kelley got in an SUV and sped off, Willeford jumped in Johnnie Langendorff’s truck and told him to give chase.

Langendorff, 27, didn’t ask any questions. He followed Kelley at 95 mph down the highway, until the perpetrator ran off the road into a ditch.

Willeford jumped out of the truck and rested his rifle on top of Langendorff’s hood and shouted for Kelley to “get out.” The murderer apparently took his own life with a gun shot.

 

Go here to read the rest.  Courage in the face of extreme evil is a valuable lesson for all of us.

3

Curse of Tippecanoe

 

 

Two hundred and six years ago, Territorial Governor of Indiana William Henry Harrison smashed the forces of the Indian Confederacy being formed by Tecumseh.  His victory would propel him into the White House three decades later.  His thirty-one day tenure, before dying of pneumonia, is the shortest presidential term on record.

 

An odd coincidence in American history is the death of every President in office beginning with William Henry Harrison and ending with John F. Kennedy elected in a year ending in zero.  A myth was developed ascribing this to a curse put on William Henry Harrison by the brother of the great Indian leader Tecumseh, Tenskwatawa, better known as the Prophet: Continue Reading

4

PopeWatch: Father Z

When Father Z is on a role, he is on a role:

 

Coyote, Wile E., (aka Michael Sean Winters… indelibly dubbed by Robbie George as the Wile E. Coyote of the catholic Left) and the National Schismatic Reporter, has fulfilled his duty as a cadre of the New catholic Red Guards today, by piling on with others in a “struggle” against Fr. Thomas Weinandy.

Here is a taste:

Hypocrisy marks DiNardo‘s inadequate response to Weinandy [Translation: Card. DiNaro is a hypocrite because he does hurt Weinandy as much as Comrade Coyote would.]

I am not sure which is worse, the fact that Capuchin Fr. Tom Weinandy, a former director of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Doctrine, could pen such a ridiculously presumptuous letter to the pope, or that the current leadership of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops could respond in such a thoroughly inadequate way [See? He’s attacking DiNardo.  He has already recently criticized the bishops – because he can criticize in his role as New catholic Red Guards cadre – because he doesn’t like the USCCB fall meeting agenda… as if they asked him.]

Mgsr. John Strynkowski, Weinandy’s predecessor at the doctrinal committee, has already published a striking response to Weinandy’s letter, with a point-by-point rebuttal. I need not repeat Strynkowski’s arguments and I most definitely wish to associate myself with them. [Strynkowski accompanied Chicago’s Archbishop Cupich as a theologian to the Synod on the Family.]

Still, I have some other concerns. Weinandy did not merely object to this or that thing Pope Francis has said or done; the whole tone of his letter, his choice of words, showed a lack of respect and humility that was appalling[And yet here we are reading Comrade Coyote remark that Card. DiNardo is a hypocrite and the USCCB is inadequate. But! The “tone” of Weinandy’s letter was lacking in respect. Go read the letter and see for yourselves.]

[…]

Weinandy and his ilk fret about all those faithful Catholics who are scandalized by Francis. Bosh. Francis is probably the most popular pope in history, [Jesus said it’s all about “popularity”] maybe not at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, [the cadre whistles and points at yet another place for the Left to attack] but in most areas where loyal Catholics [“loyal”… no, you don’t want to go against Mao Thought… believe me!] warm to the pope’s refreshing pleas for more mercy and less judgment. [Just like the mercy and lack of judgment Comrade Coyote is now showing to Fr. Weinandy.] Most conservative Catholics love this pope. There are opponents, to be sure, and they are well-funded and very noisy, but they are a sliver of the population.  [See Fr. Hunwicke’s reaction to this.  Priceless!]

[…]

Not once does DiNardo distinguish between Weinandy’s malicious ranting and the Holy Father’s magisterial teaching. [He’s already accused DiNardo of being a hypocrite.  Now comes the implication if not being “loyal” enough.] Indeed, the word magisterium does not appear even once in the statement. [COMRADE COYOTE ladies and gents!  From that perennial defender of the MAGISTERIUM the National Schismatic Reporter.] A Jewish friend, upon reading DiNardo’s statement, observed, “I thought your church was hierarchical.”  [Because the Fishwrap, which used to want popular election of bishops when JP2 and B16 were Popes, is not all about being “hierarchical”.  ]

Don’t get me wrong. I am all for civility and dialogue.  [This from Mr. Venom himself!  HERE.  Be sure to go to that link!]

[…]

It almost writes itself as self-parody.

Some time ago I was given a poster from the Cultural Revolution in 1966, when it was really getting underway.   Given the times we are now living in, I just had it framed and I’ve put it on a wall, to remind me of the violence that Catholics are up against from the liberal Left.

 

Go here to read the rest.  Catholic Leftists posing as utramontanists is akin to Catholic politicians who claim to be good Catholics while voting for abortion:  both nauseating and completely unconvincing.

38

Mark Shea Knows Who To Blame For the Sutherland Shootings

My co-blogger Paul Zummo takes a peek at the Leftist shell that was once Mark Shea:

 

The last drops of blood had not been shed before this nut and his hypocritical followers were casting all gun owners out into the eternal darkness.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php…

 

Mark Shea

15 hrs

“This is a time for thoughts and prayers, not politics”. Bunk.
Using “thoughts and prayers” as weapons against taking action to prevent future slaughter is the *real* insult to the dead and always has been. It’s also an insult to God Almighty. By 12/31/17, 35,000 more people who should still be alive will–as on December 31 of every year–be dead. They will be dead because “thoughts and prayers” were used as weapons to defend the profits of an arms industry that could not care less about their deaths. Thoughts and prayers used to defend human sacrifices to Mammon are an abomination whether Mammon receives his libations of blood from Planned Parenthood or the National Rifle Association.

It is hardly worth responding to Shea anymore, but he of course he ignores that it was  a good guy with a rifle who likely brought this fiend to Eternal Justice:

Stephen Willeford, who lives near the Texas church targeted yesterday, grabbed his own rifle and rushed to confront Devin Kelley after being told an attack was underway by his daughter.

As the 55-year-old arrived outside the church he came face-to-face with Kelley.

Mr Willeford, a plumber with no military experience, shot him in the side through a gap in his body armour, forcing the killer to flee.

Mr Willeford and another passing resident, Johnnie Langedorff, then chased him at almost 100 miles per hour in a car as the wounded killer tried to make a getaway after taking a hostage.

Kelley is said to have killed 26 people – including a child aged five – when he stormed into the church on Sunday dressed in black tactical gear and armed with an assault rifle.

Go here to read the rest.  Weapons are as good or bad as the man wielding them, no more and no less:

 

2

“Well Funded”

“You’re right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars next year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I’ll have to close this place in… 60 years.”

Charles Foster Kane, (Orson Welles) Citizen Kane

 

 

A favorite tactic of some of the Catholic Left is to accuse faithful Catholics who speak out in the Public Square of being “well-funded” from no doubt sinister sources.  Father Hunwicke remarks upon this:

Gimme money!

 
Don’t miss this … a wonderfully, miraculously funny piece of hysteria in The National Catholic Reporter by an individual called Michael Sean Winters, screaming his abuse at Fr Weinandy. It is a classic, a real winner!

One little factual query. Winters says that the opponents of PF (opponents whom, incidentally, he appears to invite to leave the Church or at least her Ministry) are “well-funded and very noisy”. If he would count me in this category, I would have no problem about being deemed “very noisy”.

But “well-funded”? My wife and I live off our Church of England pension, with one or two modest additions. 

“Well-funded”! How do I get my hands on all this limitless loot which is apparently swilling around? Who dispenses it? To whom should I make application? Why has nobody told me about this before? How is a poor convert supposed to know about this eldorado if nobody tells him?

I want money! And I want it now! Just tell me whom to ask! 

Go here to read the comments.  This brought to mind a post that I made on August 24, 2012 entitled “Don There’s A Nut On The Phone.”

 

 

 

I was working at my desk in the law mines Wednesday afternoon, when I heard one of my secretaries say loudly “Mr. McClarey never speaks to anyone who will not give their name!” followed by a phone being slammed down.  I sauntered into her office to see what was up.  She told me that some bitter old harpy was yelling and talking a mile a minute, demanding to speak to me and ranting about who was paying for The American Catholic, that Biden was a better Catholic than Paul Ryan, and spewing various insults aimed at conservatives.  When she wouldn’t give her name my secretary hung up on her per our standard operating procedures.  I learned long ago that if someone will not leave their name that is almost a certain sign of someone with a few screws loose, and I simply do not have the time to waste dealing with such phone calls.  My other secretary heard us and said that she had received a similar call a few minutes ago and after letting the woman vent for five minutes hung up on her after she repeatedly ignored requests to give my secretary her name.  At this time the caller called back and we put her through to voice mail.  The person began her diatribe by denouncing me as a coward, this from someone who would not give her name.  I deleted her call at this point since she was obviously merely going to repeat the tiresome rant that my secretaries had already described to me.

If she had merely given her name I would have been happy to talk to her and tell her who is paying for The American Catholic.  Fifty percent of our revenue comes from the Vatican.  I was in the midst of fingering my monthly pot of Vatican gold when she called.  This of course is in addition to the squad of albino squirrel assassins that I received from the Vatican when I helped form The American Catholic four years ago this October.  The remainder of our funds comes from the Koch Brothers.  They usually pay us in blood diamonds, although I would note that the shipment last month seemed to be of a lesser quality than they customarily send.  As a result, I am happy to report that each contributor to The American Catholic is rich, rich beyond your wildest dreams of avarice!  (Don laughs evilly:  Ha! Ha, Ha, Ha!  Chortle, snort!)

Then you wake up.  The sad and sorry truth is that we are all unpaid volunteers.  My income for four years toiling away at this blog is 0.  Next year I hope to increase it to 0.00.

A few observations in regard to my would be interlocutor.

1.  How pathetic does  a life have to be when someone, outraged over a blog, decides to work herself into a rage and call a complete stranger to vent?

2.  Other than venting what good did she think she could do by calling?  Did she think she was going to intimidate me?

3.  I blog for fun and I am always vastly amused by people who take any of this as seriously as the deranged nut who called me.  Perhaps it is my Irish blood or my profession, but although I enjoy a good verbal or written combat, I never take any of it seriously.

4.   I wonder if the deranged 83 year old Planned Parenthood supporter, who spit in the face of the Romney supporter in the video at the beginning of the post, is related to my caller?

5.   Many liberals live their life in an ideological bubble and when they encounter conservatives their first reaction is not to debate, but to lash out.  My caller obviously fits into this category.

6.  I said a prayer for my caller that something might fill her life rather than the anger that seems to have a grip on her.  Thank you guardian angel for the impulse to do so!

7.  In the law mines you tend to encounter people under stress and some are fairly loosely wired.  If my caller was intending to cause me something more than brief amusement, she failed.

8.  I trust that my caller will continue to read The American Catholic.  She may be none the wiser as a result, but she will be so much better informed.  (If she has low blood pressure, I think that reading TAC will help cure that malady for her!)

9.  Our goals at TAC are to enlighten and amuse.  However, if I have to choose, I will always prefer rage at what we write instead of complete indifference.

10. There is a scene in Citizen Kane that I have always enjoyed:

Thatcher puts on his hat.

                                    THATCHER

                        I happened to see your consolidated

                        statement yesterday, Charles.  Could I not suggest to you that it  is unwise for you to continue this philanthropic enterprise –

                               (sneeringly)

                        this Enquirer – that is costing you one million dollars a year?

                                    KANE

                        You’re right.  We did lose a million dollars last year.

          Thatcher thinks maybe the point has registered.

                                    KANE

                        We expect to lost a million next

                        year, too.  You know, Mr. Thatcher –

                               (starts tapping quietly)

                        at the rate of a million a year –

                        we’ll have to close this place in sixty years.

TAC of course has no money to lose.  As a result I promise our well wishers and detractors that we will be around for a very, very long time indeed!

8

Jesus Wept: 26 People Murdered in Baptist Church Shooting

 

 

Further demonstration, if any were needed, of the presence of sheer evil in our fallen world:

A gunman opened fire inside the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs on Sunday, killing 26 people and wounding 20 others, authorities said.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called the attack the deadliest mass shooting in his state’s history. The youngest victim was 5 years old and the oldest was 72. Officials said 23 people were found dead inside the church, two outside, one died after being taken to a hospital.

The shooting suspect has been identified as 26-year-old Devin Patrick Kelley, federal law enforcement sources told CBS News.

Kelley is a former U.S. Air Force member who served from 2010 to 2014. He was dishonorably discharged and court martialed in May 2014, CBS News has learned.

On Sunday night, authorities only identified the suspect as a young white male. They said he was seen dressed in all black and tactical gear — including a “ballistic vest” — at a local gas station at 11:20 a.m. He then exited his vehicle, crossed the street and began firing an AR-15 style weapon at the church, officials said. The suspect entered the church and continued to fire.

As he exited the church, a local resident grabbed his gun and pursued the suspect, who dropped his weapon and fled the scene.

Go here to read the rest.  Lots of junk floating around the internet about the shooter being a muslim convert or a member of antifa.  Believe nothing for now until we have more sound information, as a lot of this seems to be produced by conspiracy theorists from the basements of their mothers.  More to follow as we learn more facts.  For now, let us pray for the dead and wounded and their families:

Almighty, Everlasting God, who hast dominion over the living and the dead, and showest mercy unto all whom Thou knowest will be Thine by faith and works: we humbly beseech Thee that they for whom we have resolved to pour forth our prayers, whether this present world still detain them in the flesh, or the world to come hath already received them stripped of their bodies, may, by the grace of Thy fatherly love, and through the intercession of all the Saints, obtain the remission of all their sins. Through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

 

9

November 5, 1775: Remember, Remember

 

Today is Guy Fawkes’ Day in England.  This Catholic-bashing holiday is not observed in America and the Father of Our Country is largely the reason why:

“As the Commander in Chief has been apprized of a design form’d for the observance of that ridiculous and childish custom of burning the Effigy of the pope – He cannot help expressing his surprise that there should be Officers and Soldiers in this army so void of common sense, as not to see the impropriety of such a step at this Juncture; at a Time when we are solliciting, and have really obtain’d, the friendship and alliance of the people of Canada, whom we ought to consider as Brethren embarked in the same Cause. The defence of the general Liberty of America: At such a juncture, and in such Circumstances, to be insulting their Religion, is so monstrous, as not to be suffered or excused; indeed instead of offering the most remote insult, it is our duty to address public thanks to these our Brethren, as to them we are so much indebted for every late happy Success over the common Enemy in Canada.”

Order in Quarters, November 5, 1775

General George Washington

It is good to remember just how wonderful a nation America truly is.

2

Seat of Moses

Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying,
“The scribes and the Pharisees
have taken their seat on the chair of Moses.
Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you,
but do not follow their example.
For they preach but they do not practice.
They tie up heavy burdens hard to carry
and lay them on people’s shoulders,
but they will not lift a finger to move them.
All their works are performed to be seen.
They widen their phylacteries and lengthen their tassels.
They love places of honor at banquets, seats of honor in synagogues,
greetings in marketplaces, and the salutation ‘Rabbi.’
As for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi.’
You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers.
Call no one on earth your father;
you have but one Father in heaven.
Do not be called ‘Master’;
you have but one master, the Christ.
The greatest among you must be your servant.
Whoever exalts himself will be humbled;
but whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”

Matthew 23: 1-12

 

When Peter first met with Christ he told Him to leave him, because he was a sinful man.  Perhaps Peter had many sins on his soul, but I think it more likely that he simply was not a learned man and was unable to keep, or even be aware of, the myriad ritual purity laws of the Jews, and thus he regarded himself as sinful and unclean as a result.  Judaism had largely been reduced to a system of avoiding ritual impurity by the time of Jesus, and only a man, a Scribe or a  Pharisee, who devoted himself to the study of the Law, could possibly keep the hundreds of laws that Jews had to observe if they were to be kept free from ritual impurity “sin”.  The greatest of the Rabbis understood that mercy and justice were much more important to God than the observance of the endless minutiae of the Law governing ritual impurity, but as the general reaction of the Scribes and the Pharisees to Jesus indicates, their voices were in the minority.

Jesus acknowledges that the Scribes and the Pharisees were the leaders of the Jewish religion.  (As usual Jesus ignores the Sadducees who ran the Temple.  Presumably they were so far from God that it was not worth His time speaking against them.)  He bids the people to do what they say but not to follow their example.  By their works they demonstrated how far their hearts were from what Moses had taught, let alone Christ.  Christ respected the office held by the Pharisees, the seat of Moses that they had assumed, but constantly attacked them for failing to live up to that office.  Words of special meaning to Catholics in this year of grace 2017.

 

1

Benjamin Franklin and Daylight Savings Time

(Enjoy the extra hour due to the temporary ending of Daylight Savings Time.  Here is a post from 2015 noting yet another idea of our Founding Father polymath.)

Throughout his illustrious, and hectic, career, Benjamin Franklin found time to write anonymous satirical pieces which he wrote as a form of relaxation.  Here is one written in 1784 in which he suggests the adoption of a rudimentary form of Daylight Savings Time:

 

 

Time 06

To THE AUTHORS of
The Journal of Paris

 

MESSIEURS,

You often entertain us with accounts of new discoveries. Permit me to communicate to the public, through your paper, one that has lately been made by myself, and which I conceive may be of great utility.

I was the other evening in a grand company, where the new lamp of Messrs. Quinquet and Lange was introduced, and much admired for its splendour; but a general inquiry was made, whether the oil it consumed was not in proportion to the light it afforded, in which case there would be no saving in the use of it. No one present could satisfy us in that point, which all agreed ought to be known, it being a very desirable thing to lessen, if possible, the expense of lighting our apartments, when every other article of family expense was so much augmented.

I was pleased to see this general concern for economy, for I love economy exceedingly.

Continue Reading

3

PopeWatch: Veneration

From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:

 

 

Protestants from across the globe flocked to Wittenberg, Germany Tuesday to venerate a statue of Martin Luther in honor of the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation.

Many in the Lutheran and Lutheran-leaning community including pastor of Torrential Downpour Church Morgan Kremin attended ceremonies that started with a morning veneration of the statue of Martin Luther located near All Saints’ Church in Wittenberg and concluded with a collection to help fund the building of several new mega-churches.

“Could the money have gone to the poor–yes,” Kremin admitted to EOTT. “But it’s important that we build these churches so that everyone, be they rich or poor, can come to worship the Lord, even though praying to Jesus is no different in a large church than it is in a home, or even though we know that, for the most part, the homeless don’t actually ever come to our church, and that asking our people, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet, to spend their hard-earned income on exorbitant churches is one of the issues we had with the Catholic Church during the Reformation. But the fact remains that building large things and paying for ridiculous salaries cost money. There’s no way around it.”

Kremin went on to clarify, saying that it wasn’t at all like the selling of indulgences since the selling of indulgences meant that people were essentially paying for their salvation, while what Kremin was saying was that being a true Christian and therefore being saved is contingent on Christian’s paying for such expenditures.

“Totally different.”

 

Go here to read the comments.  PopeWatch called the Vatican for comment, but was told that the Pope was busy polishing his statue of Luther and couldn’t come to the phone.

 

2

La Marseillaise

God of mercy and justice
See our tyrants, judge our hearts
Thy goodness be with us
Defend us from these oppressors
You reign in heaven and on earth
And before You all must bend
In your arms, come support us
You Great God, Lord of the thunder.

Rarely sung stanza of La Marseillaise

 

 

 

Something for the weekend.   La Marseillaise, sung by New Zealand born opera singer Frances Alda, the toast of New York.  Recorded on June 1, 1917, the week after the US entered World War I, the song was number 22 of the top 40 for the US that year, reflecting the crusade like atmosphere felt by most Americans to save France from the Germans.

16

PopeWatch: War

Pope Francis used an American military cemetery in Italy for his no war theme:

 

 

“No more, Lord, no more (war)” that shatters dreams and destroys lives, bringing a cold, cruel winter instead of some sought-after spring, Pope Francis said looking out at the people gathered for an outdoor Mass at a U.S. war memorial and cemetery.

“This is the fruit of war: death,” he said, as the bright Italian sun lowered in the sky on the feast of All Souls, Nov. 2.

On a day the church offers special prayers for the faithful departed with the hope of their meeting God in heaven, “here in this place, we pray in a special way for these young people,” he said, gesturing toward the rows of thousands of graves.

Christian hope can spring from great pain and suffering, he said, but it can also “make us look to heaven and say, ‘I believe in my Lord, the redeemer, but stop, Lord,” please, no more war, he said.

“With war, you lose everything,” he said.

 

Go here to read the rest.  Of course the Pope is wrong in his final sentence.  By being defeated by the US and its Allies in World War II, Italy cast off Mussolini and gained democracy.  By becoming part of Nato, Italy has had the longest period of peace for the peninsula since the time of Cato the Elder.  On a personal note, PopeWatch hopes that the Pope will not use a US military cemetery again for one of his historically ignorant pacifist screeds.  These are places of honor, and the brave men whose bodies rest there for their resurrection are not props for the Pope to use in his pacifist morality play.

 

 

 

2

Quotes Suitable for Framing: Theodore Roosevelt

 

 

In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with every one else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birthplace or origin. But this is predicated upon the man’s becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American.

“If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn’t doing his part as an American.

“We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We have room for but one language here and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, and American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding house; and we have room for but one sole loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people.

Theodore Roosevelt, January 5, 1919  (The last public statement made by Roosevelt prior to his death on January 6, 1919.)

18

Quotes Suitable for Framing: Father Anonymous

I am a Catholic priest. Sadly, I must remain anonymous out of fear. What Fr. Weinandy has written is truth. I’m quite certain that thousands and thousands of my brother priests feel the same way and are very concerned with Pope Francis. We pray for him, love his office, and want what’s best for him. Yet this pontificate is the most uninspiring thing to happen during our priestly lives. How do I know this? Because many of us talk about it with each other. Yet we are scared of retaliation if we share this with our bishops, religious superiors, or our ‘papa’. We feel like we are living in a household with an abusive father who needs an intervention but we fear he will beat us. We are trapped. We love Jesus, His Church, and the papacy so much that we are very hesitant to speak publicly about our concerns with Pope Francis. We are suffering greatly. Pray for us! We pray for better days. Days of clarity, truth, and zeal for God’s house. Those days will come again.

Anonymous Priest in the Comboxes of Catholic World Report-Go here  to read the original comment.

3

PopeWatch: Cardinal Sarah

Sandro Magister notes that the Pope’s recent slap down of Cardinal Sarah indicates how the Pope operates:

 

The letter with which Francis recently contradicted and humiliated Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the congregation for divine worship, is the latest proof of how this pope exercises his magisterium.

When Francis wants to introduce innovations, he never does so in clear and distinct words. He prefers to open discussions, to set “processes” in motion, within which the innovations are gradually affirmed.

The most glaring example is “Amoris Laetitia,” for which contrasting interpretations and applications are in fact given, with entire episcopates lining up on one or the other side.

And when he is asked for clarification, he refuses. As in the case of the five “dubia” submitted to him by four cardinals, not deemed worthy of so much as a reply.

But when a cardinal like Sarah, an authority by role and responsibilities, weighs in to give a papal motu proprio on the liturgy the only interpretation he sees as correct and therefore to be implemented by the congregation of which he is prefect, Francis does not remain silent but reacts with harshness, in defense of those passages of the motu prorio – which in effect are anything but clear – that contain the liberalizations dear to him.

This is just what has happened in recent days.

Let’s recapitulate. On September 9 Francis publishes the motu proprio “Magnum Principium” concerning the adaptations and translations into contemporary languages of the liturgical texts of the Latin Church.

In defining the role of the congregation for divine worship concerning the adaptations and translations of the liturgical texts prepared by the national episcopal conferences and submitted for the approval of the Holy See, the motu proprio distinguishes between “recognitio” and “confirmatio,” between review and confirmation.

But the distinction is by no means explained with clarity. And in fact, two sides took shape immediately among the experts.

There are those who maintain that the “recognitio,” meaning the advance review by Rome, concerns only the adaptations, while for the translations the Holy See need give simply a “confirmatio,” its approval.

And there are those who instead maintain that on the translations as well Rome must carry out a careful review, before approving them.

In effect, this is what was done before and it is why various new translations of the missals have had a troubled life – like those of the United States, Great Britain, and Ireland – or are still waiting for approval from Rome: like those of France, Italy, and Germany.

In particular, the new translation of the missal in German was an object of criticism by Benedict XVI himself, who in 2012 wrote a letter to his fellow countrymen bishops to convince them to translate with more fidelity the words of Jesus at the last supper, at the moment of consecration:

> Vatican Diary / “For many” or “for all”? The right answer is the first

Getting back to the motu proprio “Magnum Principium,” it must be noted that when this was drafted it was kept in the dark from Cardinal Sarah, prefect of a dicastery whose middle management has long been rowing against him.

On September 30, Sarah wrote to Pope Francis a letter of thanks accompanied by a detailed “Commentaire”, aimed at a correct interpretation and application of the motu proprio, one that was rather restrictive concerning its multi-purpose formulations.

In Sarah’s judgment, “recognitio” and “confirmatio” are in reality “synonymous” or in any case “interchangeable at the level of responsibility of the Holy See,” whose task of reviewing translations before approving them remains intact.

A couple of weeks later the cardinal’s “Commentaire” appeared on various websites, leading to the conclusion – given the position of the author of the “Commentaire” – that in Rome the congregation for divine worship would act according to its guidelines.

And this greatly irritated Pope Francis, who on October 15 signed a letter harshly repudiating Cardinal Sarah.

A letter in which the pope assigns the national episcopal conferences the liberty and authority to decide on translations themselves, on the sole condition of the final “confirmatio” from the Vatican congregation.

And in any case – the pope writes – without any “spirit of ‘imposition’ on the episcopal conferences of a given translation made by the dicastery” in Rome, even for “significant” liturgical texts like the “sacramental formulas, the Credo, the Pater noster.”

The conclusion of the pope’s letter to the cardinal is barbed with venom:

“Considering that the ‘Commentaire’ in question has been published on a number of websites, and erroneously attributed to your person, I graciously ask you to see to it that this response of mine be released on the same sites as well as being sent to all the Episcopal Conferences, to the Members and Advisors of this Dicastery.”

 

Go here to read the rest.  The mode of operation is abundantly clear by now:  Church liberals get a papal embrace and papal support.  Everyone else gets the back of the papal hand.

9

Prayers For Our Dead

O happy fault that earned for us so great, so glorious a Redeemer.

Exsultet

 

 

 

 

All Souls Day is a  good time to start a post where we can pray for our dead:

Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them. May the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

I ask Lord that the souls of Larry McClarey, Donald D. McClarey, Mary McClarey, Raymond McClarey, Thelma McClarey, Ralph McClarey, Chuck McClarey, Roscoe McClarey, Betty Taylor, Chris Bissey, Rowena Barry, Nanny Barry, Alice Moore and Dyke Moore, and some poor soul known only to You, may even now be enjoying the Beatific Vision.  May we all share in the joy of those who now see You face to face.

List the souls you wish to pray for in the comboxes.