PopeWatch: Pontifical Academy for Death

Thursday, June 29, AD 2017


Sandro Magister gives us the details as to why the Pontifical Academy for Life should be renamed:

At the Pontifical Academy for Life, the first big uproar was over the appointment of the Anglican moral theologian Nigel Biggar, a supporter of abortion until “18 weeks after conception.”

Asked to comment by Vatican Insider, Archbishop Paglia tried to justify the appointment by asserting that Biggar – apart from words he exchanged in 2011 with the staunchly pro-abortion philosopher Peter Singer – “has never written anything on the issue of abortion” and that on the end of life “he has a position absolutely in keeping with the Catholic one.”

But it didn’t take much to discover that neither statement corresponds to the truth, and that Biggar has expressed his liberal positions on abortion in a 2015 article for the “Journal of Medical Ethics,” and on euthanasia in his 2004 book “Aiming To Kill. The Ethics of Suicide and Euthanasia.”

Then it was noted that other new members of the academy are rather far from the Church’s positions:

– Katarina Le Blanc of the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden, who uses stem cells taken from human embryos fertilized in vitro;
– Japanese Nobel laureate Shinya Yamanaka, who in spite of his fame for producing pluripotent stem cells artificially has by no means rules out continued research on the use of embryonic stem cells, and explains why in an article in the scientific journal “Cell & Stem Cell.”
– the Israeli Jew Avraham Steinberg, who admits in some cases abortion and the destruction of embryos for scientific use;
– Maurizio Chiodi, a leading Italian moral theologian, who in his book “Ethics of life” makes allowances for artificial procreation, if it is supported by an “intention of fertility.”

Continue reading...

2 Responses to PopeWatch: Pontifical Academy for Death

  • None of this is surprising. The pope and his henchmen act as though their ends justify pretty much any means. They simply aren’t honest about their ends. For instance, you wouldn’t treat a dog the way the Venezuelan people are treated by the Maduro government. Yet the pope continues to prop up that socialist hellhole with demands for dialogue rather than supporting his brother bishops in Venezuela. So, the fact that the Pontifical Academy of Life is no longer so is not a shock to anyone paying attention to this whitewashed tomb of a pope.

  • Judie Brown wrote quite an accurate article on Life Site News regarding these obscene appointments; https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/pope-francis-vatican-politicos-err

    Evil will not win the war…but they sure are winning the day by infiltration. Pope who?

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Lavender Mafia

Wednesday, June 28, AD 2017



It should always be recalled that a large part of the impetus behind Pope Francis and his attempt to transform the Catholic Church into an Episcopal Church with worse music is the Lavender Mafia.  One of the poster children for the Lavender Mafia is Father James Martin, SJ.  Liturgy Guy connects the dots:

With each passing week the pace quickens. The revolutionaries continue to grow more emboldened. There is no time to lose. For those who wish to remake the Church in the image of fallen Man, instead of defending the immutable Truth of Our Risen Lord,  the time is now.

With every new tweet to his 125,000 followers on Twitter, or every pro-LGBT article shared to his half a million Facebook followers, Fr. James Martin, S.J. ups the ante. The rogue Jesuit (which might be redundant), described by some as a wolf in sheeps clothing (or Roman collar), has apparently made it his personal mission to change the faith of our fathers.

As I’ve written about before, Fr. Martin’s latest effort is Building a Bridge: How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion, and Sensitivity (Harper Collins, 2017). The book is interesting enough for the simple fact that it largely comes from an address Fr. Martin gave to New Ways Ministry in October of last year.


What is different now from the past, however, is Rome itself. Leading the defense of orthodoxy and doctrinal clarity back then was Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. While Fr. Robert Nugent and Sr. Jeannine Gramick could spread their errors and ambiguities, they did so with the condemnation of the Holy See. That is not the case with Pope Francis.

To understand who is really responsible for today’s revolutionary spirit, one that seeks to make the LGBT’s agenda the Church’s own, go back to the back…of Fr. Martin’s book that is.

Who else do we find endorsing Fr. Martin’s 2017 repackaging of the New Ways message of the 1990’s? None other than three of Pope Francis’s most recent episcopal appointments: Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey; Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Prefect of the Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life; and Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego, California.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to PopeWatch: Lavender Mafia

  • “The Gospel demands that LGBT Catholics must be genuinely loved and treasured in the life of the church. They are not. [Fr. Martin] provides us with the language, perspective, and sense of urgency to replace a culture of alienation with a culture of merciful inclusion.”

    Here is what St. Paul said near the end of his condemnation of sodomy and lesbianism in Romans 1:18-32:

    “Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.”

    Do you liberal progressive feminists out in la-la land get that? Worthy of death! That’s what sodomy and lesbianism merit (along with adultery, fornication, murder, theft, false witness, covetousness, disobedience towards parents, etc)! That’s why Jesus implores us over and over and over again, “Repent for the Kingdom of God is at end.” That is why the prophet Ezekiel says: “Be converted and do penance for all your iniquities, and iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, by which you have ttransgressed, and make to yourselves a new heart, and a new spirit: and why will you die, O house of Israel? For I desire not the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God, return ye and live.”

  • Jesus said to his disciples:
    “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing,
    but underneath are ravenous wolves.
    By their fruits you will know them.
    Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
    Just so, every good tree bears good fruit,
    and a rotten tree bears bad fruit.
    A good tree cannot bear bad fruit,
    nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit.
    Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down
    and thrown into the fire.
    So by their fruits you will know them.”

    Today, through out the world these words from Matthews gospel will be uttered.
    Bravo Bishop Paprocki.
    Fr. Martin…. shame.

  • “It should always be recalled that a large part of the impetus behind Pope Francis and his attempt to transform the Catholic Church into an Episcopal Church with worse music…”

    That was too funny! How true.

    To think that Catholics threw out the Te Deum in order to sing Kumbaya.

  • The Lavender Mafia are addicts to sodomy and the vice of lust. All addiction violates the human being’s free will and deconstructs his sovereignty over himself, making his a lost soul.
    The Lavender Mafia must take responsibility for every sexually abused child, for teaching that sodomy or anal penetration is no sin. Sodomy is assault and battery of another person while denying their transcendent soul, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and virginity.
    “you will know them by what they do”
    I suspect that the Lavender Mafia is blackmailing Pope Francis. Nobody can be that unorthodox. Peter denied Jesus Christ out of fear. Maybe Pope Francis does not want to be a martyr for the Faith.

  • Pingback: Canon212 Update: Communists Aren’t Real Cardinals or Popes – The Stumbling Block
  • Mary De Voe perceptively and correctly wrote, “The Lavender Mafia are addicts to sodomy and the vice of lust.”

    I highly recommend Sexaholics Anonymous: http://www.sa.org/

    The Twelve Steps

    1. We admitted that we were powerless over lust—that our lives had become unmanageable.
    2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
    3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
    4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
    5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
    6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
    7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.
    8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
    9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
    10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.
    11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.
    12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these Steps, we tried to carry this message to sexaholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

    PS, early on in sobriety some decades ago – and not due to homosexuality but to other reasons – my 12 sponsor and my priest confessor (his sponsor) threatened to send me to Sexaholics Anonymous unless I started straightening and flying right (which meant no more womanizing, no more prostitutes). The 12 steps worked. But only if you work them. 😉

  • The infection is widespread; http://www.lifenews.com/2017/06/28/nancy-pelosi-republicans-are-dishonoring-god-by-attempting-to-defund-planned-parenthood/

    Sodomites… abortions…the “worldview” is just that….a world view. For those who are in the world but not of the world, God bless you.

  • Has anyone followed up on this story at Gloria.tv, about the special police assigned to the Holy See breaking in on a homosexual party rife with drugs at an apartment in the very Palazzo del Sant’Uffizio is located in Rome?
    An unnamed monsignor who is a secretary to one of the major sacred congregations was taken into custody, according to the story.

  • One of the basic problems in taking this on is that most Catholics couldn’t care less about these issues–as, after all, most of them and their children have been engaging in contraception, etc. for years. We need divine intervention.

  • Aristotle said something that perfectly applies to Fr. James Martin, SJ: “Men become revolutionaries for personal reasons.” I think it’s pretty obvious that Fr. Martin has a dog in the fight.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Contradiction

Tuesday, June 27, AD 2017



The former head of the Vatican Bank,  Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, lets Pope Francis have it in an essay in La Verita:


I see two implicit messages in the Pope’s failure to answer the dubia. The first implicit message is “I can contradict myself if I want to.” At the start of the Synod on the Family (October 2014), the Pope invited the cardinals to speak openly and frankly, without fear of embarrassing the Pope (the famous parresia). And yet for months the Pope has refused to respond privately or publicly to the dubia expressed by four cardinals who represent a large part of the faithful.

The second implicit message seems to be a declaration of the intent to impose a “New Catholic Morality.” This would be founded on the awkward circumstances of the new ethical demands (or requirements) of new situations created by the secularized world, not on the Commandments, the Catechism and the Magisterium invoked by the “obsolete” Veritatis Splendor.   

In the past, the Church’s concern was to keep the faithful “strong in the Truth” in order to conserve the faith. She therefore discouraged a disposition to interpret doctrine and the magisterium in a subjective and dangerously misleading manner. Indeed, back then the task of pastors was to confirm the certainties of faith by “teaching,” not just by “listening.”

Today, it could be said that you should have subjective and unresolved doubts to demonstrate that you have an “authentic faith.” You must not try to resolve them or seek answers to questions on points of ambiguous interpretation because that would be insolent and arrogant. Doubts are necessary because it seems that we don’t want to affirm a single, absolute and objective truth. A pluralist and dialectical truth has taken its place because this latter truth, a truth based on the conclusions of a “self-taught” individual conscience, has replaced doctrine as the judge of actions (praxis).  

One might say that traditional morality has been overridden by circumstances (and not the ideal), and since we should not longer judge (that is, objectively evaluate circumstances), the Church seems to want to renounce the possession of the truth and its teaching (unless it concerns the environment, poverty and immigration). Thus, a failure to respond to the dubia confirms that doctrine is abstract and that it is of no use to salvation because truth is transitory, subjective and open to differing interpretations. It is better to dialogue, then, than to teach something that is no longer eternal.

Continue reading...

19 Responses to PopeWatch: Contradiction

  • Fr. Bill Casey C.P.M. said it years ago at conferences around the country; “We as a church, have adopted today the mentality of The Church Nice.” “The Church Mush.”
    A church that stands for nothing.

    Pope Francis is helping this virus spread.

  • The former head of the Vatican Bank? Where are the bishops? With few exceptions, they are AWOL in defending the faith and the faithful.

  • When clergy will not defend the Faith, the laity must.

    There is a beautiful scene in the movie Back to Bataan about the resistance to the Japanese invaders by the Philippine guerillas, where the John Wayne character says that now that the Armies have been defeated maybe the people will want to fight. This is the stage the Church is in during this pontificate.

  • Jesus said it best; “You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt looses it’s savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out and trodden underfoot by men.” Matthew 5:13 Douay-Rheams version.

    Jane’s Krazy Salt is not a proper substitute dear Holy Father.

  • Nice try but your assertions do not line up with reality… the Church you seek where both leaders and laity ALL are in 100% agreement of every magisterial teaching has never existed and never will. That the Church purports this to be true is nothing short of a lie–the difference today being that the Church can no longer threaten or bully adherents into compliance. In other words, much to the chagrin of the radical-traditional set, the Roman church has been coerced into a more civil, charitable existence–a taste of their own medicine of sorts, after centuries of coercion from the heavy-handed hierarchs. Pope Francis is doing the only thing the RCC can do in order to remain culturally relevant and financially solvent… and the result is a subtle shift to the center, away from medieval magic, power and control. If that seems contradictory to some folks, well, sorry… just remember, church “teaching” is not limited to what is written on paper. By RC standards tradition is equally important and history is rife with less-than-consistent behavior from the leaders of RC… but here traditionalists will decry the human element of the church, elevating policies over people which has plagued the Church for centuries. Aggiornamento is happening under this pope’s watch, which is nothing new…. those who know church history know that the Church is “Siempre Reformanda,” 100% necessary in order to bring Jesus’s message to the modern world.

  • Paul, your being a fan of this pontificate, coming as you do from a very negative view of the Church, symbolizes everything for a believing Catholic that is wrong with it. However, dud Popes are nothing new in the history of the Church. Faithful Catholics will outlast him, just as we outlast all our foes, human and inhuman.

  • What if… all these things, and more, had a common root cause?
    – Widespread fornication, sex without babies.
    – Abortion, unwanted babies from sex without babies..
    – Widespread divorce, couples not truly giving themselves to each other.
    – Homosexual agenda, well if sex is not about procreation, not about babies, then.
    – Pornography, objectification of the other.
    – Church of Dissent; OK to pick and choose Teachings.
    – Church of Nice, afraid to speak the truth.

    Anyone with half a brain can see, it’s obvious the common root cause is widespread CONTRACEPTION, ACTS AGAINST THE BEGINNING OF LIFE THAT SEPARATE LIFE AND LOVE, that has in turn enabled the sexual De-evolution.

  • Pope Francis is doing the only thing the RCC can do in order to remain culturally relevant and financially solvent

    Culture relevance. Yeah, that’s what the Roman Catholic Church, the Bride of Christ, is supposed to be pushing. Not truth. Not the Real Presence. Not the pathway to salvation. Cultural relevance.

    That someone could write the above sentence fragment and think it an argument for Bergolio’s pontificate is really just proving the point of the pope’s critics.

  • Well, Paul, come on. Jesus said Christians who follow Him would be super-popular and loved by the world, and that’s certainly the case with the pontiff.

    QED and checkmate, you radical traditional bully.

  • McMasters: “the Church you seek where both leaders and laity ALL are in 100% agreement of every magisterial teaching has never existed and never will.”

    Matthew 13: 24 Another parable he put before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. 27 And the servants of the householder came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then has it weeds?’ 28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ 29 But he said, ‘No; lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’”

    McMasters; “In other words, much to the chagrin of the radical-traditional set, the Roman church has been coerced into a more civil, charitable existence.”

    1st Timothy 3: 15 If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the PILLAR and FOUNDATION of the TRUTH

    Matthew 16: 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

    McMasters: ” Pope Francis is doing the only thing the RCC can do in order to remain culturally relevant…”

    2nd Timothy 4: 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.

    1st John 2: 18 Children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come; therefore we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us. 20 But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all know. 21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth. 22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.

    McMasters: “100% necessary in order to bring Jesus’s message to the modern world.”

    Luke 13: 1 There were some present at that very time who told him of the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2 And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered thus? 3 I tell you, No; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. 4 Or those eighteen upon whom the tower in Silo′am fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who dwelt in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, No; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.”

    McMasters: It’s ok to sin because God is charitable and He will never let you go to hell.


    Buckle up, McMasters. The time for God’s judgment on liberalism and progressiveness and feminism is at hand, the eradication of all three of which is demanded by perfect Charity.

  • Pope Francis is doing the only thing the RCC can do in order to remain culturally relevant and financially solvent…

    We kinda figured it’s a business with you guys.

  • Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus– thank you for your post. That was perfect.

  • The Pope’s infallibility comes when the Pope teaches faith and morals “ex-cathedra” in union with the Magisterium, all the bishops of the world. Pope Francis seems to be emulating Obama abandoning his constituents and using his phone and his pen to rule

  • Several things are clear from the above.
    —Pope Francis has adopted the Islam practice of tawriya, a doctrine that allows lying in virtually all circumstances.
    —Pope Francis has had a devastating effect on the faithful by warping their minds to no longer recognize the truth, e.g., Paul McMaster.
    —Most of the clergy are faithless and cowardly for not speaking truth to power. Note: There is a really possibility that many of them no longer know the truth.
    —We need to be thankful to Donald McClarey for bringing the truth about the Pope to our attention.
    —The Church badly needs a Council of Trent II in order to re-establish and re-emphsize the truths of the Catholic Church.

  • Mary De Voe wrote, “The Pope’s infallibility comes when the Pope teaches faith and morals “ex-cathedra” in union with the Magisterium, all the bishops of the world”
    No, that is Gallicanism. Pastpr Æternus says, “definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church [ex sese, non autem ex consensu ecclesiae].”
    His definitions require the consent of no one. As Pastor Æternus also says, “all the venerable Fathers have embraced, and the holy orthodox Doctors have venerated and followed, their Apostolic doctrine; knowing most fully that this See of holy Peter remains ever free from all blemish of error, according to the Divine promise that the Lord our Saviour made to the Prince of His disciples: “But I have prayed for you, so that your faith may not fail, and so that you, once converted, may confirm your brothers.” (Lk 22:32).

    This gift, then, of truth and never-failing faith was conferred by heaven upon Peter and his successors in this Chair, that they might perform their high office for the salvation of all; that the whole flock of Christ, kept away from the poisonous food of error by them, might be nourished with the pasture of heavenly doctrine; that the occasion of schism being removed, the whole Church might be kept one, and, resting on its foundation, might stand firm against the gates of Hell.”
    Thus, St Augustine, the Doctor of Grace, says, “Will you dare to say that even when Christ prayed that Peter’s faith might not fail, it would still have failed if Peter had willed it to fail; that is, if he had been unwilling that it should continue even to the end? As if Peter could in any measure will otherwise than Christ had asked for him that he might will. For who does not know that Peter’s faith would then have perished if that will by which he was faithful should fail, and that it would have continued if that same will should abide? But because “the will is prepared by the Lord,” (Proverbs 8:35) therefore Christ’s petition on his behalf could not be a vain petition. When, then, He prayed that Peter’s faith should not fail, what was it that He asked for, but that in his faith Peter should have a most free, strong, invincible, persevering will! Behold to what an extent the freedom of the will is defended in accordance with the grace of God, not in opposition to it; because the human will does not attain grace by freedom, but rather attains freedom by grace, and a delightful constancy, and an insuperable fortitude that it may persevere.” (De Correptione et Gratia c 17 (VIII))

  • The infallibility of the Pope rests on ex-cathedra and the Magisterium. When any Pope rejects church doctrine and the prayer of Jesus Christ for His church, the Pope fails. not the Church.
    Infallibility rest in the church. Any Pope who rejects the church has no infallibility.

  • This particularly, regarding Bergoglio as pope, is a key point: “I can contradict myself if I want to.”

    It is also highly irresponsible for those who act in good faith trying to understand and respect his authority. It is also its own peculiar form of insolence—“Just go deal with it, I said what I said, and I don’t have to be consistent or concerned about its effects.

    We have,a real ,winner’ in this man as pope.

  • Sounds to me like, relativism has conquered immutable truth…and that’s the truth, I swear.

  • Only God cannot and will not contradict Himself, because God is perfect. Man suffers imperfection. The Catholic church in its doctrines about Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary does not contradict herself, because FAITH is a gift from God. Faith as a gift from God must be acknowledged by every state and defended in FREEDOM.

Leave a Reply

13 Responses to PopeWatch: Purple Dinosaur

  • This video suggests sameness of all religions despite the different appearances. How about we become the Church Militant again and make converts like Christ said He wanted us to do.

  • Great! All we need is be lectured on making friends with those who are different from us from those who wouldn’t be caught dead hanging out with those think different from them!

    The Barney video is more in line with mature of the two.

  • Seeking unity with those who deny the sole Divinely-Constitued Church established by Jesus Christ (and His Commandments) without them first repudiating their errors and converting to the One True Faith is to do the work of the Devil.

    It is within the lifetime of ABS that one could understand such an impetus being actualised by Masonry * (and only Masonry) but not by the One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church but that was prior to the revolution within the form of Catholicism which supplanted Salvific Theocentrism with political and social Anthropocentrism.

    Jesus gives us what we want and we want man and we want unity at all cost no matter whether we unify with those who reject the Church Jesus established or whether we unify with those who reject the Sacramental System established by Jesus or whether we unify with those who reject the Commandments of Jesus.

    We want a unity that reconciles Christ with Belial.

    And still invisibilium within the Hierarchy is that Prelate whose puissant possession of Tradition is such that it could be used as a force against our Inertia Into Indifferentism.

    Statement on Freemasonry and Religion

    Prepared by the Masonic Information Center

    Basic Principles. Freemasonry is not a religion, nor is it a substitute for religion. It requires of its members a belief in God as part of the obligation of every responsible adult, but advocates no sectarian faith or practice. Masonic ceremonies include prayers, both traditional and extempore, to reaffirm each individual’s dependence on God and to seek divine guidance. Freemasonry is open to men of any faith, but religion may not be discussed at Masonic meetings.

    The Supreme Being. Masons believe that there is one God and that people employ many different ways to seek, and to express what they know of God. Masonry primarily uses the appellation, “Grand Architect of the Universe,” and other non-sectarian titles, to address the Deity. In this way, persons of different faiths may join together in prayer, concentrating on God, rather than differences among themselves. Masonry believes in religious freedom and that the relationship between the individual and God is personal, private, and sacred.

    Volume of the Sacred Law. An open volume of the Sacred Law, “the rule and guide of life,” is an essential part of every Masonic meeting. The Volume of the Sacred Law in the Judeo/Christian tradition is the Bible; to Freemasons of other faiths, it is the book held holy by them.

    The Oath of Freemasonry. The obligations taken by Freemasons are sworn on the Volume of the Sacred Law. They are undertakings to follow the principles of Freemasonry and to keep confidential a Freemason’s means of recognition. The much discussed “penalties,” judicial remnants from an earlier era, are symbolic, not literal. They refer only to the pain any honest man should feel at the thought of violating his word.

    Freemasonry Compared with Religion. Freemasonry lacks the basic elements of religion: (a) It has no dogma or theology, no wish or means to enforce religious orthodoxy. (b) It offers no sacraments. (c) It does not claim to lead to salvation by works, by secret knowledge, or by any other means. The secrets of Freemasonry are concerned with modes of recognition, not with the means of salvation.

    Freemasonry Supports Religion. Freemasonry is far from indifferent toward religion. Without interfering in religious practice, it expects each member to follow his own faith and to place his Duty to God above all other duties. Its moral teachings are acceptable to all religions.

    Prepared by the Masonic Information

    Are we all to be Masons now?

  • What if the obsession with sameness?

    Human lungs and pears have roughly the same among of water – 83%- but, say, were one to have cancerous lungs, a man would not be too keen on a Doctor suggesting surgery in which a pair of pears replaced the pair of lungs.

  • Hmm.
    Friends are one thing, trying to convince a friend what’s true is something friends do-

    Now, if you don’t actually believe your religion is true, what are you doing in that religion?

  • Religion is man’s response to the gift of FAITH from God. All men are called to the true FAITH from God. Atheists and secular humanists reject the gift of FAITH from God . God reverences mankind and respects our free will.
    In rejecting the gift of FAITH from God, atheists and others reject the religious persons who cherish their gift of FAITH.
    Man’s response to the gift of FAITH from God is religion. The freedom of religion is inscribed in our FIRST AMENDMENT. The state and all other peoples have no authentic authority to impede man’s pursuit of Happiness in pursuit of the TRUTH.
    Belief may be of the flat earth or selling one’s common sense to some imaginary creature. Religion is man’s response to the gift of FAITH from The SUPREME SOVEREIGN BEING, in TRUTH, the will to follow Jesus Christ, in time and in eternity.

  • It is within the lifetime of ABS that one could understand such an impetus being actualised by Masonry

    The man who ran the local Masonic lodge where I used to live was a building custodian / motorcycle enthusiast in his spare time. Satisfactory locksmith as well. Such a threat.

  • Dear Art. Many in masonry are in the lower orders and are not informed about what the hierarchy believes nor are they informed about what they do and with whom they cooperate.

    There are reasons why a Catholics may not become a Mason

  • Dear Art. Many in masonry are in the lower orders and are not informed about what the hierarchy believes

    It’s a social club with some odd rituals and some philanthropic projects. Full stop. They haven’t been a source of trouble in Latin countries in the post-war period and the Scottish-rite lodges prevalent in the Anglophone world were never particularly problematic, just institutional rivals of a sort people put up with routinely. Last time you were talking rot about Puritans, now it’s fanciful Masonic conspiracies. Why not read some serious literature and quit chowing down on bilge?

  • Why not read some serious literature and quit chowing down on bilge?

    ABS is of Irish-Algonquin extraction and he is on a limited budget and can barely afford the bog clippings and pemmican, to say nothing about the alcohol, and so the serious literature you speak about is prolly too expensive.

    O, and who is it who deices what is serious literature?

    You are simply dismissive of a serious subject that has destroyed entire countries and uncountable number of souls.

    Well, if you can get along with Masons you ought to be able to get along with a bilge-binging Christian Catholic also, right?

  • Make friends across religion? I already do. I have friends who are Protestant, Mormon, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, etc. And I discuss religion with some. No big deal. But those religions are still wrong.

    Now as to Orthodox and Anglicans who broke away from Cantebury and re-established Holy Orders / Apostolic Succession by cross-polination with the Orthodox, I don’t have many arguments (some, not many). We can do ecumenism with them.

    (a) But not with Protestant heretics
    (b) Nor with Jewish Christ deniers (nope, am NOT anti-Semitic. Hope Israel continues to kick butt and dfeat Islamists. Just making a point),
    (c) Nor with pagan non-Christians (atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc).

    PS, as a point of notice, I do NOT have friends who are liberal, proogressive, feminist, humanist, secularist. They are the worst of the lot. I avoid them.

  • ABS is of Irish-Algonquin extraction and he is on a limited budget and can barely afford the bog clippings and pemmican, to say nothing about the alcohol, and so the serious literature you speak about is prolly too expensive. O, and who is it who deices what is serious literature?

    Then go to the bloody library or to used bookstores. Try C.S. Lewis, Chesterbelloc, Aquinas, or books on statistics.

    You are simply dismissive of a serious subject that has destroyed entire countries and uncountable number of souls.

    I’m trying to think of ‘entire countries’ who’ve been ‘destroyed’ since the early 18th century. I suppose in some sense you could list the European countries laid waste during the 2d World War, Soviet Russia, serial rounds of destruction in China from 1851 to 1976, Japan during the 2d World War, Indo-China (1945-79), the Congo (1885-1908, 1997-?), Uganda (1971-85), Somalia (1991-), Paraguay (1865-70). the American South (1865-70), Spain (1936-39), and Iraq (1958-). I suppose you could add various components of Europe during the Napoleonic Wars. It’s hard to locate the hand of Masonic lodges in this.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Checkmate

Saturday, June 24, AD 2017


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



Society of St. Pius X chess grandmaster Larcel Mafebvre has turned four of his pieces into bishops without approval from the World Chess Federation, officials have confirmed.

“Mr. Mafebvre has, without approval from the Federation, created bishops out of pawn pieces,” said World Chess Federation head Antonio Salamanca. “After speaking with Mr. Mafebvre regarding abiding by the new chess rules, wherein players are given the freedom to concelebrate the match, and to say the words of ‘checkmate’ in the vernacular, he has sadly decided to ignore our requests.”

Salamanca went on to tell reporters that Mafebvre had automatically incurred excheckommunication because of his disobedience.

“I must do what is in my conscience to preserve the dignity of the game,”  Mafebvre told EOTT in an exclusive interview. “Therefore, I have decided to consecrate four of my pieces into bishops to help my depleted side, for, from some Fischer, the smoke of Satan has entered the chessboard of God.”

At press time, one time follower of Larcel Mafebvre’s, Bavid Dawden, told EOTT that he has decided to become head of the World Chess Federation, though he only has three pawns to play with.

Continue reading...

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Apostasy

Friday, June 23, AD 2017


Edward Pentin at National Catholic Register has a barn burner of interview with Monsignor Nicola Bux, a former consultor to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

Monsignor Bux, what are the implications of the ‘doctrinal anarchy’ that people see happening for the Church, the souls of the faithful and priests?

The first implication of doctrinal anarchy for the Church is division, caused by apostasy, which is the abandonment of Catholic thought, as defined by St. Vincent of Lerins: quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditur (what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all). Saint Irenaeus of Lyon, who calls Jesus Christ the “Master of unity,” had pointed out to heretics that everyone professes the same things, but not everyone means the same thing. This is the role of the Magisterium, founded on the truth of Christ: to bring everyone back to Catholic unity.

St. Paul exhorted Christians to be in agreement and to speak with unanimity. What would he say today? When cardinals are silent or accuse their confreres; when bishops who had thought, spoken and written — scripta manent! [written words remain]— in a Catholic way, but then say the opposite for whatever reason; when priests contest the liturgical tradition of the Church, then apostasy is established, the detachment from Catholic thought. Paul VI had foreseen that “this non-Catholic thought within Catholicism will tomorrow become the strongest [force]. But it will never represent the Church’s thinking. A small flock must remain, no matter how small it is.” (Conversation with J. Guitton, 9.IX.1977).


What implications, then, does doctrinal anarchy have for the souls of the faithful and ecclesiastics?

The Apostle exhorts us to be faithful to sure, sound and pure doctrine: that founded on Jesus Christ and not on worldly opinions (cf. Titus 1:7-11; 2:1-8). Perseverance in teaching and obedience to doctrine leads souls to eternal salvation. The Church cannot change the faith and at the same time ask believers to remain faithful to it. She is instead intimately obliged to be oriented toward the Word of God and toward Tradition.

Therefore, the Church remembers the Lord’s judgment: “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” (John 9:39). Do not forget that, when one is applauded by the world, it means one belongs to it. In fact, the world loves its own and hates what does not belong to it (cf. John 15:19). May the Catholic Church always remember that she is made up of only those who have converted to Christ under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; all human beings are ordained to her (cf. Lumen gentium 13), but they are not part of her until they are converted.


How can this problem best be resolved?

The point is: what idea does the Pope have of the Petrine ministry, as described in Lumen gentium 18 and codified in canon law? Faced with confusion and apostasy, the Pope should make the distinction — as Benedict XVI did — between what he thinks and says as a private, learned person, and what he must say as Pope of the Catholic Church. To be clear: the Pope can express his ideas as a private learned person on disputable matters which are not defined by the Church, but he cannot make heretical claims, even privately. Otherwise it would be equally heretical.

I believe that the Pope knows that every believer — who knows the regula fidei [the rule of faith] or dogma, which provides everyone with the criterion to know what the faith of the Church is, what everyone has to believe and who one has to listen to — can see if he is speaking and operating in a Catholic way, or has gone against the Church’s sensus fidei [sense of the faith]. Even one believer can hold him to account. So whoever thinks that presenting doubts [dubia] to the Pope is not a sign of obedience, hasn’t understood, 50 years after Vatican II, the relationship between him [the Pope] and the whole Church. Obedience to the Pope depends solely on the fact that he is bound by Catholic doctrine, to the faith that he must continually profess before the Church.

We are in a full crisis of faith! Therefore, in order to stop the divisions in progress, the Pope — like Paul VI in 1967, faced with the erroneous theories that were circulating shortly after the conclusion of the Council — should make a Declaration or Profession of Faith, affirming what is Catholic, and correcting those ambiguous and erroneous words and acts — his own and those of bishops — that are interpreted in a non-Catholic manner.

Otherwise, it would be grotesque that, while seeking unity with non-Catholic Christians or even understanding with non-Christians, apostasy and division is being fostered within the Catholic Church. For many Catholics, it is incredible that the Pope is asking bishops to dialogue with those who think differently, but does not want first to face the cardinals who are his chief advisors. If the Pope does not safeguard doctrine, he cannot impose discipline. As John Paul II said, the Pope must always be converted, to be able to strengthen his brothers, according to the words of Christ to Peter: “Et tu autem conversus, confirma fratres tuos [when you are converted, strengthen your brothers].” 

Continue reading...

5 Responses to PopeWatch: Apostasy

  • Thank you.
    The tug of war ragging in my heart is exhausting and separating the office from the man has been a challenge.

    Can God turn him? Can our offerings help in his conversion?

    Not every single word from his mouth is teetering on error but his reluctance to address the matter personally is cowardice.

    Thank you for the correct perspective.

  • The smoke of Satan has indeed entered the tabernacle. Information as to how the faithful must navigate these historically crucial times is needed more than ever to insure a viable thriving remnant remain.
    Thanks for the article Don.

  • Good commentary at St. Corbinian’s Bear:


    Liberals say Trump isn’t their President. Well guess what? Obama wasn’t my President and Jorge Bergoglio isn’t my Pope.

  • Monsignor Nicola Bux is playing the role of Thomas More in our age of the tragic decline of the Catholic Church and particularly it’s leadership. Pope Francis has much the same attitude as Henry VIII in deciding he has no higher authority than himself.

  • What you are seeing is a crisis deliberately manufactured by the pontiff, his inner circle and his awful appointees. There is a dangerous fissure, it is spreading and the Bishop of Rome wants it to spread. Refuse to be gaslit, and ignore the Chip Dillers who insist despite all the evidence to the contrary that all is well.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Audience

Thursday, June 22, AD 2017


The four dubia Cardinals drafted a request for an audience on April 25, 2017:


Most Holy Father,

It is with a certain trepidation that I address myself to Your Holiness, during these days of the Easter season. I do so on behalf of the Most Eminent Cardinals: Walter Brandmüller, Raymond L. Burke, Joachim Meisner, and myself.

We wish to begin by renewing our absolute dedication and our unconditional love for the Chair of Peter and for Your august person, in whom we recognize the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Jesus: the “sweet Christ on earth,” as Saint Catherine of Siena was fond of saying. We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant, nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine munus. We are moved solely by the awareness of the grave responsibility arising from the munus of cardinals: to be advisers of the Successor of Peter in his sovereign ministry. And from the Sacrament of the Episcopate, which “has placed us as bishops to pasture the Church, which He has acquired with his blood” (Acts 20:28).

On September 19, 2016 we delivered to Your Holiness and to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith five dubia, asking You to resolve uncertainties and to bring clarity on some points of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia.

Not having received any response from Your Holiness, we have reached the decision to ask You, respectfully and humbly, for an Audience, together if Your Holiness would like. We attach, as is the practice, an Audience Sheet in which we present the two points we wish to discuss with you.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to PopeWatch: Audience

  • The pope will promptly schedule the requested audience for the second Tuesday of next week.

  • Matthew 7:9 (“Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will
    he reach him a stone?”) somehow comes to mind. Cardinals Caffarra et. al. being dutiful
    sons asking for bread, and our Pope offering stone instead. His is the silence of a man
    who has nothing to say for himself.

  • So what happens next when after time it becomes apparent to all that the Pope will never respond and dialogue?

    What is he afraid of?

  • The reality is the pope cannot answer the dubia without exposing its inability to comply with the teachings of the faith as handed down by the Apostles. The question remains: what now? Will the cardinals sit quietly for the dissolution of Catholic doctrine and practice that has already begun? Will the Pope respond with punishment?(alter boys for the lot of them) Will he attempt to answer with more transparent ambiguity and unclarity? Will he admit to its confusion and clarify the errors? As they say, only God knows.

  • This quote from the Register says it all:
    “For many Catholics, it is incredible that the Pope is asking bishops to dialogue with those who think differently [i.e. non-Catholic Christians], but does not want first to face the cardinals who are his chief advisors,” Msgr. Bux says.

  • For pf it might be better to remain silent and be accused of heresies than to open one’s mouth and support the evidence.

    Trying my best to take the good and leave the rotton until his chapter ends. Good?
    Yes. There is some good.
    Like it or not….. he’s our Pope.
    Pray for him.

  • What I hope will happen if the Pope doesn’t respond is continued following in the example of St. Catherine of Siena’s loyalty to a difficult Holy Father.

  • I’m beginning to wonder if this Pope “thinks” that his election is proof that he (Francis) is now “authorized” by God to change what Christ taught on Marriage. Am I crazy for thinking that the Pope thinks this?

  • David WS; I too, think that Pope Francis believes that he is enabled to change the truth taught by Jesus Christ, the Healer.

  • Mundabor has an interesting perspective on this, and he doesn’t take kindly to what he calls the meowing of Cardinals:


  • Agree with Mundabor. “Please, dear Cardinals, stop meowing and grow a pair already. You are supposed to be Princes of the Church, not whining kitten.”

    What we are dealing with here is the reincarnation of Henry VII in the body of Pope Francis. What’s needed is another Thomas More. We we now have are pussy cats. Like in the time of Henry the Cardinals and Bishops are mostly caving in as nearly all Catholic will also.

    The persecution of orthodox Catholics is well on its way. Let his pray for divine intervention so that fewer souls will be lost.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Unholy Ghost

Wednesday, June 21, AD 2017



An article at Crisis by Julia Meloni focuses on one of the ghostwriters for the Pope:



In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis announces: “No one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!” (297). Josef Seifert warns that it’s “nearly unavoidable” to deduce a denial of Hell—a fear echoed by others. Anna Silvas notes Amoris Laetitia’s “missing” lexicon of eternity: “There are no immortal souls in need of eternal salvation to be found in the document!”

But papal ghostwriter Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez is ebullient with joy because, as he declares in a 1995 article, “I rely firmly upon the truth that all are saved.” The author of Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing, Fernandez elsewhere rhapsodizes that extra-marital sex can express “ecstatic” charity and “Trinitarian richness.”

And Fernandez the papal ghostwriter—as Michael Pakaluk and Sandro Magister have shown—repeatedly plagiarizes his previous work in Amoris Laetitia. For instance, Fernandez’s 2006 declaration that “Trinitarian” love can be “realized within an objective situation of sin” is echoed in Amoris Laetitia 305.

Last September, the four cardinals submitted their dubia out of grave concern for “the true good of souls.” They’ve now published a letter from April requesting an audience with the pontiff—who has not responded.

As the months of papal non-engagement grow, Pope Francis’s maxim that “time is greater than space” feels increasingly ominous. Fernandez—whose cited and uncited work also appears in Pope Francis’s Evangelii Gaudium—has long claimed that we’re in an age of revolutionary “time.”

In his book The Francis Project, Fernandez laments that conservative “fanatics” can’t accept that the “Spirit”—which can “elude the supervision of the institution of the Church”—is leading us “toward a different phase.” It’s a phase where, apparently, God is “Mother” and “you should follow your conscience” and “a pope who tells us that God wants us to be happy on this earth will never ask us to be obsessed with sacrifice.” It’s a phase where, to quote Pope Francis, the Church isn’t “obsessed” with abortion or sexual ethics either.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to PopeWatch: Unholy Ghost

  • So what are the four cardinals who submitted the five dubia and requested an audience going to do as Jorge Bergoglio continues to refuse to address their concerns?

    Eventually we have to reach a point where we openly call Jorge Bergoglio a heretic and refuse to follow him or give him credence.

    He must be deposed from the Seat of St Peter and anathematized. For the good of his soul and the good of the Church, he must be cast out.

    But who can do that except God? Oh that Jorge Bergoglio might experience what King Nebuchadnezzar did in Daniel chapter 4! That would fix his Argentinian ego but good.

  • I know many decent people who are striving to lead holy lives, but in the greater balance of civilization I see very few who are “obsessed with sacrifice.”

  • the sacrifice that so horrifies many in the “lifestyle” is what they see as what the world wants them to live with daily– chastity, purity. They think not giving in to what they feel driven to do, in obedience to what they have accepted as their actual identity. “This is who I am!” “You are asking me to sacrifice every day!” “God mad me this way so He obviously wants me to live this way… your obsession with my need to sacrifice is hateful and unmerciful.”

  • Anzlyne.

    As a believer and ambassador for Christ we have much to do. Our love and example is what will help them heal from a lifestyle choice that is only a dead end.

    They will search us out as the indelible mark becomes more evident and important to their sense of true identity. We must remember to just be ourselves and trust in Providence. Of course we pray. We adore.
    We beg for the forgiveness of those who do not pray, do not adore and who do not love the one who placed that indelible mark on them from the very beginning.

    Fatima’s angel of Portugal is instructing…and preparing the future St. Francisco in all of us. Sacrifice and daily Rosaries for the conversion of sinners.


  • If we were to imagine how the devil speaks we could do no better than to listen to Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez. Why this isn’t perfectly clear to Pope Francis and the Cardinals can only be explained by sharing the same belief or lack of courage.

  • Good morning Philip and thank you . We pray and hope.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Christ?

Monday, June 19, AD 2017


A Francis appointed Bishop shows us that under the current Pontificate the words of Christ in regard to marriage mean less than nothing:

An Argentinian bishop, inspired by Pope Francis’ Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, celebrated a special Mass for civilly-divorced-and-remarried couples in his diocese. The thirty or so couples were all invited to receive Holy Communion despite there being no indication that any of them had promised to live as brother and sister.

“Welcome back home,” Bishop Angel José Macin of the diocese of Reconquista told the couples during the Mass celebrated on the June 11th Feast of the Blessed Trinity, according to Argentinian news website Radioamanecer.com.ar

The couples were given Holy Communion in what was described as a “festive atmosphere” in the parish church of Saint Roque. Relatives took photographs.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to PopeWatch: Christ?

  • It is near impossible to believe that this planting of poison ivy within Catholic flower beds isn’t done by design.

  • ” Pope Francis is all about mercy even if someone else gets kicked in the teeth as a result.”
    Comment of the week.
    “…til death do us part” means nothing so how could “I love you” from remarried people mean anything? Love is taking a back seat to I want what I want and I want it now, while Pope Francis plays the fiddle. The Pope’s job is to reiterate the words of Christ. For those who refuse to listen, they will not listen even if the rich man rises from the dead. It appears that our Pope Francis is among those who will not listen even though Jesus Christ rose from the dead.

  • It depends on what “objective truth” means.

  • Pingback: Canon212 Update: Pope Jacko Sings That Song! – The Stumbling Block
  • “Until death do you part..”

    Oh, how Cheap! ..those words have become!

  • Honestly, it’s as if our Pope and his fellow travelers in the clergy truly
    believe that the only worthy reason a person still might be denied Holy
    Communion is if he wished to receive upon the tongue whilst kneeling.

    Well, that’s overstating. I think a few might also refuse Communion to
    those who would deny the inerrancy of ‘man-made climate change’…

    Snark aside, if no one need listen to the Church’s perennial teachings on
    the indissolubility of marriage, the sinfulness of adultery and fornication,
    and the necessity of being free of mortal sin before approaching Communion,
    then why exactly should anyone listen to bishops and Popes when they speak
    about the sinfulness of anything else? Would it still be “merciful” to deny
    Communion to a notorious, outspoken racist? What about an unrepentant
    advocate of pedophilia? Would this bishop also greet them at the Communion
    rail and tell them “welcome back home” without one word about their need to
    amend their lives?

    Bishops like His Excellency the Bishop of Reconquista are no shepherds. They
    are refusing to herd their sheep towards the Father’s fold, and abandon them
    to find their own way– with disastrous results for the lost sheep. Worse, the
    sheep are told they’re on the right path no matter what they do, when in
    fact they are left in the dark, unknowingly lurching towards the wolves…

    “Merciful” prelates such as His Excellency the Bishop of Reconquista might
    abandon the ancient symbol of their office, the shepherd’s crook, for some-
    thing that better reflects their new understanding of their role. If a bishop
    intends neither to teach, govern nor sanctify as a bishop should, but rather
    is merely the head administrator and chief glad-hander of the diocese, perhaps
    his symbol of office shouldn’t be a crozier but instead a giant checkbook and a
    microphone. (At least we could tell more easily which ones to avoid).

  • Here is a case of actions speaking louder than words. Now, who can deny what Pope Francis really means in Amoris Laetitia?

  • The four “dubia” cardinals requested an audience with the pope and it appears they’re getting blown off again.


Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Dark

Saturday, June 17, AD 2017







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



In an effort to attract more young people, the USCCB announced today that they will begin working on a dark, gruesome, and gritty reboot of the Novus Ordo.

Speaking with EOTT, Bishop Robert Lombardo, who came up with the idea for the reboot, said that they hope to begin saying the new Mass beginning next fall.

“Right now we’re just beginning to work on the new translation, which we’re tentatively calling ‘The Mass: Rise of the Godman.’”

Lombardo also went on to explain that the reboot would skew more towards gritty priests and deacons and away from the smiling and happy priest and deacon that we’ve become accustomed to seeing.

“These days young adults are spending so much of their time and money watching dark movie reboots, so there’s no reason why we can’t do that within the context of the Mass. To say to someone in their 20’s and 30’s, ‘Hey, you enjoyed that gritty and gruesome movie last night, now come to Mass and enjoy the complete opposite of what you loved last night,’ is absurd. We have to give them what they want is what it boils down to.”

Gotham bishop Leonard Kelly told EOTT that the bishops also discussed a reboot for all the sacraments, including Confirmation, which will be called The Sacrament of the Blood Oath, Anointing of the Sick, which will be called The Sacrament of Bodily Annihilation, and Matrimony, which will be called The Sacrament of Mental Annihilation.

We also plan to change the vestments so that they’re simply red mantles and hoods, with the red symbolizing blood, all the blood Christ spilled for our transgressions.

At press time, Kelly has cryptically stated that it is time for the youth to heed the calling of the Light, saying “You either die a saint or live long enough to see yourself become the devil,” before throwing the hood over his head and leaping off the top of a church spire.

Continue reading...

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Lavender Mafia

Friday, June 16, AD 2017



The Lavender Mafia is alive and well at the Vatican:


Cardinal Joseph Tobin told the New York Times that it would have been “backhanded” of him to mention anything about sin to the “LGBT pilgrims” who he personally welcomed to a Cathedral Mass last month.

On Sunday, May 21, the Cardinal was on hand at Newark’s Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart to personally welcome homosexuals on a so-called “LGBT Pilgrimage.”

When asked by the New York Times if he should have used the event to call the “LGBT pilgrims” out of sin, Cardinal Tobin replied: “That sounds a little backhanded to me.” 

“It was appropriate to welcome people to come and pray and call them who they were. And later on, we can talk,” he said. 

The Cardinal said that to “combine his welcome with a criticism would not have been a full welcome at all.”


Some other high profile priests and bishops pushing the envelope on the acceptance of homosexuality within the Church include: 

  • Fr. James Martin, SJ, editor-at-large for the Jesuit magazine America and recently appointed to the Vatican as a communications consultant, who just published his pro-homosexual book, Building a Bridge.
  • Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, now at the helm of both the Pontifical Academy for Life and the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, who paid a homosexual artist to paint a homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself clasped to a semi-naked man.
  • Cardinal Kevin Farrell, recently appointed by Pope Francis to head the Vatican office on laity, family, and life issues, who has called on his city’s priests to embrace “LGBT families.”
  • The Diocese of San Diego, under Bishop Robert McElroy, recently announced that Fr. John Dolan, a priest with an LGBT-positive record, had been appointed by the Vatican to be an auxiliary bishop. Fr, Dolan had previously gone on record suggesting that there is no problem with homosexual “marriage” within the Catholic church.

Catholic parishioners in some major urban centers may also have noticed a creeping incrementalism of the acceptance of homosexuality within their parishes. 

For instance, in the Archdiocese of Baltimore, St. Matthew’s Parish has been promoting homosexuality and its so-called “compatibility” with Catholicism for years.

In the Archdiocese of New York, leaders of “gay and lesbian ministries” in three separate parishes openly flout Catholic teaching on sexual morality, saying that their lifestyle choices are part of how God made them. 

Continue reading...

6 Responses to PopeWatch: Lavender Mafia

  • I am sick to death of homosexualism. They are indeed pushing the envelope. God knows when they push too far.

  • Cardinal could have offered an off-hand remark on whether one could simultaneously be LGBT and Catholic Christian. Problem is: where does he stand?

    I’m totally ignorant in Theology. Were Hitler’s life style choices part of how God made him?

  • Lavender Mafia and Free Masonry ties?

    I wonder.
    My guess is that there connected.

    Was Francis blanketing a smokescreen when he ordered Cardinal Burke to clear out Mason’s a few months ago? http://angelqueen.org/2017/01/12/pope-ordered-card-burke-to-clean-out-freemasons-from-the-knights-of-malta/

    Who knows.
    In this climate it’s a possibility.

    As always we must pray for his conversion.
    Holy Spirit take over… please.

  • I think us lay people are more faithful to our faith its teaching and our Lord Jesus Christ then any of the Bishops, Cardinal, Priest and our Pope who all seem to be leading us in the wrong direction. I wish they would grow a backbone and teach the teaching that God wants us to live by. Shame on them!!!!

  • Homosexuality or same sex attraction is an act of “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.” Addiction to sodomy and the vice of lust is a free will act contrary to and in violation of the rational free will. Sodomy itself is assault and battery of another human being. There is nothing sexual about sodomy. Sodomy is a crime against oneself and Nature. Only Truth will set us free. The Truth about addiction to sodomy is enslavement to slavery. The Preamble to our Constitution promises “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our (Constitutional ) Posterity, all future generations. Enslaving all future generations, our Posterity, to an addiction to sodomy is the devil’s work. All human beings are conceived in original innocence, legal and moral innocence. They are the standard of Justice for our nation from the very first moment of their existence. To corrupt an innocence child needs a millstone about the neck and a very deep river into which the corrupter needs to cast himself. Priest, pagan and heretics all are required to maintain our innocent children in innocence as their God and their heritage intends for them.

  • Only those persons who reverence the human person can enter into the honorable state of Holy Matrimony.
    Informed consent cannot be given to sodomy. Sodomy is a lie. A female husband and a male bride is a lie and perjury in a court of law. Informed consent cannot be given to a lie because by its very nature a lie is disinformation.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Unchanging

Thursday, June 15, AD 2017


PopeWatch has long believed that the key to understanding Pope Francis is his life in Argentina, and, above all, this event:


A titanic struggle for the soul of Catholicism ensued. Bergoglio had strong support within the Jesuits when he became provincial superior in 1973. But by the time he ended his leadership role as rector of Buenos Aires’s Jesuit seminary in 1986, those who loathed him had begun to outnumber those who loved him. By 1990, his support within the order had been eroded by his authoritarian style and his incorrigible inability, in the words of the Jesuit, Father Frank Brennan, “to let go the reins of office once a [Jesuit] provincial of a different hue was in the saddle.” Another senior Jesuit told me: “He drove people really crazy with his insistence that only he knew the right way to do things. Finally the other Jesuits said: ‘Enough.’”

Continue reading...

10 Responses to PopeWatch: Unchanging

  • “He drove people really crazy with his insistence that only he knew the right way to do things. Finally the other Jesuits said: ‘Enough.’”

    If my own experience is any guide, the propensity of management to push that line is inversely proportional to the actual skills possessed.

  • “His view that it is his way or the highway as a young man remains the exact mode of operation of his Papacy.”

    Wait till the Lord Jesus Christ deposes him and one day He shall. This dictatorial Latin American Peronist will have much to answer for.

  • “What Pope Francis learned from this is that the left is stronger than the right in internal Church struggles, and from then on he was going to ally himself with the left.”

    Looks like practically every bishop learned that same lesson and took it to heart. As I have said before, Pope Francis is not as much the cause of the leftward lurch in the Church’s power base, but the product of it.

  • Practically every bishop in the west that is.

  • John Paul II did not learn this lesson and neither did Pope Benedict. Pope Francis is most definitely the cause of the leftward lurch in the Church as we will see after his successor takes office.

  • Well, Donald, JPIi and Benedict XVI did unwittingly set the table for much of what we are seeing now. In the case of JPII, in the latter part of his pontificate took positions on issues like capital punishment in a manner that an honest critique would demand to regarded as irresponsible. As for B16, although he didn’t enshrine his views on the “climate change” hoax in an encyclical, he was clearly in the Al Gore like camp on that issue. And the bishops they picked are clearly leftist, even the orthodox ones. Unless Church teaching explicitly forbids it, these bishops are not only leftist, but hard left. And judging from the tone of their statements, they are more concerned about “social justice” than they are anything else.

    Against this backdrop, it was only a matter of time that someone like Bergoglio got elected.

  • Pope John Paul II also helped to bring down Communism in Eastern Europe, chastised the Sandinistas to their face and was a champion of orthodoxy. Likewise Pope Benedict was a champion of orthodoxy, was alarmed by the threats to religious freedom in the US from the Obama administration and fought the normalization of homosexuality. Compared to Francis, either one was Reagan in a cassock.

  • Of course, I am not denying the good these popes did. In fact, I think especially JPII was a great pope. But in some areas, he did things that were harmful.

    Unfortunately, I think JPII would handled the Muslim refugee issue in a similar manner as Francis is. And given the fact JPII was a Pole, that would have put both the Polish government and the Polish bishops in a bad position because they take a very politically incorrect, but correct, position on that issue. That’s why Poland doesn’t have a problem with Islamic terrorism.

    And yes, compared to Pope Francis, they were Reagan in a cassock. But considered who Pope Francis is, that in itself isn’t really saying much, is it?

  • Unfortunately, I think JPII would handled the Muslim refugee issue in a similar manner as Francis is.

    Not so sure about that:


    “When no solution is foreseen, these same institutions should direct those they are helping, perhaps also providing them with material assistance, either to seek acceptance in other countries, or to return to their own country.”

  • “He drove people really crazy with his insistence that only he knew the right way to do things. Finally the other Jesuits said: ‘Enough.’”

    Let us hope the Cardinals will soon say that they too have had “Enough”.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Bad Joke

Wednesday, June 14, AD 2017


Further evidence that this current pontificate is a bad joke:


Among the 45 new members Pope Francis has appointed to the Pontifical Academy for Life is an Anglican minister who has argued that abortion should be legal until “18 weeks after conception.”

University of Oxford Professor Nigel Biggar, who was appointed to the Academy for a five-year term, stated in a 2011 dialogue with pro-infanticide ethicist Peter Singer that a preborn baby is “not…the same kind of thing as an adult or a mature human being” and therefore does not deserve “quite the same treatment.”

“I would be inclined to draw the line for abortion at 18 weeks after conception, which is roughly about the earliest time when there is some evidence of brain activity, and therefore of consciousness,” he said as reported by Standpoint magazine.

Then, one year later, when he was the keynote speaker for an event at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, he said that “it is not true that all abortion is equivalent to murder.”


Go here to read the rest.  Pro-lifers in the Age of Francis need to watch their backs, because the Church sure will not be.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to PopeWatch: Bad Joke

  • A pro-abort at the Academy for Life. There’s an oxymoron for you!

  • He is on a mission….. unfortunately;

    (An except from your article)
    Pope Francis began his overhaul of the Academy last year by creating new statutes, that among other things, no longer required that members sign a declaration to uphold the Church’s pro-life teachings. The Pope’s next move was to then remove all of the academy members while promising to make new appointments himself.

    Former academy member Judie Brown wrote in an article earlier this year that she was shocked by what she called Francis’ move to “deconstruct” the Academy that was once considered a bastion of orthodoxy.

    “The Pontifical Academy for Life is undergoing an overhaul by Pope Francis and his political operatives within the Vatican’s hierarchy, and it is one of the most heartbreaking events I have seen in my lifetime. But given the politics of the Vatican, it is not surprising,” she wrote at that time.

    Bad joke indeed.
    I can’t help but see a Martin Luther wannabe​ sitting in the Chair of Peter.

    The Chastisement us well underway.

  • The chastisement IS well….not us.
    Excuse my typo please.

  • The Eye of the Tiber and actual news are confused with this Pope.

  • “Pro-lifers in the Age of Francis need to watch their backs, because the Church sure will not be.”

    I would amend that to say:

    “Pro-lifers in the Age of Francis need to watch their backs, because neither this Pontiff nor his lackeys surely will.”

    That Argentinian Marxist Peronist heretic and his limp-wristed effeminate lavendar clothed yes-men of demonic doom do not define the Church. When God has had enough of them, He will ensure that they go to exactly where they have by their actions always shown where wanted to go in the first place.

  • Scientific DNA tells us that the human being begins at fertilization. Mary, the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION tells us that her life began at conception. The human soul being scraped from the womb is murder, a violation of the Fifth Commandment. Pope Francis has to work every hard to maintain that kind of ignorance. Maybe Pope Francis will get overtime pay from the devil, a couple of extra years in hell after eternity.

  • It won’t be long before Pope Francis re-defines Pro-Life to include environmental and economic concerns. Maybe he already has?

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Not a Liberal

Tuesday, June 13, AD 2017



Mathew Walther insists at The Week that Pope Francis is no liberal:


Indeed, I would go so far as to say that both of his predecessors, St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI, had more of the saccharine “Spirit of Vatican II” about them than Francis has. The current pope is a hard-headed practical man, with no illusions about human nature. Nor is he much of an intellectual, though his environmental encyclical Laudato si’ is one of the most important pieces of theological writing to have appeared in my lifetime.


His is a decidedly peasant spirituality of intense Marian devotion. He loathes pomposity with the fervor of his ascetic namesake, St. Francis of Assisi. While he is famous for not getting on well with mainstream traditionalists like me, the so-called rigorists and doctors of the law whom he has subjected to endless (and sometimes deserved) ridicule, he clearly has a soft spot for the much-maligned Society of St. Pius X, whose founder was shamefully — and perhaps invalidly — excommunicated by John Paul II. His gradual reintroduction of these battered and pious misfits into the wider life of the Church is the answer to many prayers.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to PopeWatch: Not a Liberal

  • Pope Francis has confused orthodoxy, orthodox doctrine, with doctors; principles with persons. Pope Francis has banned the priests and sisters of the Immaculate Conception for whatever reason, for which he is embracing the Society of Pius X. It would appear that a Pope devoted to Our Lady would embraced the priests and sisters of the Immaculate Conception.

  • Francis isn’t an ideologue since he is completely a-ideological. He could just as easily function in a country that is ruled by generals like in Argentina (where he got along swimmingly – biggest problems for him were the Catholics who didn’t like his holyman/shamanism/prophet schtick) as he can with the Leninist/Stalinists/Maoist like he is presently with the Chinese government.

    Francis is all about power. He will do whatever he needs to do to attain it and then keep it.

    So in fact, what Francis is is a Machievellian.

    And if you don’t believe me, go read the joint statement that he put out with the Russian Patriarch Kirill in Cuba.

  • I stopped reading Mr. Walther’s piece at “…(Pope Francis’) environmental encyclical
    Laudato Si’ is one of the most important pieces of theological writing to have appeared
    in my lifetime”.
    Whatever the man might have to say after a howler like that, I know
    I cannot take seriously. I actually did a double-take to make sure this wasn’t a satirical
    article reposted from Eye of the Tiber.

  • A great deal of topical commentary (by experts and aspirant experts) is fundamentally self-aggrandizing. What is the function of intellectuals, but to tell us that things are not as ordinary people see them? I’m hoping as one trods through middle age one acquires the talent to recognize this dreck fairly reliably from the appearance of a few predictable phrases, because I’m very unmotivated to read it any more. Oh no no no. If you were sophisticated you’d see the subtelty or the deeper problem or the root cause or the unnoticed antecedent ka blah ka blah ka blah. Everything that needs to be said to Mr. Walther is said by John Cleese at the 0:30 mark.


  • Jorge Bergoglio is a heretic. Further, I agree with Clinton. Laudato Si is a piece of liberal progressive eco-wacko, enviro-nazi pagan nonsense best reserved for the incinerator.

    This Pope must be deposed and anathematized! The sooner the better!

  • We learn a lot about Mr. Walther and his dislikes in this piece. He’s certainly not *that* kind of traditionalist.

    Not so much about the Pope, alas.

  • Man that bugs me. He does not seem a very good person.

    At the end of the article is this:
    “Ostensibly traditionalist Catholic journalists subject the pope’s every utterance to a kind of graspingly paranoid scrutiny; the most innocuous line from a homily is taken as evidence of a sinister mission to undermine and ultimately destroy the Church.”
    Mr. Walther’s article is a round-house wind up ending in a smack down of the faithful Catholic who is caught in the maelstrom of Francis. Sort of a tricky way of using fine language but jabbing us in the stomach at the same time. .

  • In the article Walther badmouths an excellent new book: The Political Pope: How Pope Francis Is Delighting the Liberal Left and Abandoning Conservatives, a new book by an American journalist called George Neumayr.

    Do yourself a favor and buy it.

  • Alain Badiou, the Grand Old Man of the French Left, would certainly agree that Pope Francis is no liberal.

    Badiou described the Holy Father as “a typical petit-bourgeois Social Democrat. In other words, he is someone who wants a decaffeinated Revolution – 1789 without 1793 or the October Revolution without the Red Terror”

  • Ah French lefties, thahk God that since the Commune they have usually lacked the power to carry out their blood drenched schemes. Of course in regard to Badiou he is hampered by the fact that no one, including himself, understands what he is saying which has been described as bursts of metaphysical gibberish.

  • Badiou described the Holy Father as “a typical petit-bourgeois Social Democrat. In other words, he is someone who wants a decaffeinated Revolution – 1789 without 1793 or the October Revolution without the Red Terror”

    I think if Ted Cruz or William Voegli were to describe Francis in terms of his disposition toward the Constitution of 1789, people would generally say that was silly.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Cardinal Sarah

Monday, June 12, AD 2017


PopeWatch has long thought that the alleged amity between the Pope Emeritus and his successor is basically a sham.  The flap over Cardinal Sarah’s book might be evidence of this:


“The arrogance, the violence of language, the disrespect and the inhuman contempt for Benedict XVI are diabolical and cover the Church with a mantle of sadness and shame,” Cardinal Sarah said.

“These people demolish the Church and its profound nature,” he added.


Critics of Benedict XVI have complained that the former Pontiff meddled in Church affairs by contributing the afterword to the German edition of the book, in which Benedict praises Cardinal Sarah and thanks Pope Francis for appointing the African prelate to his current post as prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

In his afterword to Cardinal Sarah’s book, The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise, Benedict XVI wrote that the liturgy is in “good hands” with the Guinean cardinal, while also praising Sarah for his prayer life.

Sarah, Benedict writes, speaks “out of the depths of silence with the Lord, out of his interior union with him, and thus really has something to say to each one of us.”

“We should be grateful to Pope Francis for appointing such a spiritual teacher as head of the congregation that is responsible for the celebration of the liturgy in the Church,” Benedict writes.

The last line of the afterword reads, “With Cardinal Sarah, a master of silence and of interior prayer, the liturgy is in good hands.”

Critics were quick to accuse the former pope of interfering in Church politics and trying to undermine Pope Francis.

One, the Italian liturgist Andrea Grillo, a longtime detractor of Pope Benedict, claims that the former pope has behaved in a “scandalous way” by writing the afterword in praise of Cardinal Sarah and his book, accusing him of “clericalism” and “hypocrisy.”

“It’s as if Ratzinger suddenly renounced his renunciation and wishes to influence the decisions of his successor,” Grillo declared.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to PopeWatch: Cardinal Sarah

  • Benedict’s rather effusive praise of his successor in his post pontificate interview with Peter Seewald suggests he is playing both sides against the middle. I think B16 giving interviews and writing afterwords to books is a bad idea in my opinion. I think it would be best if he said nothing at all.

  • Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is still a bishop, and is still entitled to speak as he thinks fit – because he has handed over the papacy does not remove his right and duty to speak as any other bishop has the right to do.
    I am part way through reading Cdl. Robert Sarah’s book, “God ro Nothing” – and I cannt help but be hugely impressed by this amazing man. I will be getting his new book, and pray that he will be elevated to the papacy on the passing of Pope Francis. We would then get clear and definitive speaking, and most certainly in line with Church doctrine – not the confusing and obfuscating language we get now.

  • We don’t know what a former Pope is supposed to do or not do. None of us have any experience with this. The best we can do is by analogy and it seems to me that the closest parallel is with retired bishops. Here in Philadelphia, we have had a lot of retired bishops around and their conduct was as they see fit. Some were really vocal like Krol. Some were dead silent like Bevilacqua. My point is only that there does not seem to BE a standard, a general view of of how retired bishops should behave. Against that backdrop, I think that Benedict should be given some latitude. Expecting him to remain silent as everything he believes about the liturgy and the importance of theology to the life of the Church is torn asunder is unreasonable.

  • “He is not going to express himself directly for fear of bringing about a formal schism.”
    Pope Benedict should speak truthfully, forcefully and frequently. If this results in a schism so be it.

  • As a human being, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is free to speak his opinion. Pope Benedict’s opinion said nothing against anyone, but only in praise of Cardinal Sarah. Those who would find fault where there is no fault are seeking to inflict their opinion by intimidation.

  • The pope ought to have taken the name, Boniface IX.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Get Thee to a Nunnery

Saturday, June 10, AD 2017



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


After several public failed relationships and an embarrassing 8-months without a boyfriend, award winning singer-songwriter Taylor Swift announced today via Twitter that she was leaving the music industry to become a nun.

“With some prayer, and lots of thinking about boys, I’ve decided to become a nun,” she  wrote on Twitter.

Swift’s agent Rod Steelman confirmed this morning that she has been accepted into the Monastery of Our Lady of Perpetual Disappointment, a convent exclusively for women who respond to a calling immediately after experiencing a devastating breakup.

“She told me a few months ago that she had discerned entering a convent every time she had ever had a breakup, but that this last breakup  was different,” Steelman told EOTT. “She said that she was thinking about how Jesus seemed like the only man that wouldn’t ever break up with her, and how she would never have to write a song about him like she did other men in her life. That’s when it dawned on her to get herself to the nunnery.”

Swift has won several awards, including  ten Grammy Awards, one Emmy Award, and  21 Billboard Music Awards. Forbes recently named her in their annual 100 Most Powerful Women.

Continue reading...

One Response to PopeWatch: Get Thee to a Nunnery

  • “She said that she was thinking about how Jesus seemed like the only man that wouldn’t ever break up with her, ”
    Jesus is the only man who would never break up with her. For real. And convents are good places to write songs about The Beloved.
    Hopefully Taylor Swift will take EOTT’s advise.

Leave a Reply

PopeWatch: Que?

Friday, June 9, AD 2017


Another papal mess to clean up:


Pope Francis again sparked calls for clarification today as he stated before the crowds in St. Peter’s Square: “God cannot be God without man.”

The pope was speaking from a written text at his Wednesday general audience.

According to theologians who spoke with LifeSite, there is a danger the phrase by itself could be taken in an erroneous way.

In context, the Pope said:

Dear brothers and sisters, we are never alone. We can be far, hostile; we can even say we are ‘without God.’ But Jesus Christ’s Gospel reveals to us that God cannot be without us: He will never be a God ‘without man’; it is He who cannot be without us, and this is a great mystery! God cannot be God without man: this is a great mystery!

John Paul Meenan, professor of theology at Our Lady Seat of Wisdom, a Catholic college in Eastern Ontario, told LifeSiteNews that while the second phrase (God cannot be God without man) is open to misinterpretation, the Pope’s first wording (He will never be a God ‘without man’) is less problematic since it is in the future tense, “since God is now in an eternal covenant with man.” Professor Meenan said it is not true that ‘God cannot be God without man’ in a universal sense.

Continue reading...

28 Responses to PopeWatch: Que?

  • Listen, analyze, judge against what the Church has taught always and everywhere, if in error- under necessity ignore.

  • The comparisons to the IQ of a soap dish and or a house plant are appropriate.

  • Penguins Fan is correct. I read the statement that Pope made and immediately thought heretic. God doesn’t need man to be God. God doesn’t need anybody or anything to be God. He is God, omniscient, omnipresent and eternal, existing before man was ever made and continuing to exist long after man has passed from this universe, outside of space and time, not subject to the laws of matter and energy, but having created all those things by His very word. However, in charity maybe the best we can really say is this is the ravings of a geriatric senile imbecile who for the sake of the Church must be deposed and anathematized.

    God, please save your Church from this Marxist Peronist Argentinian.

  • I read this and I immediately thought Process Theology. Maybe I’m reading into it, but that’s what came to my mind.

  • What the Holy Father meant to say was

    Father all-powerful and ever-living God,
    we do well always and everywhere to give thanks.

    You have no need of our praise,
    yet our desire to thank You is itself Your gift.
    Our prayer of thanksgiving adds nothing to Your greatness,
    but makes us grow in Your grace,
    through Jesus Christ our Lord…

    –From the Preface of the Mass in Weekdays of Ordinary Time, IV

  • “I read this and I immediately thought Process Theology. Maybe I’m reading into it, but that’s what came to my mind.”

    I suspect you are right Dave.

  • It seems Papa Foxtrot is a liberal. Orwell wrote (in Reflections on Gandhi) that a liberal cannot be, is not, a spiritual.

    “. . .Gandhi’s teachings cannot be squared with the belief that Man is the measure of all things and that our job is to make life worth living on this earth, which is the only earth we have.”

    “But it is not necessary here to argue whether the other-worldly or the humanistic ideal is ‘higher.’ The point is that they are incompatible. One must choose between God and Man, and all ‘radicals’ and ‘progressives,’ from the mildest liberal to the most extreme anarchist, have in effect chosen Man.”

  • Frank J. Attanucci

    He should of said that..your spot on.
    He would do well to follow the master…not share his throne. Less would most definitely be more in pf’s case.

  • Infinite God. Only God is God. What Francis is saying is that God cannot contradict Himself. If God contradicts Himself, God ceases to be God. Francis’s text blames God for man sins and accuses God of going back on His Word, Who is Jesus Christ. Those of us who refuse to be brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ are going to hell with the fallen angels. Those of us who embrace Jesus Christ will spend eternity with our infinite God in the joy of heaven. Pray for me to get to heaven. I’m not going unless you get to heaven too.

  • He was a Jesuit formed in the First Reign of Insanity following Vatican II. Most of them are drift nets who have scooped up all sorts of profound-sounding nonsense. There’s a reason that the Father John Hardon types stand out for their orthodoxy.
    At this point, I suspect the man can’t help but be a rotating sprinkler of heterdoxy with the hose cranked up to full.

  • Look on the bright side: in no way can that quote be acceptable to Islamic theologians.

  • Dale Price:

    Not to pound the Process Theology angle too much, but I just keep going back to that. Especially because, IIRC, there is some connection between those in the Latin American liberation theology movements and process thought. And it’s my strong feeling that Pope Francis is, above all things, a child of LA Liberation Theology.

  • Dave Griffey, I think you are half-right. A lot of Pope Francis’ career in Argentina can be explained if he accepted the descriptive side of liberation theology but not the prescriptive side.

  • “And it’s my strong feeling that Pope Francis is, above all things, a child of LA Liberation Theology.”
    A half-child. Pope Francis appears to accept the descriptive side of Liberation Theology but not the prescriptive side. His thinking appears to be an attempt to reconcile Liberation Theology with Peronism.

  • Apologies for the partial double post. The first post took 30 minuted to appear on my browser.

  • I don’t think it’s process theology. I read the full text, and he’s saying something different, that God is limited by His mercy. He needs man, and His love makes Him incapable of being anything but man’s Servant. Utterly heretical, but different from process theology.

  • One should be suspicious of anyone who wears black slacks under a white see-through cassock.

  • “At this point, I suspect the man can’t help but be a rotating sprinkler of heterdoxy with the hose cranked up to full.”


    Can I use that line? With attribution of course. 🙂

  • Pinky,

    Possibly not bona fide Whitehead, as I said, didn’t want to push it too far. But it’s worth noting that I can’t remember hearing the last two popes at any time and thinking ‘gee, was that Process theology’? To me, that speaks volumes.

    But then I just read that Bernie Sanders has been joined by CAIR and the ACLU in saying traditional Christian beliefs about salvation and hell are racism and bigotry and could preclude someone from holding office, so there you go. These times, as they say, are a changin’.

  • Pope Frank’s steadfast propensity for making ungodly-stupid statements is now so legendary that he is surefire material for a Geico commercial:

    “If you are Pope Frank, today you would say something that shocks and confuses both Catholics and non-Catholics alike worldwide. That’s what he does: He’s Pope Frank.”

    “If you want to save you up to 15% or more in 15 minutes, you call Geico. That’s what we do.”

  • Man is an expression of God’s beneficence not His need.

  • “God cannot be God without man.”
    Threatening Almighty God with extinction is in poor taste and uncharitable. Threatening The Supreme Sovereign Being with annihilation is disingenuous.
    God is Existence and God exists. God is Love and God loves. God is Justice and God is just. All existence extinguished, starting with Satan, is a lie. The vows of the Sacrament of Matrimony bound in heaven will not be unbound on earth.

  • “God cannot be God without man.”
    Mary, I think I understand what Pope Francis meant. You write that “God is Love”. True. So we can state in a narrow sense that God ‘needed’ to create Man so that He would have more to love, and of course the greatest expression of love by Man is to turn to God. There is a faint echo here of a popular explanation of the mystery of the Trinity.

    Of course, God REALLY did not ‘need’ to create Man, the infinite Love within the Trinity is sufficient for God. This ‘need’ is really just a metaphor.

    Regarding process theology, as far as I can see the only problems arise with the variants that deny God’s omnipotence, omniscience, etc (which admittedly is most of them). The mathematician Georg Cantor demonstrated more than a century ago that it is not illogical to think that an infinity can be increased.

  • One qualification to my last post: God is unchanging, per the Creed. My feeling is that process theology can only be true if the process result(s) are ALREADY ‘accepted’ by God before they happen. Personally I don’t think most process theologians really thought about such matters, they were too ‘worldly’ in their scope.

  • Yeah, I can guess what he meant. I’m sure he wasn’t trying to promote a heretical idea. But, as Chesterton notes, orthodoxy is a balancing act. If you’re not careful, and you put too much emphasis on one idea over another, you can lose the balance. The mystery of God’s love for us doesn’t change the fact that He is pure existence. It’s such an odd thing: for most of us, love is something that disrupts us, binds us, changes us all the time. But God is pure love, and remains unchanged by the object of His love.

  • How about interpreting what Pope Francis said through a Christological lens? God and man are united in the person of Jesus therefore it would be to deny his very existence without his full and complete possession of his humanity. That’s the way I understood what he said.

  • If God cannot be God without man, then man cannot be man without God. The Word of God made flesh in the Hypostatic Union is infinite, making man immortal. Even so, The Word of God in the Hypostatic Union is infinite, man is finite.

  • The Hypostatic Union of God and man by the Word of God depends upon the creation of the Mother of God, Mary. The Son of God chose to be the Son of Man. The Hypostatic Union and the Crucifixion are before all ages. The Hypostatic Union and the Crucifixion before all ages are eternal. God is infinite. The Son of God is infinite. The Son of Man is eternal and depends upon Mary, whose immortal soul was created in original innocence before the fall of Adam. Mary chose to remain in original innocence and obedience to God, offering herself to God in eternity.
    In the Hypostatic Union, the Son of God chose to be Jesus Christ, the Son of Man with Mary as His human Mother. The Word of God as the Son of God is infinite. The Word of God and the Son of God as the Son of Man is dependent upon the human being Mary, who is created in original innocence, as all human being’s souls are created. Mary chose to remain in original innocence as Immaculate Conception.
    Therefore, God is God without or until the creation of the image of God in mankind.

Leave a Reply