PopeWatch: Burke to Guam

Friday, February 17, AD 2017





Just when you thought that things couldn’t get much weirder at the Vatican:


Cardinal Raymond Burke has traveled to Guam, to take testimony in the canonical trial of Archbishop Anthony Apuron of Agana.

Archbishop Apuron, who has been accused of molesting a number of young men, was relieved of his pastoral responsibilities in the Guam archdiocese last June. He has insisted on his innocence and refused to resign. However, in October the Vatican named an American prelate, Archbishop Michael Byrnes, as coadjutor with “special faculties” to take over leadership of the archdiocese.

At his installation, Archbishop Byrnes revealed that the Vatican had begun a canonical trial of Archbishop Apuron on the sex-abuse charges. The Vatican press office has now confirmed this, and disclosed that Cardinal Burke was named as the presiding judge in the case.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to PopeWatch: Burke to Guam

PopeWatch: Bear Growls: Leftist Cardinals

Monday, October 10, AD 2016



Our bruin friend at Saint Corbinian’s Bear takes a look at the three new US cardinals appointed by Pope Francis:

Cupich, Tobin, and Farrell new U.S. Francis Cardinals, signaling a switch away from culture wars. Actually, it signals a switch away from Catholicism. And the Bear shall continue to be right when he says again and again that things are far worse than you think in Jorge Bergoglio’s Church. Now he is consolidating his gains.

The Church in America shall be more the Democrat PAC. It shall continue to sacrifice ecclesiastic physiology for ecclesiastic pathology. It will perpetuate the anti-Catholic leftist party who will elect the next pope in Francis’ image. More Muslim refugees; more running cover for renegade nuns; and more excuses for Muslim terrorism. More support for women deacons; even women deacons delivering homilies.

Read the jubilation at America magazine. BTW the author wants us to take him seriously, when he touts a book, “The Tweetable Pope: a Spiritual Revolution in 140 Characters.” That pretty much says it all about everything, the Bear reckons.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to PopeWatch: Bear Growls: Leftist Cardinals

  • The current Roman Pontiff has become a man I can barely stand to read about. Latin American Jesuits are pratically heretics. His tool, Donald Cardinal Wuerl, had to submit his resignation last year beause he turned 75. Wuerl’s fingerprints are all over the appointments to the bishops and cardinals. Wuerl is in league with the German bishops to give Communion to their favored groups. In Wuerl’s case, give it to abortionist Democrats. In the Germans’ case, give it to adulterers. Wuerl got a reputation about being tough on abusie priests but I found a website put togethere by a disgusted Pittsburgher whose son was shot in the back of the head by a victim of priest abuse. Wuerl is a fraud who left the Pittsburgh diocese bereft of seminarians.

    This Pontiff will likely continue to damage the Church until he faces God. He is Paul VI with a bad attitude and a mean streak. All the damage we thought was on the way out he has brought back and with a vengence.

    There is nothing to do but pray, soldier on and be patient.

  • Is my Bible a Protestant one? It’s obviously been redacted, I can’t find the portions our bishops seem to rely on most. My copy is missing the commandment “Thou shalt covet thy neighbor’s goods when in the voting booth” and the Gospel in which Jesus instructed, “Render the poor unto Caesar”, to name but two examples.

PopeWatch: Noncomformist on the Throne of Peter

Tuesday, August 11, AD 2015



PopeWatch sometimes fears that the Pope Emeritus is in jeopardy of becoming the forgotten pope.  Sandro Magister at his blog Chiesa brings to our attention of a perceptive new look at his papacy by a Japanese agnostic:


by Hajime Konno

Benedict XVI entered the stage of world politics as a Church leader endowed with clear principles and strong will. The name selected as pope, Benedict, indicated his pessimistic diagnosis of the times, or his comparison between the situation today and the late-Roman decadence at the time of Saint Benedict. Already in his homily on the eve of his election to the see, on April 18, 2005, he had clearly taken a position in this regard.

The pope’s objective was first of all the defense and reinforcement of the Christian foundations of Europe, even though during his pontificate the curia also dealt intensively with relations with non-European countries, as for example the socialist republics of China and Vietnam. Benedict did not intend to subject himself to fashion and limit himself to governing with diligence. He wanted to decide what should be changed and what not, always on the basis of the Church’s position and independently of the spirit of the times. He was by no means pledged to anti-modernism. He simply intended to preserve the elements that he saw as necessary for the Church, regardless of the fact of whether they were modern or premodern. He eliminated the papal tiara from the pontifical coat of arms, he renounced the title of “patriarch of the West,” he addressed environmental problems with passion.

Above all he was, de facto, the pope of the “logos”: with the power of his words, his most powerful weapon, he fought for Christian Europe. He opened the Church to the most recent means of communication, including YouTube and Twitter, he rehabilitated Latin and the Tridentine Mass, he reached out to the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, he consolidated the liturgy as the solemn actualization of the mysteries, he placed the Eucharist at the center of Christian life, he encouraged the administration of communion on the tongue and was not afraid, even after the much-criticized discourse in Regensburg, to discuss the violence of radical Islamists.

As interlocutors in the ecumenical movement, Pope Benedict XVI carefully chose Churches like the Orthodox and the Anglican, establishing good contacts with both while still inviting conservative Anglican dissidents to join the Catholic Church. The culmination of the friendship between Catholic and Orthodox was the encounter with the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople. Benedict XVI also went to Great Britain, meeting with both Queen Elizabeth and the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and beatifying Cardinal John Henry Newman in Glasgow. It was not possible to organize a trip to Russia, yet Benedict also had good relations with the patriarch of Moscow, Cyril I, since he was metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad. Although at the time of the council Ratzinger had worked for a positive evaluation of Protestantism, Pope Benedict XVI kept his distance from the “ecclesial communities” of the Reformation.

The progressives inside and outside of the Catholic Church did not recognize the pope’s ability to act autonomously apart from the spirit of the time. To these groups a pontiff who had as his motto “cooperatores veritatis” appeared as an arrogant, unbearable prince of the Church. They did all they could to promote a negative image of the pope and rejoiced over his unexpected resignation. Among the means used, an important role was given to anti-Germanism. The method of stigmatizing Ratzinger as German, even though he rarely emphasized his Germanic identity, resembles that used by anti-Semitism when even Jewish converts are still accused of remaining Jews.

In Germany, his birthplace, Pope Benedict XVI has always been a topic of debate. On the one hand his election was a sort of stroke of liberation. The fact that a German had been elected pope and therefore, so to speak, the supreme spiritual authority of the West, was in itself sensational. English tabloids like “The Sun” could not pass up the chance to compose mocking headlines (“From Hitler Youth to… Papa Ratzi”). Benedict reacted to all of this by emphasizing his Bavarian rather than German patriotism and on May 28, 2006 he went to visit the former concentration camp of Auschwitz-Birkenau. At the same time, however, he also highlighted the importance of Germany. The progressives left no stone unturned in accentuating the problems of sexual abuse and of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, in order to undermine the authority of the pope. Conservative German Catholics, for example those gathered in the initiative “Deutschland pro Papa” or in the “Forum Deutscher Katholiken” found themselves disarmed in the face of the markedly anticlerical climate that prevailed in German public opinion.

Although Benedict XVI did not expressly intend to do so, in fact he brought the dominion of modern values into question. In the context of his criticism of Marxism he supported Western parliamentary democracy, but his siding in favor of democracy was by no means unconditional. He decisively refused to introduce it into the Church, which is ordered in a hierarchical way. He also looked with skepticism at public opinion polling. His distance from the popular will is not explained only by his experience with the student movement in the 1960’s, but was already rooted in his distancing himself from National Socialism, which in its time was accompanied by thunderous applause from the majority of the population. He also did not share the optimistic evaluation of modern-day man and the progress of society.

His attitude followed in the footsteps of Christian social conservatism. The appreciation of the family and of heterosexual marriage was in contradiction with the present-day multiplication of family models. The emphasis placed on the role of Christianity as the pre-political basis of liberal democracy was aimed against secularism. Benedict XVI disapproved of the criticism of Eurocentrism and reiterated the Christian character of Europe. Not only in political questions, but also and above all in cultural ones he took positions and acted as an active champion of old European culture against the tides of globalization.

Pope Benedict XVI was a nonconformist on the throne of Peter. When from the seat of gold he imparted the blessing in Latin, excommunicated dissidents, held the universal Church together and affirmed the unicity of the Catholic faith, he was in fact showing his authoritative side. It comes as no surprise that his detractors, like Leonardo Boff or Johann Baptist Metz, should have criticized him. Nonetheless, the question can also be seen in a different way if it is placed within the situation in which the Church finds itself. If one looks at the dominant position of modern values, the Catholic Church is an oppressed minority while its critics belong to the majority. Thus Ratzinger’s authoritative attitude was a reaction to the prevailing situation.

In any case, the combative spirit was only one side of Joseph Ratrzinger. Although he armored himself, in a certain sense, against his opponents, he never lost the willingness for dialogue. Even his most ardent critic, Hans Küng, was given a friendly reception at Castel Gandolfo. In his encyclicals, Pope Benedict XVI repeatedly dealt with themes like “love” and “hope.” Substantially he remained a Bavarian patriot, with enthusiasm always in his heart for the procession of Corpus Domini. In this sense he resembles the prince of ancient China Ling Wang (Gao Changgong). Even though he fought on the battlefield wearing a mask of the devil, the features of the face that this concealed were delicate.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to PopeWatch: Noncomformist on the Throne of Peter

  • How blessed we were with Benedict, who always spoke with clarity and Catholic truth–a warrior for God’s Church “as handed down by the Apostles.”

  • Benedict is my favorite Pope going back to Pius XII. He is both brilliant and holy, his books a source of insight, his governance courageous, his life an inspiration, his resignation mysterious. I wish he were back in the drivers seat. Someday he will be declared a saint as he is a living one already.

  • Benedict was the backbone behind Saint JPII Papacy- a remarkable papacy.

    I felt a great sense of personal loss when Saint JPII died. The world changed and the absence of his holiness was tangible. Since then, the flavour in the Catholic Church comes across as lacking in salt. Uninspiring.

    I felt for Pope Benedict who had to fill such big shoes. And I don’t begrudge his retirement. It’s a thankless task being Pope.

    Pope Francis lacks the epic suffering of a difficult childhood and a heroism to overcome this through to adulthood that was evident in all Saint JPJII did- he inspired and radiated a love that was evident in the simple glow of his smile.

    I admit that without Pope Benedict’s stability and intelligence behind the scenes, Saint JPJII could not have achieved what he achieved.

    Pope Francis lacks a Pope Benedict to stabilise his Papacy.

  • I strongly supported Benedict. However, I also suffered
    the illusion that the pagan liberals in the Church had
    been vanquished and that the traditionalists or conservatives
    would occupy the papacy for decades. Benedict’s resignation
    was a colossal mistake which could hurt the Church for
    many years. The only positive note of Francis’ election
    is the unveiling of the depth of the corruption of the

  • How well Ezabelle has summated the sacred leadership that a Successor of Peter must radiate to the Universal Church! One remembers the plea of John Henry Newman for Christ: “Help me to spread Your fragrance everywhere I go…” Pope Francis has failed so far to give us a whiff of His fragrance. (I am NOT judging his soul)

  • Pope B XVI is one of my favorites ever – precise, exact, analytical, logical.
    The current Pontiff is a mess.

  • Michael Dowd :”Benedict is my favorite Pope going back to Pius XII.”

    Me, too

  • He will not be forgotten. My seventh son bears his middle name, and we will always have his writings and prophecies long after all current embarrassments are laid to rest.

PopeWatch: Cupich of the West

Wednesday, March 4, AD 2015

21 Responses to PopeWatch: Cupich of the West

  • Well, as all rightcorrect-thinking people, Catholic and non-catholic alike, already know the real problem is poverty.

  • Oh, come on now, Don–the Pope says plenty of fine sounding words on life. It’s just that when the rubber hits the road, he tosses you a bunch of Bernardins who undercut your efforts. In other words, if you want lip service, he’ll give it to you. But if you want action…well, that would send the wrong message to the wider world. Have to meet people where they are, and all that.

    In fact, he’s a lot like the GOP in that respect.

  • What a puzzle! What is he thinking!? Just like Obama… I think he is doing this stuff on purpose (or is he inept? )
    Really can one be a Liberal and be Catholic? Isn’t that sort of an oxymoron?

  • A lot like the GOP…. Yes.
    Can a bishop teach heresy with impunity?

  • Ironic that those who are partaking of the Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ unworthily are unaware that their doing so….and trying to defend others that shouldn’t be receiving Jesus until they truly reconcile.

    This is the problem. Bishops Cardinals and whole segments of Catholicity are placing themselves in ruin, AND then trying to ruin other souls by defending their error. They are either oblivious or cruel in their reception of the Eucharist.

    God help us.

  • Pingback: Liquid Bread: The Top 5 Bock Beers for Lent - BigPulpit.com
  • Pope Leo X hated making appointments and always tried to delegate the task to others. He claimed that, whenever he made one, he created ten malcontents and one ingrate.

  • An ironic appointment, given that Cordileone’s auxillary, and ideological opposite, is being sent to San Diego, which is Cordileone’s home town (and wasn’t he bishop there as well?)

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour: “Pope Leo X hated making appointments and always tried to delegate the task to others. He claimed that, whenever he made one, he created ten malcontents and one ingrate.”
    Well said.

  • Cupich still has a mind of his own and is responsible for what he does.

  • Almost equally as jaw-dropping: NYC just swore in FDNY’s first openly gay female chaplain. Talk about a lib two-bagger: female and hemale! Imagine herself providing spiritual direction to burnt firefighters.

    I was going to address McElroy’s Ragmerica piece line-by-line. But, brevity is the soul of wit. To wit: everything that guy wrote is false. NB: I refrained from employing Bronx vernacular for “false.” Thank you.

  • This is gravely disturbing on so many levels that it is impossible to unwind. McElroy’s comments about the states suggests the abolition of federalism and subsidiarity. He makes no mention that the main antidote to “poverty” is the family. Those policies which support the family include lower taxes, the need to end debt spending, the encouragement of free enterprise (as opposed to crony capitalism), the moral support for local communities and much more. In other words, to hell with subsidiarity. He fails to understand that our obligations to love and for charity are not satisfied by an all powerful federal and/or global government handing out goodies. Then there are his equally depressing moral relativism arguments. Drivel, pure drivel.

  • “I refrained from employing Bronx vernacular for “false.” Thank you.”

    I appreciate your restraint T. Shaw!

  • The appointment of +McElroy to be in charge of the San Diego Diocese has the fingerprints of Cardinal Donald Wuerl all over it.

    Cardinal Wuerl, as we all know, favors giving out Holy Communion to anybody who shows up in line and will pour out his wrath upon any poor priest who believes in actual Catholic teaching about Holy Communion and attempts to put it in practice.
    Pope Benedict should have left +Wuerl in Pittsburgh, where, if he had stayed, we would not have a personal Extraordinary Form Parish. Notice that +Wuerl did NOT get promoted two of the bishops, +Tobion of Providence and +Zubik of Pittsburgh, who are a LOT more observant of the rules than Cardinal Wuerl.

    +Wuerl isn’t done yet. Expect more mushmouths to get made bishop, archbishop and cardinal until the current Roman Pontiff hangs ’em up and heads back to Argentina.

  • Folks,
    There is a different point of view at Tom Peters’ Catholic Vote:
    And Dave Armstrong has been fiercely debating contrary to this blog post. All I have to say is that I am thoroughly confused. I see Pope Francis supporting Orthodoxy one minute and then supporting liberal leftism the next. I truly do not know what to think. Maybe I should pray and read Scripture more.

  • I see Pope Francis supporting Orthodoxy one minute and then supporting liberal leftism the next. I truly do not know what to think.

    I suspect the reason for that is that he says whatever is convenient at that moment. See Msgr. George Kelley on foxes and lions in the Church. The appointments are the real show. Personnel is policy.

  • I belong to our parish MMP group – Marian Movement for Priests. The readings from Fr. Gobbi given to him by locutions from Our Lady have been talking about this type of betrayal- and have been going on – since the 1970’s ,and yet the appointments of this type continue.
    Are our pontiffs deliberately given false information, or kept in the dark, or do their appointments reflect their own understandings ? One has to wonder. The main weapon is prayer and vigilance, and speaking out when we can.

  • The media will have a field day with this appointment, as well they should. Right when they thought the Pope was an actual Catholic because of his recent statements on marriage, he lets them know he’ll meet the cafeteria Catholics half way and not really pay any attention to the Holy Eucharist, because after all no one should be “punished” and not be allowed in the presence of God during Mass. Nancy Pelosi is giggling as she walks into Mass and crosses herself with holy water. Her favorite pope of all time has just appointed her favorite bishop. All is well in cafeteria Catholic land. Jesus weeps.

  • Paul:

    The problem with Peters’ take is that he misses a crucial fact: the early Francis appointments were already in the pipeline from Benedict when Francis placed them in their sees.

    Then the Pope reshuffled the Congregation of Bishops, jettisoning Burke and importing Wuerl. Then we started seeing progressives going into high-profile positions. The stream has changed, and now the progs are marching in. He’s whistling past the graveyard, which is a consistent flaw in his writing.

    I am unfamiliar with what Mr. Armstrong wrote, so I can’t comment on that.

  • Almost equally as jaw-dropping: NYC just swore in FDNY’s first openly gay female chaplain. Talk about a lib two-bagger: female and hemale! Imagine herself providing spiritual direction to burnt firefighters.

    Another insult to public safety personnel courtesy Bilge di Blasio’s camarilla.

  • This priest’s goal is to please everyone except Jesus Christ.

5 Responses to PopeWatch: America Bound

  • Well, let’s hope he doesn’t “make a mess”!

  • If in ten months it is God’s will that I have time, money and agility sufficient to be near anyplace His Holiness goes from car to building, I will have a sign that reads “Para que podamos saber lo que realmente sirve, Santo Padre, por favor hable con claridad.
    I cannot predict what would happen after that. I suppose it depends on how the translation goes.

  • WK Aiken, the Pope thinks that he IS speaking clearly. That is the whole problem – he cannot accept that he actually is speaking ambiguously. The tradition of precision that Benedict XVI exemplified – almost scientific in its implementation – is not a part of the makeup of Pope Francis. It is foreign to him. He does not have either the aptitude nor the willingness to use such precision.

  • Hi, Paul.
    Agreed on every point. But that does not prevent me from wishing, if it is my place to do so, that an outside element might be employed to try to illuminate this disconnect. Sometimes a non-sequitur such as a 56-year-old man who looks like an NFL linebacker holding a sign in Spanish that asks what is meant (or who one serves, depending) might just stick in a craw.
    It may be completely futile. All that may transpire is “pity on the poor man who cannot understand such lofty concepts.” Maybe I should append the text to say “Para que podamos saber lo que realmente sirve, Santo Padre, por favor hable con claridad a me.” He gets it when it’s personal.
    In any event, those are my thoughts.

  • He will be in Philadelphia. As a Western Pennsylvanian who hates Philadelphia politics and the Philadelphia vote fraud that occurs every Presidential election, I can think of many places better to go visit for a first trip to the USA.

    Having said that, I’m not crossing Pennsylvania to see him. I won’t cross the street to see the current Roman Pontiff. I pray for his well being…and for the wisdom to resign and go back to Argentina for the rest of his days.

PopeWatch: Think Hard About This

Monday, November 17, AD 2014


The Pope spoke quite strongly against abortion, euthanasia and in vitro fertilization on Saturday to the Association of Italian Catholic doctors

The dominant thinking sometimes suggests a “false compassion”, that which believes that it is: helpful to women to promote abortion; an act of dignity to obtain euthanasia; a scientific breakthrough to “produce” a child and to consider it to be a right rather than a gift to welcome; or to use human lives as guinea pigs presumably to save others. Instead, the compassion of the Gospel is that which accompanies in times of need, that is, the compassion of the Good Samaritan, who “sees”, “has compassion”, approaches and provides concrete help (cf. Lk 10:33).

Your mission as doctors puts you in daily contact with many forms of suffering. I encourage you to take them on as “Good Samaritans”, caring in a special way for the elderly, the infirm and the disabled. Fidelity to the Gospel of life and respect for life as a gift from God sometimes require choices that are courageous and go against the current, which in particular circumstances, may become points of conscientious objection. And this fidelity entails many social consequences. We are living in a time of experimentation with life. But a bad experiment. Making children rather than accepting them as a gift, as I said.

Playing with life. Be careful, because this is a sin against the Creator: against God the Creator, who created things this way. When so many times in my life as a priest I have heard objections: “But tell me, why the Church is opposed to abortion, for example? Is it a religious problem?” No, no. It is not a religious problem. “Is it a philosophical problem?” No, it is not a philosophical problem.

It’s a scientific problem, because there is a human life there, and it is not lawful to take out a human life to solve a problem. “But no, modern thought…” But, listen, in ancient thought and modern thought, the word “kill” means the same thing. The same evaluation applies to euthanasia: we all know that with so many old people, in this culture of waste, there is this hidden euthanasia. But there is also the other. And this is to say to God, “No, I will accomplish the end of life, as I will.” A sin against God the Creator! Think hard about this.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to PopeWatch: Think Hard About This

  • I am pleased the Holy Father addressed the question of assisted reproduction.
    I have always though it unfortunate that so little effort has been made by pastors to draw our attention to Donum Vitae, the CDF’s instruction of 22 February 1987, especially when we see human gametes being treated as articles of commerce and a thriving international market in babies, bespoke or prêt-à-porter, through surrogate gestation.
    France is the only country I know of that has enacted legislation to restrict the commercialisation of the reproductive process.

  • How odd that liberal progressives who, being environmentally conscious, are so in love with nature and yet are so willing to do the most unnatural things with unborn babies and even in their own sex lives! As St Paul said, they would rather worship the creature than the Creator.

  • Paul, that always puzzles me as well. People who spend the extra money on “organics,” purified water and whatnot are the same ones pumping themselves full of artificial hormones to avoid pregnancy. Makes no sense.

  • It’s also interesting that many of the people we’ve seen seize upon this Pope’s
    unfortunate “who am I to judge?” comment to justify ignoring perennial
    Catholic teachings about homosexuality … are the same people who will, with a
    roll of their eyes, pass over Pope Francis’ strong words against abortion and

  • c matt: “Paul, that always puzzles me as well. People who spend the extra money on “organics,” purified water and whatnot are the same ones pumping themselves full of artificial hormones to avoid pregnancy. Makes no sense.”
    Estrogen from contraceptive pills is polluting our ground water. Without a solution, Obama has issued the HHS Mandate requiring everybody to pay for and buy contraception of everybody. Global warming had no response to the volcanoes in New Zealand, Alaska and Hawaii. Oh, no, the people are prohibited from praying to God, our Creator, to “deliver us from evil”, from Yellowstone, the supervolcano from erupting. “Unless you honor me, I will make of you a “no people” a foolish nation.”
    You just killed a human being, one of God’s children, through abortion. This ought to make you a favorite of God.(sarcasm) You just engineered a person without his informed consent. That ought to make the law more relevant to the masses for a civilized society. (more sarcasm) The devil makes us incoherent before God. Atheism removes the God of good will and common sense, and leaves us dependent upon “a no people, a foolish nation”.
    Every sin provokes God. Every prayer will be answered.

  • Mary De Voe.
    Damn right!
    Your sarcasm is appreciated.
    Bless you dear one.

  • Am I wrong in noticing that the Pope only speaks thusly (criticism of abortion, divorce, homosexual behavior, calling it a sin, etc) when he is before an audience who would normally agree with Church teaching? Have I noticed wrong on that? That is my impression.

  • DJ Hesselius

    Surely it is obvious why he would want to discuss abortion, euthanasia and assisted reproduction, when addressing a medical association?
    Less so, if he were speaking to the mercantile marine, for example.

  • MPS, the Holy Father should say these things to Cardinal Kasper and the liberal news media. He avoids doing so and issues such platitudes as “Who am I to judge?”

  • It is pathetic how downhill the medical profession has gone with regard to reproduction and with life itself. It is an irony of devilish proportions to have uterine transplants in China and Sweden; IVF from now 3 sources; exploitations of women for surrogacy in India; and nearer home, the utter lack of so many “Catholic” physicians to stand up and be counted to follow ethical principles. In Catholic hospitals, the ERDs are virtually not promulgated, and often ignored in practice. From the pulpits, a great silence.
    For whom are we saving the planet?

  • Thank you, Philip. I will take that as a Hail Mary.

  • A false compassion says Francis. What happened to God is
    open to new ideas?

    Perhaps, Francis is unaware of the crucial role homosexual
    groups played in establishing assisted suicide in Oregon.
    Remember homosexuals have many gifts to offer the church.

    Oregon was targeted by the Hemlock Society, which strongly
    advocated assisted suicide and which was funded by homosexual
    groups, which sought a painless death for AIDS infected members
    of their community, to make legal euthanasia.

    The states of Oregon and Washington were targeted for assisted
    suicide because both states have large non-religious populations
    (over 25 percent for each state) which made the effort to legalize
    euthanasia in those states much easier.

  • Pingback: Pope Francis, The Francis Effect & The Media - BigPulpit.com
  • I have been around enough individuals in the medical field to know that not everyone in the medical field would agree with Pope Francis and the Church’s understanding regarding these particular issues. I cannot help but think there those in Italy who would not agree with the Church’s vision on abortion, IVF, euthanasia, etc. I applaud him for speaking out and hope that this catches on to the broader media. His words can encourage and embolden us priests to speak more clearly and vocally on these issues.

  • It’s also interesting that many of the people we’ve seen seize upon this Pope’s unfortunate “who am I to judge?” comment … are the same people who… pass over Pope Francis’ strong words against abortion and euthanasia.

    Not interesting at all. Those people answered Pope Francis’s “who am I to judge?” remark with “That’s right Frankie, you’re not to judge!” Within their Culture of Death, those people are quite consistent

    Puzzle solved.

  • Notice how easily that foolish girl could obtain drugs to put herself to death with while the State of California struggles to obtain any drugs at all with which to put death horribly guilty murderers.

    By the way, the more euthanasia enthusiasts there are who consider death a blessing, the harder it will be for ACLU attorneys to stand before a judge and claim that the death penalty is “cruel and unusual”.

  • It’s also interesting that many of the people we’ve seen seize upon this Pope’s unfortunate “who am I to judge?” comment … are the same people who… pass over Pope Francis’ strong words against abortion and euthanasia.

    Not interesting at all. Those people answered Pope Francis’s “who am I to judge?” remark with “That’s right Frankie, you’re not to judge!” Within their Culture of Death, those people are quite consistent.

    Puzzle solved.

PopeWatch: Condolence and Love

Monday, August 25, AD 2014

3 Responses to PopeWatch: Condolence and Love

  • In the Holy Mass, all people are remembered and prayed for, those in heaven, on earth and under the earth. Pope Francis can live his words to James Foley’s parents and loved ones through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, through the great gift of Holy Orders. This is a great gift of Peace. According to Saint Augustine, all people offer their hearts and souls to God at the Offertory of the Mass, enabling all persons to live what they say, their words. May the Sacred Heart of Jesus shelter us in our hour of need.

  • Mary De Voe,

    You are so correct about Holy Mass. When it comes to the grieving process the Mass is the vertical (and most ultimate) dimension of the Church’s response, and the ‘pastoral’ is the horizontal. We need both.

  • Botolph: Your understanding is gratefully appreciated. You simplify the Truth.

PopeWatch: Not Interested?

Thursday, July 24, AD 2014




Sandro Magister at his blog Chiesa puts his finger on what PopeWatch views as the single most dispiriting aspect of the papacy of Pope Francis:



Three days later, on June 4, the pope had a long meeting at his residence of Santa Marta with some “Evangelical” leaders of the United States, including the famous televangelist Joel Osteen, California pastor Tim Timmons, and the president of the Evangelical Westmont College, Gayle D. Beebe.

On June 24, another meeting. This time with Texas televangelists James Robinson and Kenneth Copeland, with Bishop Anthony Palmer of the Communion of Evangelical Episcopal Churches, with John and Carol Arnott of Toronto, and with other prominent leaders. There were also Geoff Tunnicliffe and Brian C. Stiller, respectively the secretary general and “ambassador” of the World Evangelical Alliance. The meeting lasted for three hours and continued through lunch, in the refectory of Santa Marta, where the pope, amid loud laughter, gave Pastor Robinson a high five (see photo).

Copeland and Osteen are proponents of “prosperity theology,” according to which the more faith grows the more wealth grows. They themselves are very wealthy and live an extravagant lifestyle. But Francis spared them the sermon on poverty.

Instead – according to what “ambassador” Stiller reported – the pope assured them: “I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals to Catholicism. There are so many doctrines we will never agree on. Let’s be about showing the love of Jesus.”

Continue reading...

37 Responses to PopeWatch: Not Interested?

  • Prayers and mortification. This has already been a long pontificate and every day that follows will be that much worse. But again, prayers and mortification for the Fool Pope.

  • God has an even more appropriate comment for the Fool Pope. From today’s first reading:

    When I brought you into the garden land
    to eat its goodly fruits,
    You entered and defiled my land,
    you made my heritage loathsome.
    The priests asked not,
    “Where is the LORD?”
    Those who dealt with the law knew me not:
    the shepherds rebelled against me.
    The prophets prophesied by Baal,
    and went after useless idols.

    Be amazed at this, O heavens,
    and shudder with sheer horror, says the LORD.
    Two evils have my people done:
    they have forsaken me, the source of living waters;
    They have dug themselves cisterns,
    broken cisterns, that hold no water.

  • I guess I am a little more concerned about the Pope’s lack of interest in converting Muslims. Granted, his indifference to calling our “separated brethren” home to Mother Church surely isn’t helping to convert Muslims.

  • Brian C. Stiller who was at the June 24th meeting with Pope Francis wrote the following at http://dispatchesfrombrian.com/2014/07/09/lunch-with-the-pope/:
    “I know some will wonder if we lack discernment, dining as we did with the head of a church many see as heretical. As an Evangelical, I’m clear in the importance of the Reformation and the role our community plays in announcing the Good News. I celebrate our understanding of the Scriptures as our only and final authority, the priesthood of every believer, the life-giving moment of rebirth and freedom for churches and ministries to spring up under the inspiration of the Spirit. No one is interested in rewinding the clock. Also to construct a united church isn’t doable and neither is it in our interest. Such plans do not lead us to fulfill Jesus’ prayer in John 17 that we be one in Christ.”
    The Pope reaching out to people like Brian Stiller is good. The Pope not refuting nor condemning Brian Stiller’s statement above is bad. The Reformation to which Brian Stiller refers was rebellion against the only Church that Jesus founded. The so-called Reformers are called Protestants by their very own selves for a reason: they have protested against the One Body of Christ, and as such have placed themselves outside that Body. The Pope needs to clearly address this (in of a way more diplomatic than I am capable of) to prevent the rise of scandal within the Church and to provide a clear distinction without.
    Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

  • Could it be that Pope Francis considers it a higher priority right now for the Church to evangelize its own fallen-away members and “get its act together”, so to speak, before turning our attention to converting others? Kind of a “take the log out of your own eye before you take the speck out of your brother’s eye” approach?

    Or perhaps he believes Evangelicals should first be approached as allies in the fight against aggressive secularism (especially with regard to abortion, euthanasia, same-sex unions, etc.) than as “targets” for conversion? If you want someone to fight beside you for a cause, you don’t start the conversation by saying “Here’s where you’re all wrong.” When they fight beside you and see your character and integrity, they may then want to become more like you or have what you have, and that is when the opportunity for evangelization/conversion occurs.

  • Paul W Primavera

    I always thought Protestants took their name from the Protestation of Spiers (Speyer) (1529), in which the Princes and the agents of the Free Cities protested against the revocation by the Diet of the policy of tolerance adopted at the previous Diet of Spires in 1526, pending the calling of a General Council, to which both Pope and Emperor had agreed.
    It is anachronistic to think of anyone at Spiers thinking in terms of a Catholic Church and a Protestant Church. The “Protestants” of Spiers thought of themselves as good Catholics and demanded to know why anyone thought otherwise.

    In 1533, we find Francis I of France, effectively supporting the “Protestants” of Spires, by calling for a General Council, to include both Catholics and “Protestants.”

    It was not until the Edict of Nantes in 1598, a full lifetime after Spiers, that anyone believed a permanent and irreversible breach between the Catholic and Protestant states of Europe was even possible. Hopes of an organic reunion lingered on throughout the following century.

  • “Could it be that Pope Francis considers it a higher priority right now for the Church to evangelize its own fallen-away members and “get its act together”, so to speak, before turning our attention to converting others?”

    Only God knows since this Pope almost never seems to explain anything he says or does, even with his own staff. Of course Christ did not give the Church the option of not evangelizing at all times. I can imagine Peter standing up after the Ascension: “You know boys, what Christ said was all well and good about making disciples of all the nations and I know I was deeply moved by it, but after Judas betraying Christ, and my own denying Christ, and the fact that the rest of you ran like scared rabbits, I think we need to get our act together before we try to convert others.”

  • I thought the word “protestant” came from “pro testare” (or something Latin), that is placing one’s reading of the testament/Scripture over the teachings of the Church and its councils. The answer on Final Jeopardy, the other night, was pretty much that “What is protestantism?” for the fact that Luther and others rejected the teaching of a Church Council.

    And, the definition of “heretic”, I thought, was replacing Church teachings (on matters of faith and morals) with one’s (or one’s group’s) personal opinions on same.
    So, I think it’s amusing that these ignorant clowns could consider Holy Mother Church to be heretical.
    I have one piece of advice for the wealthy charlatans: “You can’t take it with you. It will burn.”

  • “The “Protestants” of Spiers thought of themselves as good Catholics and demanded to know why anyone thought otherwise.”

    Too bad they didn’t listen to the many answers they were given by the Church.

  • @Elaine, your second point got me thinking: given 2×2=4 possible combinations,
    Pope (cares if you join the Catholic Church OR doesn’t care) x (says so OR doesn’t say),
    I’d prefer the Pope cares AND (says so OR doesn’t say), rather than he doesn’t care AND says so. In a foxhole, one might care, and not say so because you are so busy praising the Lord and passing the ammunition.

    My preference then speaks to your first point, which is convincing fallen-away Catholics to return. And, Protestants just fell away longer ago. Because I think it’s more attractive than unattractive to say “I love you so much I want you to have this great good thing I have.” It’s more attractive to at least say nothing, than to say “I’m not interested in… you getting this great good thing I have.”

  • “Could it be that Pope Francis considers it a higher priority right now for the Church to evangelize its own fallen-away members and “get its act together’…”

    I don’t thik so as then we would run the risk of becoming self-absorbed promethean neopelagians. A definite no no in the Pope’s book.

  • T Shaw

    I believe “heretic” comes from αἵρεσις (hairesis, “choice, system of principles”), from αἱρέομαι (haireomai, “choose”), the middle voice of αἱρέω (haireō, “choose”), I would imagine it came into English via Latin haeresis or Old French heresie (modern hérésie); from which is anyone’s guess.

    Donald R McClarey wrote, “Too bad they didn’t listen to the many answers they were given by the Church”
    The promised council did not meet until 1545. By that time, so much property, especially Church property, had changed hands that many people were more interested in protecting the acquisitions than in theological discussions.

  • Maybe the comment that about not being interested was a statement calculated at disarming his guests. Charm and disarm. You have nothing to fear from me.
    I think that’s the same message he gave his lavender associates. I am not against you. It occurs to me, he may be thinking of a longer range trajectory in for his cannonballs. And he may be jesuitical enough to have a certain definition for “interested” (or 🙂 have his fingers crossed)

  • That IS the position of the pope and there IS a great crisis.

  • Phillip – you’re right.
    Anzylne – cannonballs are only for the promethian pelagians mentioned by Phillip.

  • Anzlyne, sorry and I can’t blame my auto- correct. You wouldn’t have recognized yourself!

  • Hah! ha.
    oh no. what am I laughing about!?
    Would I rather believe he was doing some dissembling, or that he really doesn’t think we should convert people to the one True faith. That Kenneth Copeland and Joel Osteen would not be massively immeasurably blessed by participation in the Eucharist.
    This is astounding to me really. Who knew? When B16 thought relativism was such a problem that maybe the Church would get smaller, we didn’t know the top of the hierarchy would be leading the shuffle off the stage. While still keeping the name and robes of course. Many today are Catholic in name only and cite the holy father. No wonder catholics don’t believe in the Real Presence and the difference between the Mass and a prayer meeting, or a motivational seminar. wonder why Marcus Grodi even bothers.

  • The Pope understands that due to the American and French revolutions, people have the civil right to choose any religion that suits them. If the Papacy were to go all Fire and Brimstone on people, they would simply choose another religion.

    I do wish the Pope would actually test this theory though. Simply require every parish to offer the traditional mass with a brief statement at the beginning that anyone in attendance who has watched pornography or engaged in heterosexual or homosexual sodomy or is divorced and remarried must refrain from approaching communion unless first having confessed.

    Then post the attendance and collection plate figures for said masses and let the chips fall where they may.

  • Well before the 18th and 19th century revolutions, people were choosing to believe in Christ, even though it was politically and socially incorrect. Modernism is another thing that seems to seep out of Francis. What is in your heart eventually comes out of your mouth.
    False dichotomy: Hellfire and brimstone are not necessary in witnessing to the Truth of the Catholic Faith.
    Neither is publicly embarrassing sinners.

  • The Pope meets with this bunch, says a bunch of silliness (I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals – did a Pope really say that?) and then goes his way. Meanwhile the Chaldean and Syrian Catholics suffer.

    Perhaps there is something going on behind the scenes, but I don’t see anything being done by the Vatican to help these poor people – and I am irate.

  • So the Church has decided not to convert the Jews and now the Evangelicals. I guess all Protestants are next. And why bother with agnostics and atheists? You’re not going to agree on anything anyway. Should we even evangelize?

    Ugh. I hope the quote is a misquote.

  • In the end, such a denial leads one to deny others the Eucharist and a close relationship to our Mother Mary. This is love? No. Such is a lack of love. From today’s reading again:

    “Since we have the same spirit of faith as he had who wrote, “I believed, and
    so I spoke,” we too believe, and so we speak, [14] knowing that he who raised
    the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and bring us with you into his pre-
    sence. [15] For it is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and
    more people it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God.”

    From St. Gregory the Great:

    “try to bring it to the attention of others. You should, therefore, desire others to
    join you on the ways of the Lord. If you are going to the forum or the baths, and
    you meet someone who is not doing anything, you invite him to go along with
    you. Apply this earthly custom to the spiritual sphere, and as you make your
    way to God, do not do so alone”

  • Pope Francis is a thorough-going Augustinian, that is to say, he is an experimentalist. The Augustinian feels certain that something has happened to him, and he invites you to let it happen to you — that is, really, the whole of his message. As Mgr Ronald Knox puts it, “the emphasis lies on a direct personal access to the Author of our salvation, with little of intellectual background or of liturgical expression.”

    For the Augustinian, evangelisation is an invitation to “Come to Jesus,” confident in the power of grace, freely bestowed, to transform hearts and minds and to lead us into all truth.
    This often results in a depreciation of theology, elegantly voiced by Bl John Henry Newman; “Theological dogmas are propositions expressive of the judgments, which the mind forms, or the impressions which it receives, of Revealed Truth. Revelation sets before it certain supernatural facts and actions, beings and principles; these make a certain impression or image upon it; and this impression spontaneously, or even necessarily, becomes the subject of reflection on the part of the mind itself, which proceeds to investigate it, and to draw it forth in successive and distinct sentences.” Hence, “naturally as the inward idea of divine truth, such as has been described, passes into explicit form by the activity of our reflective powers, still such an actual delineation is not essential to its genuineness and perfection.” Indeed; this is why the French School (thoroughly Augustinian) draws a sharp distinction between « la théologie » and « la religion »

  • “Pope Francis is a thorough-going Augustinian…”

    Your source for this assertion. I don’t know that he was formed in or has even done much work in Augustine.

    Now Benedict XVI:


  • Philip

    I used “Augustinian” to distinguish a particular theology that is distinct and recognisable in many Christians, Catholic and Protestant, who have never read him.

    Bl John Henry Newman, who very rarely cites him, or any other Latin Father for that matter, is entirely Augustinian and in nothing more than his Platonism.
    Evangelicalism, in its soteriology, which tends to be the sum and substance of its theology, is entirely Augustinian, although he is seldom acknowledged as its source.

    Pope Francis’s suspicion of moralism, his hatred of Pelagianism and its “works righteousness” are the hall-marks of the Augustinian approach to the mystery of grace.

    Cardinal Ratzinger (as he then was) (in the book “Guardare Cristo: esempi di fede, speranza e carità” – Looking at Christ: Examples of faith, hope and charity) shared this concern: “the other face of the same vice is the Pelagianism of the pious. They do not want forgiveness and in general they do not want any real gift from God either. They just want to be in order. They don’t want hope they just want security. Their aim is to gain the right to salvation through a strict practice of religious exercises, through prayers and action. What they lack is humility which is essential in order to love; the humility to receive gifts not just because we deserve it or because of how we act…”

  • So is the Pope a promethean Augustinian? It would seem so…
    I must comment seriously (not sarcastically) that I really have gotten to love that word! Thank you Francis!

  • The Protestants cannot believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ because the Protestants do not believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ or the Immaculate Conception.
    As far as self-absorbed promethian neo-pelagians, I will have to think about that.

  • Mary De Voe wrote, “The Protestants cannot believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ …”

    “The Tenth Article has been approved, in which we confess that we believe, that in the Lord’s Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and are truly tendered, with those things which are seen, bread and wine, to those who receive the Sacrament. This belief we constantly defend, as the subject has been carefully examined and considered. For since Paul says, 1 Cor. 10:16, that the bread is the communion of the Lord’s body, etc., it would follow, if the Lord’s body were not truly present, that the bread is not a communion of the body, but only of the spirit of Christ…. we defend the doctrine received in the entire Church, that in the Lord’s Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and are truly tendered with those things which are seen, bread and wine. And we speak of the presence of the living Christ [living body]; for we know that death hath no more dominion over Him, Rom. 6:9.” – The Lutheran Defence of the Confession of Augsberg 1533

    “ the Protestants do not believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ or the Immaculate Conception”
    “It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” – Martin Luther’s Sermon “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527

  • “Pope Francis’s suspicion of moralism, his hatred of Pelagianism and its “works righteousness” are the hall-marks of the Augustinian approach to the mystery of grace.”

    Though that might make him a Thomist. Or a follower of Scotus. Or perhaps also Bernard.

    Such does not make him an Augustinian.

  • Yes Micjhael but you know that Luther’s personal devotion to Mary in the years after his death has faded away from the ordinary Lutherans understanding.
    About the Con substantiation – that Lutheran doctrine tried tkeep the understanding of Real Presence, while in a way limiting the power of God to effect the total and complete change and make it more palatable to the people.
    But even this Lutheran understanding can not hold water because of the lack of Holy Orders. The understanding of who when and how the Eucharist is confected is bottom line.
    As you know the Presence of God is in the worshipping congregations act of worship according to protestants- esp emphasized by the evangelical.
    Interestingly in discussing changes in Catholic architecture since V2 including the removal of the Tabernacle, my elderly priest friend suggested that it was based on the idea that the Real Presece is in the people who come to worship.

  • Anzlyne wrote, “The understanding of who, when and how the Eucharist is confected is bottom line.”

    Well, not if you are a Ubiquist, as many Lutherans are. The arguments are contained in the Formula of Concord,( which proved to be one of the most divisive documents ever written), namely, “That God’s right hand is everywhere; at which Christ is placed in deed and in truth according to His human nature, [and therefore] being present, rules, and has in His hands and beneath His feet everything that is in heaven and on earth [as Scripture says, Eph. 1:22],

    Later German Idealism and Pantheism owe a good deal more to Luther than is commonly realised.

  • Ubiquist
    Denying, yet again, the Authority given the Catholic Church re Holy Orders / and Apostolic Succession.

  • Only an ordained priest can and may act “in persona Christi” to confect the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ in the Real Presence on the altar.
    Anzlyne: “Interestingly in discussing changes in Catholic architecture since V2 including the removal of the Tabernacle, my elderly priest friend suggested that it was based on the idea that the Real Presece is in the people who come to worship.”
    The people who come to worship can and may only act in “alter Christi”, as other Christs, but never, never as Christ, the High Priest, as does the ordained priest “in persona Christi.” at the Consecration of the Mass. St. Augustine touched on this matter when he said that the congregation at Mass offers up their hearts with the priest, when the priest offers up his heart at the Consecration of the Mass. The people may not always fulfill this consecration perfectly “Lord, I am not worthy…”, whereas, the priest through the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ, Himself, accomplish this sacrifice perfectly, irregardless of the sanctity or reverence of the duly ordained priest.
    The Mass, taken as a whole act of worship, from beginning to end, with contrition, praise and adoration culminates in Jesus Christ.

  • “Later German Idealism and Pantheism owe a good deal more to Luther than is commonly realised.” – true that!
    Wonder if the pope would have had an interest on converting Luther

  • Reverting. Or maybe because of primacy of conscience earnestly seeking God- who would he be to judge

  • P.S. and anyone who tries to take Jesus away from mankind will be violating Jesus Christ’s command to the Apostles: “Go, therefore, and teach all nations (every one of us). Give us back our tabernacles and stop talking in church. It is just plain rude, obnoxious, inconsiderate and blashemous.
    Thank you, Donald McClarey. Now, I feel better.

  • Oh, and did I mention the short pants and skirts with hairy legs and arses exposed in the sanctuary? Those persons in the sanctuary act in the name of the church and their clothing ought to reflect their mission, not them, per se. Choir gowns would fit the bill for women readers and songstresses. There is no help for the pewsitters having to climb over hairy pink thighs, doing a fast lap dance to access a seat.
    Where is St. Rafael?

PopeWatch: Communion Gate

Saturday, January 11, AD 2014



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

VATICAN––It was revealed today that senior assistants to Pope Francis conspired to snarl lines for Holy Communion in the basilica of a “rival Cardinal.”  In an EOTT exclusive, an anonymous source said that some of Pope Francis’ top aides remained bitter toward supporters of an undisclosed papal candidate who came close to being elected at the March 2013 conclave. Information leaked from the papal election named Santos Abril y Castello, Archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, as one of the cardinals who had cast his vote for a runner-up instead of then-Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio. In official emails and text messages shown to EOTT today, Papal aides discussed Castello’s non-support of Francis in bitter tones in the months following the election. In one email dated December 4, 2013, an aide to Pope Francis, Father Pietro Torelli mentions Castello’s vote and jokes with another aide, “Time for some communion traffic problems in Maria Maggiore!” Many Maria Maggiore parishioners had complained to EOTT that there was a total absence of Eucharistic ministers at the Basilica on Sunday, causing people to wait an “unbearable” twenty to twenty-five minutes to receive Holy Communion. “It was more than I could take,” said one frustrated parishioner. “Usually there are about ten Eucharistic Ministers, but there was only two. For the first time in my life, I walked out of Mass before receiving Communion. I usually run right out after receiving, but since I was at the end of the long and only Communion line, I knew that the parking lot would be a zoo if I did not get out of there soon.” Pope Francis held a news conference today denying knowledge of the incident and promising that any of his aides involved in ordering Eucharistic Ministers at the Basilica to stay home from Mass would be dismissed. Vatican observers wonder if this ugly incident jeopardizes Francis’ chances to repeat as TIME magazine’s “Person of the Year” in 2014. “I am not a bully,” the Pope sadly told reporters. “I don’t know how I got that reputation. Maybe because I was once a bouncer? I don’t know.”

Continue reading...

20 Responses to PopeWatch: Communion Gate

  • “Hmmm? Has anyone ever seen Chris Christie and the Pope in the same room?”

    I don’t know. Given Christie’s size, he’d have to be Benedict and Francis.

  • Distraction.

    The lying, liberal (but I repeat myself, again) media is devoting an estimated 17-times more “wind” and ink to Bridgegate than it did to checking Obama commie beliefs, qualifications and experiences in 2008; body count from Fast and Furious; outlining 2,300 pages of Obamacare legislation; fighting/not fighting wars/surges for electoral advantage; the IRS assault on certain Americans’ political speech; Benghazi/YouTube lie/cover-up; purges of hundreds of senior military officers; the decline and fall of the middle class; etc.

    It borders on the pornographic.

    Quoth their next POTUS on Benghazi, “What difference does it make, now?”

  • T. Shaw.
    I honestly feel your justifiable disrespect for the “whores” that pretend to be non-biased journalist.
    It’s sickening.

    As for “I usually run right out of mass after receiving..” it’s sad. I know this is ( Eye of the Tiber material ) however the mad dash to eat & run is just plain sad.

  • The Eye of the Tiber is oh so true.

  • Chris Christie is pro-life. He has de-funded Planned Parenthood (twice)and put the National Education Association in their place. Christie did and knows how. I do not know his reasoning in this so-called gay-marriage business. A bride-wife is a female wife and a woman.. A groom-husband is a male husband and a man. How can students learn math when they sit in a classroom trying to figure that one out when they are presented with a male wife and female husband and its going to be on the final exam? They can’t. The girl they fell in love with used to be a boy and the rest of the seats are empty. Programmed for failure. I’d vote for Christie.

  • Mary De Voe.
    You just described the entrance to Hell.

    Our Great Grandparents would never have believed that this nation could sink so grossly into moral decay and depravity.

  • “With all due respect, the fact is we had four closed lanes. Was it because of a traffic study, or was it because political operatives out for coffee one morning decided to punish some Democrats? What difference, at this point, does it make? It is my job to figure out what happened and do everything I can to prevent it from ever happening again.”

  • “Has anyone ever seen Chris Christie and the Pope in the same room? “

    Not a reference to the elephant in the room by any chance? 😉

    But seriously, if this is true, this is a grave abuse of the Eucharist by that priest – if it was him who instigated – and those who knowingly co-operated.

    “I usually run out right after receiving…………..
    This is also an abuse. Not only is it sheer bad manners, but failing to thank Our Lord for His heavenly and eternal gift to us is IMO sinful. Imagine – being invited around to a friends place for a meal, eating the meal and then jumping up and taking off before dessert without even thanking your host.

  • This was a parody Don. Eye of the Tiber is a Catholic humor site. In reference to elephants in the room, I suspect with Christie it would be a rino in the room!

  • Ah….thanks Don.
    I actually suspected that it may be and went to the site to check – but there was nothing obvious at a cursory glance to suggest it was the Catholic “Onion”,
    Once bitten………:-)

  • “”I knew that the parking lot would be a zoo if I did not get out of there soon.”” So, he was the first “animal” out there. Thanksgiving after Holy Communion and the rosary are for humans.

  • High winds and icy conditions on a bridge do push a car sideways. It is in the power of government to protect the citizens. There is always repercussions.

  • Pingback: PopeWatch: Communion Gate | The American Catholic | microbudgetproductions
  • Mary, I have seen a car do a 180 on a bridge on the Capital Beltway as it overpassed I-270 in Montgomery County, Maryland. The Christie-bridge thing is just too much.
    It is a contrived media scandal and nothing more.

    As for EOTT, I I would suggest Don the Kiwi read some more articles there. I check it out at work when I eat lunch and it is good for more than a few giggles.

  • Donald, thanks for the laughs. The state of our politics is ridiculous so why not laugh once in a while. And thank you Mary De Voe for calling out gay marriage as the bad joke it is. “The girl they fell in love with used to be a boy”. Reminds me of an old joke, a play on words in the old song, I’m dancing with tears in my eyes because the boy in my arms wasn’t you. (Substitute, was a girl. for wasn’t you) It’s a nice song, especially as sung by Ruth Etting. Here is a link to it for your enjoyment:

  • When I first saw this I was unsure about it. Is OK to make a parody that involves the Eucharist? The I saw this line

    “I am not a bully,” the Pope sadly told reporters. “I don’t know how I got that reputation. Maybe because I was once a bouncer? I don’t know.”

    and I just lost it and couldn’t stop laughing. Thanks!

  • W.P.W.

    Its good to laugh. One of my favorite depictions of Jesus is called the Laughing Jesus. He has a great laugh, the artist did a marvelous job.
    The future confusion of school children will be “normal.” Can you imagine that?
    Normal to think unimportant the gender of teachers or fellow students.
    Normal to view the sex changes of individuals as normal as changing the tires on your automobile.
    What next?
    Laughing at the gross incompetence of a Nobel prize winner that hates America…oh and happens to be President of said country.

  • Philip
    Psalm 2 comes to mind. “The Kings of the earth rise up and the princes conspire against the Lord and against his Christ. Let us break their bonds asunder and let us cast away their chains from us. He who dwells in Heaven laughs at them, the Lord derides them”.

  • W.P.W..
    Possibly that was the inspiration the artist had when he created the Laughing Jesus.

    Have a great week.

  • Pingback: Pope Francis and President Obama - BigPulpit.com