Catholics MUST Fight Transgenderism 

 

Challenging the party line on Transgenderism puts doctors’ careers in jeopardy…
It has already happened to scientists who challenge the scientific theory of Climate change. They are maligned and called Climate deniers. Some even have their jobs threatened. Now Doctors who challenge unscientific Transgender politics are having the same kinds of dirty techniques used to try to silence them.  Source

Comment:

Compare the facts in the above report to the propaganda that is being thrown at us day in and day out on our TV screens and in newspapers. There’s NO science behind this stupidity.  Learn some of those facts by heart and use them to fight this scandalous propaganda. No Catholic can support this scandal OR be silent as it spreads like wildfire. Such silence makes us complicit in grave sin.  Click here to read an excellent article by a Catholic woman published in The Universe. More Catholics need to show a lead here: writing letters to support those, like Caroline Farrow, who speak out is one worthy apostolate that costs no more than a postage stamp or the few minutes that it takes to write an email – click here.

Already we are seeing Catholics, including priests and teachers, going along with this nutty idea that men can become women and women can become men. Crazy.  Click here to read the comments section in our recent blog on Fatima and the Vision of Hell, where we discuss the shocking news of the complicity of Archbishop Peter Smith in the promotion of LGBT issues in his schools in Southwark, specifically the introduction of a “gender neutral” uniform in St Anthony’s Catholic Primary school – no replies to any of our emails and phone calls from any of the parties responsible up to and including the archbishop himself. Then there’s  the scandal of St Mary’s Primary in the same archdiocese, inviting the militant LGBT group Stonewall in to conduct “workshops” with pupils.   Child abuse, writ large. 

Which brings me to our central topic for discussion…

Bottom Line: Transition-Affirming Protocol Is Child Abuse

…These professionals are using the myth that people are born transgender to justify engaging in massive, uncontrolled, and unconsented experimentation on children who have a psychological condition that would otherwise resolve after puberty in the vast majority of cases.

…These harms constitute nothing less than institutionalized child abuse. Sound ethics demand an immediate end to the use of pubertal suppression, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgeries in children and adolescents, as well as an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and legislative policies.

It is time for our nation’s leaders and the silent majority of health professionals to learn exactly what is happening to our children, and unite to take action.   End of Extract…

“Transition-Affirming Protocol Is Child Abuse”…

I agree, wholeheartedly – do you?  

Bishop Toal of Motherwell Must Sack LGBT-Supporting Cambuslang Priest..

A Cambuslang priest’s message that the Catholic Church must redress the harm it has done to gay people has gone viral.  Click here to read more 

St Peter Damian, 11th century Bishop, Doctor of the Church, spoke out against the evils of homosexuality in the Church of his time.

Comment

Another priest of the same Diocese of Motherwell remains suspended for his decision to publish a book on the problem of homosexuality within the Catholic Church in Scotland.

There was promise, at the time, of an investigation into the claims made by Fr Despard in his book, but nothing has been done. And now we have a brother priest in the same Diocese openly “welcoming” LGBT people to his parish – without any reference to Catholic moral teaching on the need to repent of such behaviour, but instead, nicely timed, whether by accident or design, to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality in England, with all the news coverage this anniversary affords.

It’s not so long sinceFr Morton was under police investigation for sex allegations of which he was eventually cleared.  We are emphatically NOT taking the “no smoke without fire” line – but one would think, would one not, that he would avoid having his name repeatedly associated with sexual matters in the tabloid press… Just a thought. 

A priest who makes an announcement that LGBT people have been harmed by the Church in the past and are now welcome, unrepentant, at his Masses, is saying that there is nothing immoral about homosexual activity, that the Church has got it wrong. Click here to read about homosexual activity and decide for yourself if the Church has gotten it wrong…   But, what to do about it?  Well, for one thing, I’d be hot-footing it out of that parish, never to return. Instead, apparently, the parishioners are behind their PP, which is all the more reason why the Bishop, Joseph Toal, MUST act. The people have been malformed to the point where they really do not know whether they are on foot or on horseback, no idea what it means to be a Catholic;  they have not been taught essential truths, such as the nature of the moral law – which comes NOT from “the Church”  i.e. not from any churchmen, but from God.  

Fr Morton MUST be sacked because he is effectively  denying the right and duty of the Church to execute its role as Guardian of the Moral Order.  Faith and Morals go hand in hand.  For him to arrogantly assert that the Church is wrong on such a fundamental question as human sexuality, male and female, reveals his own lack of divine and Catholic Faith, for, when the Faith goes, the Morals quickly follow.  No-one can be a fully believing Catholic while rejecting basic morality.  A dozen analogies spring to mind but this comment piece is already too long.  Essentially, we want Fr Morton to resign from parish ministry.  He is openly inviting public sinners to commit sacrilege, and so the Bishop MUST remove him from ministry.  After all, if Fr Despard had to resign for highlighting the very problem which Fr Morton confirms, why should Fr Morton be permitted to continue as Parish Priest, now cast in his new role as the darling of the LGBT “community”?

Please email the Diocese of Motherwell to express your concerns, and to call for the removal of Fr Morton from ministry at ‘chancellor@rcdom.org.uk’

St Peter Damian, pray for us!  

Pope To Abolish Summorum Pontificum?

ROME, July 26, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Sources inside the Vatican suggest that Pope Francis aims to end Pope Benedict XVI’s universal permission for priests to say the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), also known as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. While the course of action would be in tune with Pope Francis’ repeatedly expressed disdain for the TLM especially among young people, there has been no open discussion of it to date.

Sources in Rome told LifeSite last week that liberal prelates inside the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith were overheard discussing a plan ascribed to the Pope to do away with Pope Benedict’s famous document that gave priests freedom to offer the ancient rite of the Mass.

Catholic traditionalists have just celebrated the tenth anniversary of the document, Summorum Pontificum. Pope Benedict XVI issued it in 2007, giving all Latin Rite priests permission to offer the TLM without seeking permission of their bishops, undoing a restriction placed on priests after the Second Vatican Council.

The motu proprio outraged liberal bishops as it stripped them of the power to forbid the TLM, as many did. Previously priests needed their bishop’s permission to offer the TLM.
Additionally, Summorum Pontificum stated that wherever a group of the faithful request the TLM, the parish priests should willingly agree to their request.

The overheard plans are nearly identical to comments from an important Italian liturgist in an interview published by France’s La Croix earlier this month. Andrea Grillo a lay professor at the Pontifical Athenaeum of St Anselmo in Rome, billed by La Croix as “close to the Pope,” is intimately familiar Summorum Pontificum. Grillo in fact published a book against Summorum Pontificum before the papal document was even released.
Grillo told La Croix that Francis is considering abolishing Summorum Pontificum. According to Grillo, once the Vatican erects the Society of Saint Pius X as a Personal Prelature, the Roman Rite will be preserved only within this structure. “But [Francis] will not do this as long as Benedict XVI is alive.”

The plan, as related to LifeSite, involved making an agreement with the Society of St. Pius X and, with that agreement in place, sequestering those Catholics wanting the TLM to the SSPX. For most, that would strip them of access to the TLM since there would not be nearly enough SSPX priests to service Catholics wanting the TLM worldwide.

Moreover, LifeSite’s source suggested that the plan may explain a May 20, 2017 letter by the recently ousted Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Cardinal Gerhard Müller. Even though Cardinal Müller wanted the SSPX fully reconciled to help fight modernists in the Church, the May 20 letter seemed to scuttle an agreement between Pope Francis and the SSPX which would see them get a personal prelature. The letter includes provisions long known to be completely unacceptable to the SSPX, thus nullifying an understanding SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay believed was imminent.

The LifeSite source suggested that the May 20 letter by Muller perhaps was written because he knows what Francis was up to and wanted to avoid the plan to bury Summorum Pontificum with Pope Benedict. “It’s directed not so much against Fellay but against the agreement,” said the source. “Pope Francis was very angry that document came out from Cardinal Muller and some say that’s why he made the decision to dismiss him.”  Source

Comment:

One glimmer of hope in this pontificate is the rising opposition of some clergy – click here to read more

Of course, the Scots clergy are a meek lot, and unlikely to rebel unless their bishop, too, rebels – and then, voila!  Good career move.  I’d better watch – I’m in danger of becoming cynical…

Share your thoughts – especially on the possible link between the Pope’s apparent enthusiasm for a Personal Prelature for the SSPX and his suspected intention to abolish the provisions of Summorum Pontificum so that ONLY SSPX priests will be able to offer the TLM. Surely that can’t be… what about the other traditional Mass groups – FSSP, Institute of Christ the King?  What would those priests do – join the SSPX? What!  But they set up shop to distance themselves from that “schismatic” bunch…  Irony of ironies! 

LGBT Agenda: Will “Gay” Blood Donations Endanger Lives?

Click here to read about the lifting of the prohibition on homosexual men donating blood to the Transfusion Service: Gay men will be allowed to donate blood three months after having sex rather than a year, under equalities reforms announced by the Government. [Emphasis added]

Pat McKay, one of our pro-life activist bloggers, emailed the above link and wrote as follows: 

“The BBC, of course, were gushing enthusiasm about it on yesterday’s News 24, with a studio guest from the Terrence Higgins Trust saying …‘how delighted’ they were with the decision, ‘after a long time of campaigning’….. Needless to say, there was nobody from the opposition invited, had you or I been there we would have pointed out how criminally insane this is – well, that would never have done!

So how do they intend to ‘police’ this? If one of them turns up at the blood clinic and claims not have been ‘active’ for 3 months, does the clinic just believe this and say ….‘ok, roll up your sleeve’?..

Talking about blood, it really makes mine boil when I think of how the licence fee revenue is blatantly misused time and again to promote and encourage LGBT interests.”

Comment:

Is Pat right to enquire about the policing of “gay sex”?   Is he right to ask for some kind of evidence that there has been a three months gap since last activity at time of donating blood, given that homosexuals are notoriously promiscuous?  Or is this too intrusive?  What matters more, the feelings of “victimised gays” or the safety of Joe Bloggs in need of a blood transfusion?

 

Atheist: Pope Destroying The West

Pope Francis

ROME, July 12, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – An atheist philosopher friend of Benedict XVI has strongly criticized Pope Francis, accusing the Holy Father of not preaching the Gospel but politics, fomenting schism, and issuing secularist statements aimed at destroying the West.

In a fiery interview published July 10 in Mattino di Napoli, Marcello Pera, who co-wrote the famous 2005 book Without Roots with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, said he cannot understand the Pope who, he said, goes beyond the bounds of “rational comprehension.”

A philosophy professor, member of Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party, and a former president of the Italian Senate, Pera said he believes the reason why the Pope calls for unlimited immigration is because he “hates the West” and is seeking to do all he can “to destroy it.”

He added that he does not like the Pope’s magisterium, saying it is “not the Gospel, only politics,” and that Francis is “little or not at all interested in Christianity as doctrine, in its theological aspect.”

“His statements appear to be based on Scripture,” he said, but “actually they are strongly secularist.”

Immigration has become a highly sensitive topic in Italy in recent months as thousands of refugees arrive every month, mostly from north Africa, placing considerable strain on local communities and services.

Pera’s comments also come after another conversation between the Pope and the atheist Eugenio Scalfari in which Francis allegedly told Scalfari to be “very concerned” about the summit last week of the G20 group of industrialized nations because they have “very dangerous alliances” and a “distorted view of the world.”

According to Scalfari, who is over 90 and doesn’t record his interviews, the Pope also said the G20 worried him because of the issue of immigration, saying the problem is “unfortunately rising in today’s world, that of the poor, the weak, the excluded, of which migrants are part.”  Some of the G20 nations have “few local poor but fear the invasion of immigrants,” he said.

In the July 10 interview Pera, went on to say that he believes the Pope isn’t concerned about the salvation of souls but only social well-being and welfare, and argued that if Europe were to follow the Pope’s position, it would be committing suicide. “The Pope reflects all the prejudices of South America against North America, against the free market, liberty, and capitalism,” Pera added.

On the issue of migration, the philosopher politician believes the Pope’s approach is not from the Gospel, and his words are designed to win easy applause from the United Nations.  His political vision on migrants and society, he continued, has “nothing to do with the Western tradition of political freedom and its Christian roots.”

Pera’s book with Cardinal Ratzinger, whose full title was Without Roots —The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam, warned of the dangers facing civilization if the West abandoned its moral and cultural history. The joint authors called on Western leaders to embrace a spiritual rather than political renewal, accepting the moral values of its Judeo-Christian heritage which would enable society to make sense of today’s economic, political and social challenges.

In this week’s interview, Pera said he believes the open doors approach to migrants that the Pope is advancing will lead to a “bad reaction” with no desirable solution. He said the Pope’s positions underline that he is not in “perfect harmony” with “conservative Catholics and the rest of the Church.”

He added that Francis is not only causing problems in politics over migration, he is also fueling a kind of schism within the Church.

Pera, whose 2008 book Why We Must Call Ourselves Christians contained a preface by Pope Benedict XVI, maintained that an “apparent hidden schism exists in the Catholic world” that the Pope is “pursuing with obstinate persistence and determination.”

But he said this “new course” being pursued by Francis does not convince him at all, and argued that it is “exploding the Second Vatican Council in all its revolutionary radicality.”

Pera further believes these ideas, which he thinks are devastating for the Church, have their origins in the Council. “That aggiornamento (updating) of Christianity secularized the Church, triggering a very profound change, even if it risked bringing a schism that was kept at bay in the years that followed,” he said.

He credited Benedict XVI and Pope St. John Paul II for saving the Church, “resisting and trying to mediate the new with tradition.” They did this in a “lofty way,” he said, but now Francis has brought all back into discussion: “human rights, all without exception, have become the ideal point of reference and compass for the Church” while the “rights of God and of tradition have almost gone.”

In an interview with the National Catholic Register in 2006, Pera warned against multiculturalism, saying it leads to the exact “opposite of integration, because it gives rise to separate communities, that are then reduced to a ghetto-like status and enter into conflict amongst themselves.”

He also said then that his diagnosis for Europe’s future was “not a happy one.”
“If Europe goes forward with its relativist culture, with the refusal of its own tradition, with its low nativity rates, with indiscriminate immigration, then Europe is going to end up Islamized,” he warned.

Referring to Benedict XVI’s comments in Without Roots, he said “the impression today is that Europe resembles the Roman Empire at its fall.”  Source

Comment: 

Well, we know he’s destroying the Church, humanly speaking – but the entire western world? Over to you… 

Should UK Ban Covering of Faces in Public Places – Including Muslim Veil?

The Swiss agency ATS announced on June 9 that the full Muslim veil (the burka and the hiqab) will be forbidden in Austria in public places beginning October 1, 2017. 

Indeed, the integration law voted in mid-May by the parliament stipulates that any violation of the ban on the full veil will be punished by a fine of up to 150 euros. The law also requires all refugees and asylum-seekers to sign a one-year “integration contract” that includes language classes, civic classes, skills assessment, and preparation for integration.

The president of the Republic, Alexander Van der Bellen, promulgated the text on June 9, explaining that “it is not a good law”. Whereas the social democrat (SPÖe) chancellor Christian Kern declared during his presentation: “We have accepted to forbid the full-face Muslim veil. This agreement has not been easy for us. There are pros and cons, but a coalition has to find a way to work together.” “We believe in an open society that is also based on open communication”, declared the Social Democrat (SPÖe) and Conservative (ÖVeP) coalition on this interdiction.

The minister of Foreign Affairs, Sebastian Kurz, leader of the conservative party ÖVeP since mid-May, ignited a controversy in the beginning of the year when he suggested going further than just forbidding the full-face veil, and banishing the veil for public service employees.

The first European country to forbid the full-face veil in public places was France with a law promulgated in October 2010, then applied starting in April 2011, that “forbids hiding one’s face in a public place”, with a 150€ fine. There have been 1,600 infractions since. Belgium followed in 2011 and Bulgaria in September 2016. At the end of April, the German deputies decided to forbid the full-face veil for government officials, and oblige persons with their faces hidden to uncover them in the case of identification verification. In Switzerland, only the canton of Ticino has forbidden the burka in public places since July 2016, following a popular vote.  Source

Comment:

I must confess, I’m more concerned about the “hoodies” among us – usually teenage boys who may hide their faces in order to get away with crimes, including  physical assault.  Legislation to ban “hoodies” then, gets my vote. 

Religious dress,  though, or, more accurately, cultural dress albeit associated with a particular religion, is a bit different. Much as I find it perplexing that any woman would choose to be covered up from head to toe, I don’t see it in  quite the same category.  I can see the arguments for banning the full Muslim veil in public places although I recognise that there are “civil liberties” and other arguments against the ban.

Convince me, one way or the other… To ban or not to ban?  That is the question…

Ben Shapiro Puts Catholics To Shame

Ben Shapiro is a young American Jewish man who fearlessly speaks out against much of the immorality in western society: unfortunately, he supports birth control, but – as you will see in the video clip below – he destroys the transgender and procured abortion lobby with his incisive and humorous comment…

Comment:

We desperately need a Catholic “Ben Shapiro” to speak out in the UK media, as Ben does so brilliantly in the USA.  Can you think of someone we could “school” for the job – perhaps a young person in your circle? Or is this best left to the “naturals” who volunteer for the job? 

Organ Donation – The UGH! Factor…

The Church is very clear on the meaning of death. “Death can mean decomposition, disintegration, a separation,” Pope John Paul II said in a 1989 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. “It occurs when the spiritual principle which ensures the unity of the organism no longer exercises its functions in and upon the organism, whose elements, left to themselves, disintegrate.”

The scenario has become a familiar one in the news media. There is a tragic accident, a young victim, and a distraught family. Within the next few days, follow-up stories report approvingly that the organs of the brain-dead patient have been donated. The family expresses relief that at least some good has been derived from what might otherwise have been merely a senseless tragedy. Most readers find little controversy in these stories. Donating the organs of a brain-dead patient has become a routine procedure at both secular and religious hospitals throughout the US, and throughout the world. However, a small but growing number of ethicists tire protesting what they deem an overly hasty rush to procure organs for transplant a rush which, they contest, is sometimes so hasty that “brain-dead” patients are in fact alive when they are put to the knife.  Click here to read more…

Comment: 

The Scottish Government plans to bring forward legislation to change the current situation where it is necessary for patients to  choose to donate their organs at death, and such volunteers often carry a card specifying that they wish to donate organs.  Read more here.  

The system is to be changed so that patients must opt-out – otherwise, our organs may be presumed to be available.  I have sent the following email to Aileen Campbell, MSP, Minister for Public Health in Scotland: 

Dear Ms Campbell,

With reference to the planned legislation to enforce “opt out” of organ donation, please advise how to go about opting out.

I presume this entails notifying my GP, but I would also like to ensure that I carry a card to indicate that I do not wish to donate an organ, NOR do I wish to receive one, in any emergency situation that may arise, so I presume that there will be a card to read “I do NOT wish to donate”, as there is an opt-in card already available.

I look forward to your advice on these matters, as soon as possible.  Thank you. END

Now, I know that the new Catechism of the Catholic Church praises organ donation in the highest terms:  Donation of organs after death is a noble and meritorious act and is to be encouraged as a manifestation of generous solidarity… (#2296)

So, why do I have such a revulsion against the very idea?  Whatever happened, I ask myself, to accepting God’s will when afflicted with serious illness, albeit allowing for the pursuit of available treatments to improve or restore health. Having someone else’s organs transplanted into us, seems to me, to go way beyond that.  However, I get the feeling that I’m very much in the minority on this subject.  I won’t be won over:  the revulsion I felt when I first heard about organ transplants has never left me – but I look forward to learning how other bloggers view this matter.  Over to you!  

16 July: Feast of Our Lady of Mt Carmel

The Feast of Our Lady of Mt Carmel is a very good time to learn about the Brown Scapular, and for those who are not yet enrolled in it to resolve to do so.  Click here for a comprehensive history of the Brown Scapular, with details of miracles and the facts about the (often misunderstood) Sabbatine Privilege.

Our Lady of Mt Carmel, pray for us!

Comment:

Those who are not yet enrolled in the Brown Scapular but would like to be, might be interested to learn that enrolments will take place on the Feast, 16th July, in both the Glasgow and Edinburgh SSPX chapels after Mass.  In  Glasgow, Mass begins at 9.45.am here, and in Edinburgh Mass begins at 1pm here.

Note: in Glasgow, on Sundays, there is free parking on Sauchiehall Street, and a small all-day charge at the National Car Park in Cambridge Street, both a short walk from the chapel.  In Edinburgh, there is usually parking on the street outside the church, but the pavement is currently being restored, so this is not possible at the present time. There is, however, a car park a few hundred yards north of the chapel, first opening on the right. It is signposted St Leonard’s Parking. Usually free on Sundays.

13/7: Fatima Centenary of Vision of Hell

The Lady told Lucia: …Sacrifice yourselves for sinners, and say many times, especially whenever you make some sacrifice: ‘O Jesus, it is for love of You, and for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary.’“ 

As Our Lady spoke these last words (Lucia said) she opened her hands once more, as she had done during the two previous months. The rays of light appeared to penetrate the earth, and we saw, as it were, a vast sea of fire. Plunged in this fire were demons and souls in human form like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, floating about in that conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames which issued from within themselves, together with great clouds of smoke, now falling back on every side like sparks in huge fires, without weight or equilibrium, amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fear (it must have been this sight which caused me to cry out, as people say they heard me). The demons could be distinguished by their terrifying and repellent likeness to frightful and unknown animals, black and transparent like burning coals. That vision only lasted for a moment, thanks to our good Heavenly Mother, Who at the first apparition had promised to take us to Heaven. Without that, I think that we would have died of terror and fear.”

The Explanation of the Vision

Our Lady said to us, so kindly and so sadly: “You have seen Hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end, but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God, that He is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father.

To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated.

In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world. In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved etc.”

Our Lady then taught the children a prayer to add to the end of each mystery of the Rosary: O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fire of Hell, Take all souls to Heaven, especially those in most need.

The seers photographed after the vision of Hell.

Comment:

Believe it or not, there are actually Catholics who disapprove of Our Lady showing the children the vision of Hell.  Why on EARTH would anyone think or say such a thing? 

There is no shortage of warnings about Hell in Sacred Scripture, and saints down the centuries have had visions of the torments awaiting souls in Hell: “I saw the torments of hell and those of purgatory; no words can describe them. Had poor mortals the faintest idea of them, they would suffer a thousand deaths rather than undergo the least of their torments during a single day.” St. Catherine of Siena.

So, rather than be shocked at the children of Fatima being shown the vision of Hell, the truly Catholic response  is one of gratitude; it is, surely,  a great grace to have had the dogma of Hell affirmed by Our Lady herself at the beginning of the 20th century, when it was to come under enormous attack.  Or perhaps you would have preferred a vision of Heaven? Share your thoughts…