USA: Speaker Nancy Pelosi – Archbishop Condemns Biden/Pelosi Abortion Beliefs… 

Comment: 

Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco is crystal clear in the above interview about the nature of abortion; it is not a divinely revealed Catholic teaching – which is why atheists, agnostics and people of non-Christian religions and philosophies across the world oppose it.  Abortion is an evil because it goes against the natural moral law, created by God with the Church guarding and promoting it. That is the Church’s role in the moral sphere; the Church doesn’t invent morals, but merely protects the moral law.  The Archbishop explains this fact simply and clearly – excellent. 

However, his response to the question about reception of Holy Communion was disappointing. The interviewer prepared the ground for a weak answer by emphasising the pastoral role of a priest to first speak with the person engaged in public sin (a given, of course), and seek to lead them away from that position.  However, once it is clear that a person – especially such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi who holds an important public office in the United States Government – is unwilling to end the scandal caused by her very public promotion of the evil of abortion, then Canon Law requires that they do not approach for Holy Communion:  Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.  Canon # 915.  

This clearly applies, also, to Joe Biden.  So, why are these prominent American lawmakers being allowed to cause this dreadful scandal,  while at the same time presenting themselves as “devout Catholics”?  And why is Archbishop Cordileone clearly reluctant to apply Canon 915 to Nancy Pelosi, who lives and moves and spreads her errors in his archdiocese?   

Archbishop-Elect Dermot Farrell of Dublin – The New Judas On The Block… 

From The Catholic Thing – Some Troubles in Dublin by Fr Gerald E. Murray

               Archbishop-Elect of Dublin,               Dermot Farrell

The Archbishop-Elect of Dublin, Dermot Farrell, gave an interview to the Irish Times soon after his appointment had been announced by the Holy See. (Click here for a transcript of the interview.)

The new archbishop declares himself in favour of women deacons and married priests. He does not find in the Scriptures an argument against the ordination of women to the priesthood. He calls the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on homosexuality merely technical. He also says he has no problem with the private blessing of rings for divorced and remarrying couples and for homosexual couples (though he finds public blessings problematic because people often misconstrue them as actual marriages).

Amid so many other troubles, the Irish Church appears to be headed for more rocky days.

Farrell’s treatment of Church teaching and practice regarding homosexuality, for example, is dismissive: “It’s a technical description. People misconstrue that then because it is technical theological language.” He considers amending this technical language, because “I think Pope Francis has discussed that (removal). It came up at the last Synod.”

Really?  Farrell is referring to this teaching of the Catechism: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (CCC 2357)

In common parlance, calling language in a document “technical” can mean that it is unintelligible or is commonly misunderstood by the uninitiated, and is there to serve some arcane or legalistic purpose. Its removal is desirable but may be difficult to do if sticklers, purists, or legalists object. Better just to ignore it and treat it as a dead letter, as in “Technically speaking that is true, but. . .”

To describe the clear, unchanging, and unchangeable teaching of the Church on the inherent immorality of homosexual acts as technical language that could, and even should, be dispensed with is plainly a rejection of that teaching.

The rejection of homosexual activity, and the homosexual lifestyle, by faithful Catholics, however,  is not a misconstruing of “technical” language found in the Catechism. Those who want the Church to embrace and bless the homosexual lifestyle object to the language of the Catechism not because it is misconstrued by clueless people who think it means that no one should engage in homosexual acts because, being intrinsically disordered, they are immoral. Rather, they object because the language is easily and correctly understood to mean just that. The problem for them is not the allegedly confusing words used, but rather the clear meaning of those words.

Archbishop Farrell, in response to a question about blessing rings for divorced and remarried couples and for same-sex couples, says:

The difficulty with blessings is that they are very often misconstrued as marriage. Priests have given these blessings in the past. I remember one colleague of mine. I had said to him – he used to have this ceremony of the blessing of rings – I said to him I don’t have a difficulty with blessing rings if you’re doing that here in the house but if you go out into the public domain, in a church, and bless rings as you see it. . .they turned up with 200 people and they saw it as a marriage. Sometimes people use that phraseology. . .you’re into confusion there. It can be misconstrued as “yes, the priest married us.” Blessings are always going to be misconstrued and that’s where the difficulty arises because once you start blessing things like that people are going to construe that as a marriage. We can’t have that sort of situation in the Church because it creates all sorts of problems in terms of our own teaching and these teachings of the church have been constant.

Leaving aside the question of blessing the rings of divorced and remarried couples, what exactly are we to understand is the meaning of blessing the wedding rings of same-sex couples, whether in private or in public? Is it a misconstrual to consider that the priest who does such a blessing approves of the relationship that the homosexual couple has entered into (which is a counterfeit, pseudo-marriage), and asks God’s favor and approval upon that relationship as symbolized by the rings?

The Modern Catholic Dictionary defines a blessing thus: “In liturgical language a blessing is a ritual ceremony by which an authorized cleric in major orders sanctifies persons or things to divine service, or invokes divine favor on what he blesses.” The dictionary’s entry on rings states: “Conferring the ring is an integral part of the marriage ceremony to signify the mutual love of husband and wife, and wearing the ring symbolizes their pledge of marital fidelity.”

The main problem with blessing wedding rings of a same-sex couple is not that people will become confused and think that the priest was actually  marrying them. No, the main problem is that a priest who does such an unholy act is giving the impression that God will favour what He has condemned. Same-sex “marriages” are not marriages in any way, shape, or form. It’s a gravely sinful relationship in which two men or two women pledge to sodomize each other. No blessing should ever be invoked by a priest upon this unnatural relationship nor upon the pirated symbols of the holy estate of marriage.

Archbishop Farrell says: “I don’t have a difficulty with blessing rings.” If that’s true, what he does have is a more fundamental difficulty: God has warned shepherds who mislead their flocks into paths of sin and error that they will be held accountable. Let us pray that the new Archbishop of Dublin will forswear his comments and reaffirm the Church’s actual teaching and practice.  Click here to read at source

Comment:

There’s really nothing left for me to say – except pray for poor Ireland.  As if it’s not due a break.  From my trip to Dublin at the time of the abortion referendum I have one memory which will be forever fixed in my mind and it is this:  handing out our leaflets and engaging with the few members of the public who didn’t tell us to blankety blank off, I met one woman who expressed herself heart-broken about the state of the Church in Ireland, that it had come to this – a referendum on murdering the unborn. She told me that she had daughters who were going to vote in favour of legalising abortion, and her tears fell. My heart went out to her. Catholics have been very badly served by the clergy in Ireland.  And after the abortion and then the same-sex “marriage” votes, the Pope is still not satisfied; the people of Ireland need yet another bad bishop – and one who is not afraid to publicly display his fake Catholicism.

As I intimated at the beginning of this short comment – there’s really nothing left for me to say.  Over to you… 

Church Closures: Are Catholics Obliged to Obey Govt Ban On Worship Of God? 

Comment: 

Martin Luther King, as pointed out in the above video, quotes Catholic teaching on unjust laws to legitimise the civil uprisings in the USA against the segregation of black people from the rest of the population. King points out that those who invoke this right to disobey unjust civil laws must be prepared to take the consequences – such as imprisonment. Thus, it is made clear that the motive for such civil disobedience is conscience, not malice. 

At this time, when we are prohibited from the worship of God in our churches because of “the virus”, what should Catholics do – pressure priests for “secret” Masses or openly attend churches, bearing in mind that the priest is the person most likely to have to pay the consequences. We’re hearing of a Scots priest who has been handed a hefty fine for allowing parishioners to attend his Mass recently.  Such is the confusion around us that I’m not clear in my own mind whether or not members of the congregation are also liable to fines – informed contributors please enlighten me on that score. It’s not the virus of which people are afraid when it comes to assessing the restrictions, it’s the fines and the fear of losing hearth and home which is forcing compliance. My entirely unsolicited and unqualified legal advice to anyone found breaking a “Covid law” is, in any case, to refuse to pay fines and let the matter go to court in due course. I’ll pray for you 😀   

It should go without saying (but I’d better say it anyway) that if you happen to know of any underground Sacraments which you suspect may be on offer, you must not say so on this thread, or anywhere else on this blog for that matter.  This thread is to discuss the principles of law and our obligation (or not) to obey all laws – even perceived unjust laws. Do the current Covid laws,  especially the prohibition on attending churches, fit the definition of an unjust law, according to the thinking of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Saint Augustine…

IS is true that “an unjust law is no law at all” ?   

USA: Brave Priest Warns Biden Win Is Nothing For Catholics To Celebrate…

Comment:

Priests with this quality of unapologetically speaking out clearly and fearlessly are gold-dust.  Let’s pray for more and more to preach boldly like Fr Gigliotti. 

The problem is that seminary lecturers have pumped socialist ideas into the heads of young students for the priesthood over a period of many years now, to the point where they think like secular people on just about every level.  It is, therefore, going to take a special grace to enable most priests so see the truth and embrace the courage to preach it. Otherwise, Catholics for generations to come will be malformed in the Faith, and unable to tell the difference between good and evil – which is what we are witnessing in these times. 

During the 20th century, notably in the “swinging sixties”, we were led into a mindset where everything was relative, right or wrong depending on one’s own point of view, and that has led, inevitably, to a society where nihilism rules: we don’t know right from wrong, good from evil. 

As we are finding ourselves subject to Communist tyrannical rule, we need priests to wake up to the reality of the danger to the world of a Biden administration. They don’t call the President of the USA “leader of the free world” for nothing. We have been depending on President Trump to keep the forces of Communism at arm’s length. Now, with Biden supporting the objectives of Communist China, we are, humanly speaking, lost.  Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!   

We are grateful for access to the American TV news channel, Newsmax TV, where one of my favourite presenters is Chris Salcedo.  He is a consummate professional, and not afraid to express his Catholic Faith, as we see in the above video.  God bless him! 

Open Letter To The Scottish Bishops: Demand End To Govt Abuse of Power… 

Martin Blackshaw, aka blogger Athanasius writes…

Dear Bishops of Scotland,

As we reach the tenth month of a relatively harmless Chinese Flu pandemic, the global governmental response to which will surely one day be recorded for posterity as the greatest crime ever perpetrated against humanity, I thought I would take the opportunity at the beginning of this year dedicated to St. Joseph to once again upbraid you for abandoning Christ’s flock to the wolves.

You may recall that I wrote to you in July 2020 demonstrating, with sound statistical evidence, the falsehood of the official narrative regarding this virus, which the UK government had already downgraded to “non-life threatening” on March 19, the same day it mandated the closure of our churches with your approval on the very feast of St. Joseph, Patron of the Universal Church.

Despite the detailed information I provided at that time, together with a reminder that the Church’s superior divine mission can never be made subject to secular interference, you have continued to impose the most unholy measures in the House of God in your zeal to appease the “Prince of  this world”. 

For four consecutive months last year you closed the churches completely to your flocks. Over the same period you compounded the scandal by complying with an evil law forbidding Sacramental visits to the dying, thereby abandoning many souls in the most important last hours or moments of their lives.

Since the easing of that failed lockdown you have continued to collaborate with the new government dictatorship in the suppression of people’s inalienable rights to freedom and the worship of God. In this regard you have limited Holy Mass to small groups, obliging the faithful to pre-book as though they were arranging a dental appointment and subjecting them to infantile admittance rules that have absolutely no precedent in Church history and no basis in established science – your unspoken “no mask = no Mass or Sacraments” rule standing out as singularly iniquitous before God.

If only this misplaced zeal were evident in defence of the rights of the Church and our Christian heritage when the secular authorities legislate against the divine and natural law or when Catholic politicians publicly trample the Church’s moral teaching and then present themselves unopposed for Holy Communion, the faithful would scarce have cause to doubt your fidelity to Christ, Our Lord.

This tragically not being the case, however, it is the duty of all subordinate Catholics to call you out for the hypocrites you are; men who strain on a gnat while swallowing a camel, prelates apparently devoid of supernatural faith whose episcopal agendas, like that of Pope Francis, are more aligned with the naturalist doctrines of Socialism than with the divine doctrine of Our Saviour, whose Kingdom is not of this world.

Reading through the three Encyclical letters of the present Pontiff, one is struck immediately by the dearth of references to the immortal soul and the supernatural life. Everything is about this world, i.e., the climate, migrants, the poor, injustice, the marginalised, a brotherhood of man, etc. It’s like reading the worldview of a Communist or a Freemason, not remotely in line with traditional Papal teaching.

Likewise your own mindset as most recently expressed in Bishop Nolan’s ‘Pastoral Letter for Day of Peace’, here 

This disgraceful document similarly emphasises the “new humanism” of Vatican II, to quote Pope Paul VI at the conclusion of that fateful Council in 1962, the bitter fruits of which subsequently led him to lament “the smoke of Satan in the Church” – more specifically identified by an exultant Leo Cardinal Suenens as “The French Revolution in the Church”.

It is hardly surprising then that after almost 60 years of this conciliar destruction of the faith from within, we find you exhorting not to a restoration of all things in Christ, Our King, but to the embracing of the diabolic “Build Back Better” programme of a global Socialist elite presently engaged in the establishment of a New World Order of brutal totalitarianism that they variously describe as “The Great Reset” and “The New Normal”.

Well did Our Lady of Fatima warn of the global spread of the errors of Russia so long as the Pope and bishops of the world refuse to grant her request for a public and solemn consecration of that country to her Immaculate Heart. Well did Sister Lucy describe the subsequent unfolding of the Third Secret chastisement in the Church as “apostasy from the top down”.  She also said (in an interview with an American historian in 1946) that Communism would spread to every country without exception;  it is now here, aided and abetted by you bishops… 

If ever the Scriptural warning that Lucifer often appears disguised as an angel of light were applicable, it is today in this “Build Back Better” doctrine of Socialism that promises a new humanity emerging from a programme of psychological warfare on the peoples of the nations, suppression of their inalienable rights and freedoms, destruction of their economies and a silencing of all legitimate opposition by means of media censure, arbitrary fines and police brutality.

The Bishops of Scotland

Where is your outrage, you who champion Vatican II’s French revolutionary spirit of liberty, equality and fraternity? Why are you not speaking out forcefully against this diabolic assault on our way of life, against these criminal impositions in the name of a virus that has purportedly killed only 1.8 million of the estimated 70 million who die in this world every year?

Untold numbers around the globe are committing suicide in despair, countless thousands more are suffering mental health issues, incalculable numbers have seen their medical treatment for genuine life-threatening illnesses suspended, tens of millions are losing their employment, economies are collapsing, civil liberties are suspended, families are split and isolated, the elderly die alone and the worship of God is forbidden in the public domain while you, disciples of the “new humanism” of Vatican II, apostles of justice and peace, defenders of the poor and marginalised, remain conspicuously silent, your only utterances being to echo the fallacious “Build Back Better” doctrine of the Socialist despots responsible for such evil.

You of all people should know that the only way to “Build Back Better” in this troubled world is to restore all things in Christ, whose universal Kingship must be re-established everywhere, not least in the hearts of men, particularly men of the Church: For as Pius IX declared in Quas Primas: “…as long as individuals and states refuse to submit to the rule of Our Saviour, there is no really hopeful prospect of a lasting peace among nations. Men must look for the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ…”   

Christ The King

Alas, this is not the sound doctrine you preach by your indifferentist “common home” vision of a world in which all religions and none collaborate in the creation of some future mythical paradise on earth, as though this place were not after all a temporary exile and a valley of tears to be traversed in the hope of one day arriving at our true eternal home in heaven.

The faithful need to see an end to this destructive Vatican II experiment and the cowardice it has engendered in the Shepherds of Christ’s flock. Our Lord did not come into this world as a hippie to found a commune of earth worshippers and appeasers, He came to found His Catholic Church by His own precious blood for the salvation of souls, outside of which, declares the infallible dogma, there is no salvation.

Why do you no longer preach this divine truth, this certain reality? Is it because, like the ancient Latin Mass of the saints and martyrs, the kneeling to receive Our Lord on the tongue at Holy Communion, sermons on the four last things – death, judgment, heaven and Hell – and so many other holy traditional Catholic beliefs and practices handed down, it represents an inconvenient barrier to the new humanism of that so-called pastoral Council?

You need to open your spiritual eyes and see the devastation this new orientation of Vatican II has visited upon Our Lord’s holy Church, which you have helped reduce to ruins over many years and which you now subject to the demands of inferior secular authorities, turning the House of God, a House of Faith, into a house of Covid fear and forbiddance.

You are the successors of the Apostles called by Our Lord to preach fearlessly, as they did, against sin and irreligion, the real plague that threatens humanity, not wring your hands over a respiratory virus that hardly compares with past deadly pandemics, and certainly not to the extent that requires your approval of vaccines produced from or tested with the stem cell lines of aborted babies, however remote in time.

Pope John Paul II

Abortion, as you well know, is “a sin crying to heaven for vengeance”, to quote John Paul II. It is therefore unconscionable that the present Church hierarchy should approve of vaccines produced or tested using the stem cell lines of murdered innocents, applying sophistry to undermine divine moral teaching that forbids the reaping of benefits from evil acts.

There is quite sufficient sophistry at work right now in those peddling the Covid-19 crisis that never was, your duty as disciples of the Lord is to expose this with the truth, not participate in it to the further detriment of the worship of God and the common good of humanity.

Having read your response to the Scottish government’s latest January lockdown, your timidity was once again on full public display. Instead of using the divine authority invested in you by God to command and demand an end to this unprecedented and inhumane abuse of government power, your letter is best described as pusillanimous and embarrassing. It has to stop, for you are called to be Shepherds of souls and on that alone you will be most rigorously judged by the divine Judge.

In this regard I am reminded of the words of one brave prelate who, when persecuted by his confreres for defending the faith handed down from the poison of the conciliar new humanism, was asked why he acted as he did. His response is sobering:

“When I stand before my judge and He asks me what I did with my priesthood, I do not want to hear those terrible words “you have helped to destroy the Church along with the rest of them”.

Sobering words indeed, and well worthy of your serious reflection, as are the following concluding statements:

 “I do not think there are many among Bishops that will be saved, but many more that perish.” (St. John Chrysostom, Extract from St. John Chrysostom, Homily III on Acts 1:12).

“The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.” (St. Athanasius, Council of Nicaea, AD 325). 

********************************
Click here to read Martin’s previous letter to the Scottish Bishops.
********************************
Comments invited…  

Covid-19: Tyranny – Shouldn’t We ALL Shout At Politicians? Hmmm… YES! 

Comment: 

Well done, Julia, for telling Bob Stewart MP  that you have every right to shout at him, given that he is planning to vote for continuing/worsening restrictions in the name of Covid, without a shred of evidence for the need to do so.  He comes across as a weakling, keen to keep on the right side of his equally weak boss.  Well done!  Your show, and others at talkRadio, is about the only pushback to this shocking removal of our freedom. In saner times, we could have looked to our priests and bishops to fight, on the grounds that our liberty comes from God, and cannot be taken away by any Government.  But, to match the weak MP on your show today and the weak Prime Minister, we also have a bunch of weak priests matching their weak “bosses”;  there hasn’t been a right-thinking Bishop in possession of a backbone seen anywhere in Scotland since the outset of this “crisis”. They accepted then that God is a non-essential “item” and it’s been all downhill ever since. 

However, ever keen to be fair to them 😀 and in case I’d missed an announcement from the Scottish Bishops’ Conference opposing the continuing restrictions on our personal and religious freedoms, I paid a visit just now to their website.  No sign of any opposition there; far from it – there is a notice offering priests in Scotland an opportunity to participate in an online Advent afternoon of recollection which will take place via Zoom on Thursday 10th December 2020,  from 2pm – 4pm.   Unbelievable.  Source

Here’s a wee meditation suggestion for the clergy – would only take about 10 minutes of the two hours allocated for their “Advent afternoon of recollection” – why not start acting like real priests, ignore the Government restrictions, announce that if anyone wishes to report you to the police, to at least have the courage to give advance notice, including name and address, with a short signed note waiving their claim  to the Last Sacraments, including Confession, should they become seriously ill at any time during this contrived crisis.   You can see why they won’t ordain women, can’t you, ‘cos’ that’s exactly  what I’d do, I kid you not. 

Anyway, back to Julia’s response to that hapless Member of Parliament – was she right to shout at him?  Would you shout at your MP, given half a chance?  I’ve already had to switch off the capital letters when I email mine, because he might not reply if I “shout” over the internet 😀     Is “shouting” – for which read, more accurately, plain-speaking, vigorous discussion –  likely to get the message across that you want him or her fighting to restore our liberty?  Well, frankly, being nice and soft-spoken doesn’t seem to be making any difference, so, worth a try…  if only via the internet? 

What’s  that?  Does this question – “would/should we shout” (at them) –   also apply to Bishops? Well, now… what do you think?  

Irish Police State: What Kind of Catholic Would Report Priests For Offering Mass? 

CAVAN, Ireland, November 19, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Irish police are threatening a Catholic priest with prosecution because of his refusal to turn people away when they arrived for Mass.

Under the current law, the Irish government is expressly forbidding gatherings for “religious or other reasons” and threatening priests with a fine of €2,500 and/or six months imprisonment should they attempt to offer public Mass. The law has come about as part of the Level 5 lockdown currently enforced across the country.

Speaking to the AngloCelt, which reported on the story, Fr. P.J. Hughes mentioned that “somebody reported me,” which led to his Masses becoming known to the local bishop and the civil authorities.

Fr. Hughes’ superior, Bishop Francis Duffy, had contacted the priest last week after receiving a complaint from a parishioner that he was saying Mass with people present. Duffy reportedly told Fr. Hughes that he was in “dangerous territory.”

Fr. Hughes told the AngloCelt, “I have continued to say Mass because I feel it is our Constitutional right to practise our religion,” and also mentioned that when members of his congregation would arrive at church, he “did not chase them away.”

He noted that the church had taken all the measures required by the government in the face of COVID-19 and that people in the church are “just there to pray and go home.”

he may be prosecuted for breaching the Covid rules introduced during the last lockdown period.”

Hughes challenged the police, appealing to the constitutional right to freely practice religion.

The law banning public Mass appears to be in direct violation of Article 44 of the Irish Constitution, which states “The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion. Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.”

Apparently, Fr. Hughes has been offered a final chance to submit to the ban on public Mass.

He explained he has “no support, only from the people maybe, but I have no support. So I put myself out on a limb. I have to make a decision to celebrate Mass every day, but I cannot celebrate it at the time that’s designated because people will come in.”

“So I’ll say Mass at a different time each day, on Facebook, for the people,” Fr. Hughes continued. “Because I don’t want to be prosecuted either, although I would like to test to see would they go and bring me before the DPP because I just think this is scandalous really, we’re gone to a police state.”

In a radio interview after the Mass, Fr. Hughes mentioned that “people mattered more to him and God mattered more to him than anything else.”

The case of Fr. Hughes is not an isolated event, as police in Cork also approached a priest to warn that they would “apply the full rigours of the law,” if he continued celebrating Mass with people present.   Source – Lifesitenews


Comment:

The parishioner who reported Fr Hughes (and the priest in Cork) for offering Mass with people present is about as Catholic as any other Protestant – that is to say, any other person protesting against the Catholic religion; that is to say, not a a Catholic at all.  That is to say, a person who does not believe that Christ is King and that, thus, no Government gives us our basic freedoms, nor does any Government have the right to take them away. That is true without the assistance of the Irish Constitution. It’s great that the Irish Constitution specifically protects religious rights, but it is not the Irish – or any other – national Constitution which confers such rights. 

Our right to our religious freedom derives from our duty to worship God, as He commands.  I’m lost for words that any Catholic would even consider reporting a priest for infringing these despicable and wholly unnecessary restrictions on our freedoms. I’ll say nothing about the Bishop because what I’d like to say about him is unprintable. If anyone is “in dangerous territory” it’s bishops who are bowing, yet again, to the authority of politicians over God’s law. Health has become their god, not Christ the King.  And they will answer for their worship of this false god at their judgement.  

Here’s the thing though… Is that likely to happen here, in the UK?  Would any parishioner even consider reporting a priest for breaching the latest ridiculous rules, including a limit on the number of people who may – thanks to the “permission” of the politicians –  attend Mass?  These politicians, remember, are here today, gone tomorrow.  God, on the other hand, will be there, waiting for us, at the moment of our death.  Who, thinkest thou, is entitled to our obedience in this matter?   

Protestant Attends Mass While Catholics Watch Online – Legacy of Lockdown …

Comment: 

There’s no mistaking the sincerity of the young Protestant Evangelical in the above video.  He very accurately summarises the differences between the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) and the novus ordo (NO). 

One mistake which he makes – a very common mistake – is to think that “the Church” is not “one”.   He misunderstands the difference between the break-up of Christendom thanks to Martin Luther et al, who left the Church, with the Church itself upon which Christ bequeathed unity from the beginning: “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (John 17:21)  Here Christ was bestowing unity on His Church – it was not some future goal. 

However, this is, as I say, a very common misconception.  Catholics make the same mistake, so we have to cut the young man some slack on this. 

Where there is absolutely NO slack to be cut, is for those Catholics who have not returned to attending Mass since the disgraceful Government ban was lifted, but are choosing instead to stay at home and watch Mass online.  I’d heard concerns expressed that this would happen and I could see the temptation but it didn’t occur to me for a second that any Catholic accustomed to attending the TLM would fall prey to such temptation.   I’ve now heard of at least three such cases – and I remain incredulous. 

Watching Mass online does not fulfil the Sunday Mass obligation.  The notices and announcements in churches at the time of the lockdown stated clearly that “there is a temporary dispensation from the Sunday obligation” – that is, the obligation was temporarily lifted [due to the Government ban].  That ban is no longer in place.  Neither is the dispensation from attending Mass in person.  We are once again obliged to attend Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation. 

So, what does this readiness to skip Mass for the comfort of watching it online tell us?  Well, with this willingness to miss Mass,  remember, is a willingness to live without the benefit of the Sacraments – no confession, no absolution, no Holy Communion.  What kind of Catholic life is that?  Answer:  it’s not.  

If you have any thoughts on this phenomenon please share them in the comments below, but do not name names.  Suffice that we try to work out what is  going on here – are these “Lockdown Legacy Catholics” staying away from church out of a [human but faithless] fear of “the virus”, or is the virus merely an excuse to re-structure life in such a way that God’s law does not interfere too much with their secular lives? Were they always Catholics of weak Faith, or what…  What’s the mentality – I’m genuinely puzzled.  Over to thee…   

And don’t forget to pray for the young Protestant man in the video – he appears to be very open to the grace of God, so it would be wonderful if he were to embrace the gift of the Faith.  Our Lady,  Help of Christians, pray for him!   

Glasgow Priest-Policeman To Un-Masked Layman: Obey Or Forfeit Sacraments…

St Mungo’s, Townhead, Glasgow

Catholic Truth blogger Athanasius, aka Martin Blackshaw, writes…

In what can only be described as providential timing, I encountered first-hand on Saturday the evil that Fr. Dunn warned of in his letter challenging the bishops of Scotland on their Covid-19 response measures.

The venue of my bitter experience was St. Mungo’s church in Glasgow’s Townhead, the source of the evil was the superior of the Passionists there, Fr. Frank Keevins.

Having clearly been tipped off that I had entered the church for Confession, dismissing, as is my Catholic duty, the faithless and dehumanising house rules for entry imposed by Scotland’s wayward hierarchy, Fr. Keevins skulked around outside awaiting my departure in order to “have a word”

The word mumbled from behind his pitiful little face covering was that unless I conform to the Covid-19 tyranny of the State, as per the capitulation of the bishops and their clerical enforcers, I will not be allowed to enter that particular House of God again. In fine – no mask, no Sacraments.

Two Gospel texts came to my mind as he spoke; one being Our Lord’s condemnation of the Pharisees who close the kingdom of heaven to souls, neither entering themselves, the other His just wrath visited upon the worldly Temple moneychangers.

Imagine Our Saviour turning up in the flesh at St. Mungo’s today only to be greeted by a masked usher asking for His contact details, squirting him

with sanitiser, handing him a State muzzle and offering to guide Him to one of the few pews not taped off. I think it fair to conclude that having turned away from that worldly place, emptied of God, there would not be left a stone upon a stone.

No matter how hard I tried to explain this reality to Fr. Keevins, reminding him of the very grave evil he was perpetrating, evil that could well result in the loss of his own immortal soul, he remained unmoved and resolute. His response was a flippant “I will take that risk” as he sought refuge in “blind obedience” to the bishops – that monumental error of our time that robs the free children of God of their liberty on the whim of abusive ecclesiastical authority.

This recourse of Fr. Keevins to blind obedience rather reminded me of the pathetic defence of the Nazis at Nuremberg who sought to justify their wickedness with the line “I was only obeying orders”.

To be absolutely clear on this point, it is the teaching of the Church that subordinates must obey the legitimate ecclesiastical authority in all that is consistent with the faith handed down. However, it is equally incumbent upon them to refuse obedience when the ecclesiastical authority issues commands that are detrimental to the faith and harmful to souls.

There is no question that by their treacherous compliance with unjust secular laws relating to Covid-19, laws that subordinate the superior supernatural authority of the Church to the inferior State, trampling the freedom and dignity of Christ’s flock along the way, these worldly bishops and priests must be resisted by all Catholics who retain a true sense of the faith and zeal for the honour of God.

It has been patently obvious for several months now that Covid-19 represents no threat to health for 99.7% of the global population; this is verified both by official statistics and the declarations of the world’s leading scientists.

Hence this unholy behaviour of our clerical superiors, unprecedented in ecclesiastical history even during times of real plague, is proof positive that the Church is presently undergoing a great crisis of faith in her clergy, a crisis that demands of the faithful serious discernment in the grave matter of which priests they entrust their salvation to.

The Redemptorist missionary admonition of tradition reads “You have one life to live and one soul to save; death will come soon, then heaven or hell for all eternity”. With these words of true wisdom ever present in our minds let us all resolve to reject the spirit of “the Prince of this world” that so many bishops and priests have succumbed to – and are trying to subject us to.

Our clear duty is to seek out faithful clergy, supernatural men of God noted for their love of God and their spiritual zeal for souls. These, in my experience, are generally priests who celebrate the ancient Latin Mass of the saints and martyrs and are conspicuous for their Eucharistic devotion, rejecting the much-abused, irreverence-inducing indult of Communion in the hand to standing communicants.

While they are by far the minority these days, often disdained and marginalised by their worldly bishops and confreres, these are the priests whose voice resonates within our souls as the true voice of the Good Shepherd.

Comment: 

To date, only one priest has gone on the record in Scotland (and, as far as we know, in the entire UK) to express his shock at the way the Bishops are implementing Government Covid-19 restrictions, placing themselves at the service of the State – that is to say, they have chosen to serve Man not God. This, of course, contradicts the Gospel imperative: Our Lord teaches very clearly that we cannot serve two masters – we must choose God or the world.  If we try to serve both, we will come to hate the one and love the other (Luke 16:13)  The Bishops of  Scotland and the wider UK seem to have made their choice. This, of course, has been true for many years now, so we are entitled to ask if, in fact, they have come to hate God. They certainly do not appear to love Him more than the corrupt politicians from whom they are taking their orders, turning the Father’s House into a den of thieves. 

But, what about the rest of us? Martin Blackshaw has made his position crystal clear: he’ll be complying with this ridiculous Covidiocy around ten years after Cadbury ceases chocolate-making.  But what about you and me – will we go along with these outrageous restrictions through fear of fines and imprisonment? Are we likely to choose God over Nicola Sturgeon, in the absence of the kind of moral and spiritual leadership which we have a right to expect from our religious leaders?  Bishops and priests are clearly afraid of the possibility of finding themselves with a criminal conviction, and their fear is understandable… until, that is, we recall the many priest-martyrs at the time of the Reformation who were criminalised  – and executed  (our own Scottish martyr, John Ogilvie SJ included) – simply for refusing to stop offering Holy Mass.  Quite a standard – sets the bar very high for us all. 

So… what now?  Should priests who refuse the Sacraments to non-compliant laity, be disciplined?  Share your thoughts…   

            Immaculate Heart of Mary,          pray for us!  

Archbishop Viganò: Don’t Leave the Church – Stay and Fight the Modernists! 

This new statement is important, inasmuch as in recent days, both Father Thomas Weinandy, as well as Father Raymond de Souza, spread the suspicion that the Italian prelate might be “schismatic,” thus intending to leave the Catholic Church. This suspicion had arisen because of Viganò’s critique of the Second Vatican Council and its detrimental effects on the life of the faith in the Church. For example, de Souza’s article is entitled: “Is Archbishop Viganò’s Rejection of the Second Vatican Council Promoting Schism?” And Weinandy stated: “My concern is that, in his radical reading of the Council, the archbishop is spawning his own schism.”

In an August 22 article published by the traditional Catholic newspaper Catholic Family News, Kokx had asked Viganò a set of questions with regard to what faithful laity can do in the midst of this Church crisis that is going back to the Council. 

Kokx suggested Viganò needs to give more advice to laity and priests on what to do next: “He’s certainly diagnosed the problem, but what are his solutions, if any? What, in other words, is it that he believes Catholics in the 21st century should do in response to the crisis?”

Archbishop Viganò’s response as published on September 1 by Catholic Family News (see full text below) is clear: it is not the faithful Catholics who oppose the changing of the faith, but those who perpetrate these changes that ought to be questioned. He writes that we need to discuss “the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them.”

If people who hold heterodox views are in positions of authority in the Church, he continues, “It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.”

In addition and on a practical level, the Italian prelate gives us advice on how to live and grow in the faith, working on our sanctification and remaining in the state of “sanctifying grace.” But at the same time, we are to assist and “comfort” good priests and bishops, seeking out reverent Masses. 

“Faithful laity have the right and the duty to find priests, communities, and institutes that are faithful to the perennial Magisterium,” Viganò explains. “And may they know how to accompany the laudable celebration of the liturgy in the Ancient Rite with adherence to sound doctrine and morals, without any subsidence on the front of the Council.”

Finally, Archbishop Viganò also praises the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), which has defended the traditional faith for decades now. They “deserve recognition” for their work of preserving the Catholic faith, he says, and adds that he considers Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of this Society, to be a “confessor of the Faith.”

Here we might remember that just recently, a cardinal stated that Lefebvre will one day be declared a “Doctor of the Church” and that he was “prophetic.”

Let us close with Viganò’s last words of his response to Kokx’s questions:

“The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother. The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.”

Below is the full statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, reprinted with permission:

Disclaimer: The following positions adopted and advice offered by Archbishop Viganò do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews and are presented only for your information.

Dear Mr. Kokx,

I read with lively interest your article “Questions for Viganò: His Excellency is Right about Vatican II, But What Does He Think Catholic Should Do Now?” which was published by Catholic Family News on August 22 (here). I am happy to respond to your questions, which address matters that are very important for the faithful.

You ask: “What would ‘separating’ from the Conciliar Church look like in Archbishop Viganò’s opinion?” I respond to you with another question: “What does it mean to separate from the Catholic Church according to the supporters of the Council?” While it is clear that no admixture is possible with those who propose adulterated doctrines of the conciliar ideological manifesto, it should be noted that the simple fact of being baptized and of being living members of the Church of Christ does not imply adherence to the conciliar team; this is true above all for the simple faithful and also for secular and regular clerics who, for various reasons, sincerely consider themselves Catholics and recognize the Hierarchy.

Instead, what needs to be clarified is the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them. It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.

Once this point has been clarified, it is evident that it is not the traditional faithful – that is, true Catholics, in the words of Saint Pius X – that must abandon the Church in which they have the full right to remain and from which it would be unfortunate to separate; but rather the Modernists who usurp the Catholic name, precisely because it is only the bureaucratic element that permits them not to be considered on a par with any heretical sect. This claim of theirs serves in fact to prevent them from ending up among the hundreds of heretical movements that over the course of the centuries have believed to be able to reform the Church at their own pleasure, placing their pride ahead of humbly guarding the teaching of Our Lord. But just as it is not possible to claim citizenship in a homeland in which one does not know its language, law, faith and tradition; so it is impossible that those who do not share the faith, morals, liturgy, and discipline of the Catholic Church can arrogate to themselves the right to remain within her and even to ascend the levels of the hierarchy.

The situation is certainly more complex for clerics, who depend hierarchically on their bishop or religious superior, but who at the same time have the right to remain Catholic and be able to celebrate according to the Catholic Rite. On the one hand laity have more freedom of movement in choosing the community to which they turn for Mass, the Sacraments, and religious instruction, but less autonomy because of the fact that they still have to depend on a priest; on the other hand, clerics have less freedom of movement, since they are incardinated in a diocese or order and are subject to ecclesiastical authority, but they have more autonomy because of the fact that they can legitimately decide to celebrate the Mass and administer the Sacraments in the Tridentine Rite and to preach in conformity with sound doctrine. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum reaffirmed that faithful and priests have the inalienable right – which cannot be denied – to avail themselves of the liturgy that more perfectly expresses their Catholic Faith. But this right must be used today not only and not so much to preserve the extraordinary form of the rite, but to testify to adherence to the depositum fidei that finds perfect correspondence only in the Ancient Rite.

I daily receive heartfelt letters from priests and religious who are marginalized or transferred or ostracized because of their fidelity to the Church: the temptation to find an ubi consistam [a place to stand] far from the clamor of the Innovators is strong, but we ought to take an example from the persecutions that many saints have undergone, including Saint Athanasius, who offers us a model of how to behave in the face of widespread heresy and persecuting fury. As my venerable brother Bishop Athanasius Schneider has many times recalled, the Arianism that afflicted the Church at the time of the Holy Doctor of Alexandria in Egypt was so widespread among the bishops that it leaves one almost to believe that Catholic orthodoxy had completely disappeared. But it was thanks to the fidelity and heroic testimony of the few bishops who remained faithful that the Church knew how to get back up again. Without this testimony, Arianism would not have been defeated; without our testimony today, Modernism and the globalist apostasy of this pontificate will not be defeated.

It is therefore not a question of working from within the Church or outside it: the winemakers are called to work in the Lord’s Vineyard, and it is there that they must remain even at the cost of their lives; the pastors are called to pastor the Lord’s Flock, to keep the ravenous wolves at bay and to drive away the mercenaries who are not concerned with the salvation of the sheep and lambs.

This hidden and often silent work has been carried out by the Society of Saint Pius X, which deserves recognition for not having allowed the flame of Tradition to be extinguished at a moment in which celebrating the ancient Mass was considered subversive and a reason for excommunication. Its priests have been a healthy thorn in the side for a hierarchy that has seen in them an unacceptable point of comparison for the faithful, a constant reproach for the betrayal committed against the people of God, an inadmissible alternative to the new conciliar path. And if their fidelity made disobedience to the pope inevitable with the episcopal consecrations, thanks to them the Society was able to protect herself from the furious attack of the Innovators and by its very existence it allowed the possibility of the liberalization of the Ancient Rite, which until then was prohibited. Its presence also allowed the contradictions and errors of the conciliar sect to emerge, always winking at heretics and idolaters but implacably rigid and intolerant towards Catholic Truth.

I consider Archbishop Lefebvre an exemplary confessor of the Faith, and I think that by now it is obvious that his denunciation of the Council and the modernist apostasy is more relevant than ever. It should not be forgotten that the persecution to which Archbishop Lefebvre was subjected by the Holy See and the world episcopate served above all as a deterrent for Catholics who were refractory toward the conciliar revolution.

I also agree with the observation of His Excellency Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais about the co-presence of two entities in Rome: the Church of Christ has been occupied and eclipsed by the modernist conciliar structure, which has established itself in the same hierarchy and uses the authority of its ministers to prevail over the Spouse of Christ and our Mother.

The Church of Christ – which not only subsists in the Catholic Church, but is exclusively the Catholic Church – is only obscured and eclipsed by a strange extravagant Church established in Rome, according to the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich. It coexists, like wheat with the tare, in the Roman Curia, in dioceses, in parishes. We cannot judge our pastors for their intentions, nor suppose that all of them are corrupt in faith and morals; on the contrary, we can hope that many of them, hitherto intimidated and silent, will understand, as confusion and apostasy continue to spread, the deception to which they have been subjected and will finally shake off their slumber. There are many laity who are raising their voice; others will necessarily follow, together with good priests, certainly present in every diocese. This awakening of the Church militant – I would dare to call it almost a resurrection – is necessary, urgent and inevitable: no son tolerates his mother being outraged by the servants, or his father being tyrannized by the administrators of his goods. The Lord offers us, in these painful situations, the possibility of being His allies in fighting this holy battle under His banner: the King Who is victorious over error and death permits us to share the honor of triumphal victory and the eternal reward that derives from it, after having endured and suffered with Him.

But in order to deserve the immortal glory of Heaven we are called to rediscover – in an emasculated age devoid of values such as honor, faithfulness to one’s word, and heroism – a fundamental aspect of the faith of every baptized person: the Christian life is a militia, and with the Sacrament of Confirmation we are called to be soldiers of Christ, under whose insignia we must fight. Of course, in most cases it is essentially a spiritual battle, but over the course of history we have seen how often, faced with the violation of the sovereign rights of God and the liberty of the Church, it was also necessary to take up arms: we are taught this by the strenuous resistance to repel the Islamic invasions in Lepanto and on the outskirts of Vienna, the persecution of the Cristeros in Mexico, of the Catholics in Spain, and even today by the cruel war against Christians throughout the world. Never as today can we understand the theological hatred coming from the enemies of God, inspired by Satan. The attack on everything that recalls the Cross of Christ – on Virtue, on the Good and the Beautiful, on purity – must spur us to get up, in a leap of pride, in order to claim our right not only not to be persecuted by our external enemies but also and above all to have strong and courageous pastors, holy and God-fearing, who will do exactly what their predecessors have done for centuries: preach the Gospel of Christ, convert individuals and nations, and expand the Kingdom of the living and true God throughout the world.

We are all called to make an act of Fortitude – a forgotten cardinal virtue, which not by chance in Greek recalls virile strength, ἀνδρεία – in knowing how to resist the Modernists: a resistance that is rooted in Charity and Truth, which are attributes of God.

If you only celebrate the Tridentine Mass and preach sound doctrine without ever mentioning the Council, what can they ever do to you? Throw you out of your churches, perhaps, and then what? No one can ever prevent you from renewing the Holy Sacrifice, even if it is on a makeshift altar in a cellar or an attic, as the refractory priests did during the French Revolution, or as happens still today in China. And if they try to distance you, resist: canon law serves to guarantee the government of the Church in the pursuit of its primary purposes, not to demolish it. Let’s stop fearing that the fault of the schism lies with those who denounce it, and not, instead, with those who carry it out: the ones who are schismatics and heretics are those who wound and crucify the Mystical Body of Christ, not those who defend it by denouncing the executioners!

The laity can expect their ministers to behave as such, preferring those who prove that they are not contaminated by present errors. If a Mass becomes an occasion of torture for the faithful, if they are forced to assist at sacrileges or to support heresies and ramblings unworthy of the House of the Lord, it is a thousand times preferable to go to a church where the priest celebrates the Holy Sacrifice worthily, in the rite given to us by Tradition, with preaching in conformity with sound doctrine. When parish priests and bishops realize that the Christian people demand the Bread of Faith, and not the stones and scorpions of the neo-church, they will lay aside their fears and comply with the legitimate requests of the faithful. The others, true mercenaries, will show themselves for what they are and will be able to gather around them only those who share their errors and perversions. They will be extinguished by themselves: the Lord dries up the swamp and makes the land on which brambles grow arid; he extinguishes vocations in corrupt seminaries and in convents rebellious to the Rule.

The lay faithful today have a sacred task: to comfort good priests and good bishops, gathering like sheep around their shepherds. Give them hospitality, help them, console them in their trials. Create community in which murmuring and division do not predominate, but rather fraternal charity in the bond of Faith. And since in the order established by God – κόσμος – subjects owe obedience to authority and cannot do otherwise than resist it when it abuses its power, no fault will be attributed to them for the infidelity of their leaders, on whom rests the very serious responsibility for the way in which they exercise the vicarious power which has been given to them. We must not rebel, but oppose; we must not be pleased with the errors of our pastors, but pray for them and admonish them respectfully; we must not question their authority but the way in which they use it.

I am certain, with a certainty that comes to me from Faith, that the Lord will not fail to reward our fidelity, after having punished us for the faults of the men of the Church, granting us holy priests, holy bishops, holy cardinals, and above all a holy Pope. But these saints will arise from our families, from our communities, from our churches: families, communities, and churches in which the grace of God must be cultivated with constant prayer, with the frequenting of Holy Mass and the Sacraments, with the offering of sacrifices and penances that the Communion of Saints permits us to offer to the Divine Majesty in order to expiate our sins and those of our brethren, including those who exercise authority. The laity have a fundamental role in this, guarding the Faith within their families, in such a way that our young people who are educated in love and in the fear of God may one day be responsible fathers and mothers, but also worthy ministers of the Lord, His heralds in the male and female religious orders, and His apostles in civil society.

The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
September 1, 2020               

Source               

Comments invited…