Pewsitter News Pewsitter News en-us Wed, 01 Jul 2015 10:57:06 GMT Wed, 01 Jul 2015 10:57:06 GMT none <![CDATA[ In Praise of Alternate Popes ]]>
In Praise of Alternate Popes

By Frank Walker


Violent-tempered, aggressive, unliked, and completely different than the Humble One

John Allen has a piece of blatant pro-divorce propaganda today and he trashes the heroic and pious example of the victorious Egyptian Copts in the process.

As Pope Francis gears up for a showdown over divorce and remarriage at October’s Synod of Bishops, marking the latest chapter in a polarizing debate that’s left some Catholics delighted and others disenchanted, he can take consolation that he’s not the pope in the hottest water over the issue.

If you're delighted then you're not Catholic.  Only liberals get disenchanted.  That's  because they're so easily enchanted.  Faithful Catholics are just furious at the hijacking of our Church.

The world’s other major Christian leader who holds the same title, Pope Tawadros II of Egypt’s Coptic Orthodox Church, is also facing stiff blowback related to a divorce debate. Unlike Francis, however, some members of his own flock don’t just want him to change course, but they actually want him fired.

“He’s one of the worst spiritual leaders we’ve had in recent times,” said Wael Eskander, a well-known commentator on Coptic affairs, applauding recent calls from Coptic activists for Tawadros to be removed and sent packing to the monastery where he lived prior to being named a bishop.

“He’s playing a game he will lose in the end,” Eskander said.

Pope Tawadros is highly popular.  The Egyptian Copts endured a living nightmare after Obama's pro-Islamist pressure helped topple their long-time president, leaving them ethnic cleansing and scores of churches burned.  Who are these 'some members,' and who cares what this 'well-known' Eskander thinks?'

Copts form the vast majority of Egypt’s eight to ten million Christians, and while most observers regard the idea of removing their pope as a long-shot, they say the uprising reflects real discontent over the extent to which Church authorities try to assert control over the private lives of their followers.

“People don’t like him very much, because he has a violent temper and he’s seen as aggressive,” said Mina Thabet, a Coptic researcher on human rights. “There’s a real problem between the pope and the people.”

I don't believe that statement for a minute.  The only people who don't like Egypt's Tawadros are displaced Muslim Brotherhood.  But this isn't really about Copts.  It's about Francis and his brazen and heretical divorce coup.  Not that Francis believes in divorce, no.  He just thinks separation is mandatory in a host of vague and commonplace circumstances, streamlined annulments are in order, and Eucharistic sacrilege is 'mercy.'

When it comes to the substance of the divorce question, Francis and Tawadros are drawing fire from opposite sides.

The Catholic leader is generally seen as a moderate, with conservatives alarmed that he might relax his Church’s rules banning communion to anyone who divorces and remarries outside the Catholic Church. Tawadros is seen as a hard-liner, staunchly opposed to allowing Copts to dissolve their marriages under virtually any circumstances.

Francis is not seen as a moderate.  He's seen as seven steps to the left of Catholic.  If someone like John Allen calls you a hard-liner, it just means you're nice.

In 2011, a movement was founded called “Coptic 38” to campaign to go back to the earlier, more permissive rules. When he took office three years ago, Tawadros rejected that suggestion out of hand.

Despite the criticism, Tawadros appears to have the backing of other Coptic leaders.

On June 25, a traditional Church body called a “millet council” in Alexandria rejected calls for the pope’s removal, calling the selection of the Coptic leader a “divine choice” that cannot be undone.

Certainly the generally conservative ethos of the Church’s leadership suggests Tawadros won’t find much resistance for keeping reformers at bay.

So much for that unpopular Coptic Pope on the brink of removal.

There’s little indication any such putsch against Tawadros is in the cards, yet there are signs his stance is driving a few Copts away. Estimates provided by Peter Ramses El-Naggar, a lawyer who’s part of the “38” movement, are that since 2008 some 1,200 Copts have converted to Islam, which permits divorce, and that 4,000 more have tried to pursue a civil divorce or joined another Christian denomination.

In a country of over 70 million Muslims, Tawadros is such a bad Pope that Copts jump ship at the rate of over 150 per year! (I'm sure none of them are simply caving under pressure.)

Aside from the coincidence that another pope is wrestling with the same problem, Francis may want to take note of the Egyptian debate for another reason. If he relaxes the Catholic position on divorce and remarriage, it could create ecumenical tensions with churches such as the Coptic Orthodox currently struggling to hold the line.

Isn't that the opposite of a Catholic stand?  How in the world can a Pope 'relax a Catholic position on divorce and remarriage?' A Pope like Francis might lie about it, but he can't actually do it.   We aren't the Protestants here.

No matter what happens to Tawadros, the turmoil illustrates a hard truth which, by now, must be clear to his fellow pope in Rome too: When it comes to divorce and remarriage, somebody’s going to be unhappy no matter what you do.

If faithless sinners aren't unhappy with the Pope then he's not doing his job.  If, on the other hand, he's pleasing faithless sinners left and right then, unlike Pope Tawadros II, he actually should be removed.

If a good pope can be threatened off the throne, a bad one can be taken down.  The Church can't just let the world impose its own popes.  It's becoming painfully clear that it just doesn't work.

Church teaching isn't going to change, and it isn't going to hibernate until the World somehow becomes more virtuous. It's going to sit there, Francis or no Francis, demanding action and assent regardless.


Read more at The Stumbling Block







... ]]>
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch: Global Warming is Real and Political Prisoners Imagined ]]>
FrancisChurch: Global Warming is Real and Political Prisoners Imagined

By Frank Walker

If there are no political prisoners in FrancisCuba, then how can there be Ladies in White?


At Breitbart Francis Martel reports:

A Catholic church in the central Cuban city of Cienfuegos has banned female relatives of political prisoners from attending mass unless they no longer wear white, a color associated with political imprisonment in the nation. The slight to families of the abused follows the bewildering remark from Archbishop of Havana Jaime Ortega that Cuba no longer has prisoners of conscience.

Eight members of the Ladies in White activist group have attended Sunday Catholic Mass wearing white for years, sitting in the pews in silence unless participating in the Mass. No reports have surfaced of the women themselves–mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters of prisoners of conscience–disturbing the Mass. Nonetheless, a priest in Cienfuegos expelled them from his service, ordering them never to wear white again in his church if they wish to attend services.

The priest, identified as “Father Tarciso,” told Diario de Cuba that the women were “disrespectful,” stating, “I had told them that the way things are could not continue to be. … I cannot allow our community to be further fractured,” he argued. He accused them of taking photographs inside the church, which the ladies deny. Miladis Espino Díaz, a representative of the Ladies in White, noted that they were expelled from the church and, upon walking out, could hear the priest apologize to those in attendance for not having done it sooner.

“We do not only go to church because we are Ladies in White,” Espino Díaz told the newspaper, “but because we believe in God. We sing, we pray, we participate, we do nothing wrong.”

Following their removal from the church, the women testified to being the victim of a number of offensive acts, including a man “exposing himself and urinating in front of them,” “obscene gestures using fingers,” and “being called prostitutes.”

Offenses to the Ladies in White are common as they attempt to attend Mass; in a particularly gruesome instance last year, one woman was tarred for wearing white to the service.

Two male supporters of the group, Emilio García Moreira and Alexander Veliz García, began a hunger strike Thursday to support the return of the women to Mass.

Catholic religion is heavily regulated in communist Cuba, where it is technically a counterrevolutionary activity but has managed to persist, particularly given overtures by Pope Francis towards the Castro dictatorship. “If he keeps talking like this, I’ll return to the Church,” Raúl Castro said of the Pope this year following his support of major U.S. concessions to the Castro regime. Pope Francis was a direct mediator between President Obama and Raúl Castro before the American head of state chose to strip Cuba of its State Sponsor of Terrorism status–despite no evidence in a change of support to either the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or Hezbollah–in exchange for nothing from Cuba.

Are the new enviro-apocalyptic totalitarian societies we're being forced into just high-school popularity contests on steroids?  You're either in desperately in or your nowhere?  What does a local homily sound like in Cardinal Ortega's Cuba?  If he can't get away with the ridiculous claim that there are no political prisoners, maybe he can make their wives and mothers disappear!

Is this what faithful Catholics have to look forward to in the new FrancisChurch -  government-loving flunkies posing as priests, calling true Christian witnesses 'divisive,' and kicking them out of Mass?  That would never happen in the free world, no!  The FrancisVatican officials are always respectful and welcoming of honest ideas.  Sometimes they're even funny?  They never side with the enemy.

The Mass-going Ladies in White are nothing like prostitutes.  How twisted must a Catholic get before he can insult and attack these brave women?

I'm not looking forward to the new Global Warming Church.  I had to pray for all the rivers and various species at Mass today.  Now that there are no Catholics there to 'fracture the community,' gay marriage is going to catch on like wildfire in the Cuban pews.



Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch: Global Warming is Real and Political Prisoners Imagined; In Praise of Alternate Popes ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

FrancisChurch: Global Warming is Real and Political Prisoners Imagined


In Praise of Alternate Popes







... ]]>
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Fr. Rutler and the Full St. Francis ]]>
Fr. Rutler and the Full St. Francis

By Frank Walker

Fr. George Rutler teaches on Francis of Assisi and the Canticle of the Sun:

On September 13, 1224, on the mount of Verna, Saint Francis received the stigmata, the marks of Christ’s five wounds in his flesh. Several months later, he composed the “The Canticle of the Creatures,” now more commonly called “The Canticle of the Sun.” It is beautiful in its Umbrian dialect and enchants in any language. The seventh verse, which begins “Laudato si, mi Signore, per sora nostra matre terra . . .” is the incipit of the recent encyclical on the dignity and duties of life in the created order.

Five other verses are quoted in paragraph 87 of the encyclical. They praise the Lord for the sun, moon, stars, wind, air, water and fire. I am inclined to think that St. Francis, who was a deacon, had in mind the Benedicite, which is part of the Liturgy of the Hours, conflating Daniel 3:57-88 and Psalm 148. St. Francis was a walking Bible, and his life was a canticle incarnate, so his inspiration was the same as Daniel’s and David’s. His canticle distinguishes the creature from the Creator who is the object of creation’s praise.

   I found some verses in a Unitarian hymnal:

        Nature shouts from earth and sky,
        In the spring our spirits fly,
        Join the resurrection cry,
        Love is God and fears must die, Alleluia!

Such poésie may suit people who are vague about the Resurrection, and it really only works north of the equator. The problem is its inversion of “God is love” and “Love is God.” If Love is God, then it is a quick step to thinking of the sun and moon and stars and earth as divine, with earthly pastures as a pantheon.

This is why it is important that the “Canticle of the Sun” be invoked in its entirety. The first and last three verses do not appear in the encyclical. An uninformed reader might get the impression that the saint of Assisi did not sing his song in a transport of joy to God whose glory is ineffable. “Most High, all powerful, all good Lord! All praise is Yours, all glory, all honor, and all blessing. To You alone, Most High, do they belong. No mortal lips are worthy to pronounce Your name” (verse 1). The last three verses praise the Lord for the strength he gives to forgive and to endure sickness and trial, for the mystery of death and fear of dying in mortal sin, and for serving him “with great humility.”

A satirist once described a trendy clergyman who “collects butterflies and considers the word ‘not’ to have been interpolated in several of the Commandments.” While Christ bid us to “consider the lilies of the field,” he did so not as a botanist but as the Lord who “is before all things, and in him all things hold together” (Colossians 1:17). To redact the “Canticle of the Sun” risks being left with the Sun, but without the Son.






... ]]>
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Sinful Not To Abandon Your FrancisChurch Husband? ]]>
Sinful Not To Abandon Your FrancisChurch Husband

By Frank Walker

         Sorry, but under the circumstances it'd be a sin to keep you.

AFP reports on Pope Francis' latest guidance on marriage and separation.  Apparently you're morally obligated to break up your marriage and family if you're the weaker sex and you're being humiliated.

Pope Francis said Wednesday that it may be "morally necessary" for some families to split up, marking a change of tone in the Catholic Church's attitude to troubled marriages.

"There are cases in which separation is inevitable," he said during his weekly general audience, with a message hoping to encourage greater compassion in the Church ahead of a highly anticipated global meeting on family life in October.

Pope Francis is always changing the Catholic 'tone,' and in the process completely tearing down the last vestiges of Christian society.  One must be careful not to hand the world a bunch of rhetorical excuses, but then again, 'who am I to judge?'

"Sometimes, it can even be morally necessary, when it's about shielding the weaker spouse or young children from the more serious wounds caused by intimidation and violence, humiliation and exploitation," he said.

Why does Francis say 'the weaker spouse?'  Do you think that may mean the man, or is he talking perhaps about various gay marriages?  What happens if my wife humiliates me?  I guess I'm out of luck and I'll have to stick with her.  That's an 'intimidating' prospect.  Oops.

I have been exploiting, intimidating and humiliating my wife for twenty-eight years.  I know because I've heard all about it.  Thank God she's stronger than me and we didn't have FrancisChurch until just now.

Francis said there were many families in "irregular situations" and the question should be how to best help them, and "how to accompany them so that the child does not become daddy or mummy's hostage".

"how to accompany them so that the child does not become daddy or mummy's hostage?"  That bears repeating somehow.

The issue is likely to be addressed during the upcoming synod -- a gathering of bishops -- on the family, which Francis hopes will help reconcile Catholic thinking with the realities of believers' lives in the early 21st century.

Could they have a more notorious goal?  What in the world are we going to do about our Church in this time of Mercy?



Read more at The Stumbling Block







... ]]>
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Check Your Catholic Procreation ]]>
FrancisChurch: Check Your Catholic Procreation

By Frank Walker

                              Irresponsible sins against nature?

It's amazing how much sheer anti-Catholic material is being set up for that awful upcoming Synod.  Responsible procreation?  Hasn't the entire Catholic world including His Holiness Francis just told us the new Catholic earth-ism has nothing whatsoever to do with population control?

In Chicago, as Frank Sinatra pointed out, men dance with their wives.

Sometimes that leads to other things.

In the great movie Rob Roy, one of the Catholic Highlanders tells this joke at a celebration:

Q: Why are Calvinists against making love standing up?

A: It might lead to dancing.

Last night I danced with my wife.

Is it always "procreation" or is it only procreation if you find out later that it was?

In any case, I didn't think about it. Even once. I don't think she did either.

I went to work without feeling guilty. As I remember, I bought a cup of coffee and a donut.

That's your first mistake right there, Mr. Mahound.  In FrancisChurch you're supposed to feel guilty about that kind of thing.  Also, dancing is sexist and coffee and donuts pollute your inner ecosystem so that's two other sins right there, maybe three.  Remember, in terms of the Earth (which is of course oriented toward God), we're all one and responsible for each other.  So can that donut NewCatholic!

Of course, I'm thinking about this against the background of the recently released Instrumentum Laboris of the Synod (on the Family). One of the Agenda Items is "responsible procreation."

I've read that in the early Medieval Church, sometimes it was thought necessary to confess if you had romantic feelings for, and acted on them with, your spouse. Unless of course you had no romantic feelings and were just doing your duty to populate the earth or whatever.

Now (it seems) you have to confess if you only had romantic feelings and were not dutifully thinking of the effects of acting on those feelings on, say, future carbon emissions.

We've come full circle, sort of.

Okay, so I've always wanted to say this:

Hands off my body.

Hands off my wife's body.

And hands off, well, you know.

We'll procreate however we damn well want.

Another item on the Synod agenda is "birth reduction."

I know. I did a double-take on that one too. No doubt there will be more to say about it later. But for now, this will merely have to do:

Hands off my (future) ten-seat van with the Pro-Life stickers... nasty heretical freaks.

Careful.  Your individualism is showing.  There's no Hell, but if there was it would be for you selfish types who sin against creation, careless of your neighbor.

At least there can be earthly demerits and penalties established by committee with the help of business leaders.


Read the rest here.



Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Getting the Straight Truth From Mullarkey ]]>
Getting the Straight Truth From Mullarkey

By Frank Walker

                               How do I get up out of this?

Who is Maureen Mullarkey and why is she so wonderful?  Her piece today on the Pope's Global Warming Manifesto says everything that no one is permitted to even conceive.  Why not?  It's only true.

Subversion of Christianity by the spirit of the age has been a hazard down the centuries. The significance of “Laudato Si” lies beyond its stated concern for the climate. Discount obfuscating religious language. The encyclical lays ground to legitimize global government and makes the church an instrument of propaganda—a herald for the upcoming United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference in Paris.

and then this...

Propelled by the cult of feeling and Golden Age nostalgia—enshrined in the myth of indigenous peoples as peaceable ecologists—that elusive something picked up a tincture of Teilhardian gnosticism as it grew. It bursts on us now as “Laudato Si,” a malignant jumble of dubious science, policy prescriptions, doomsday rhetoric, and what students of Wordsworthian poetics call, in Keats’ derisive phrase, “the egotistical sublime.”

This theme of the Pope's ego is key.  Mullarkey has broached it before, and was entirely renounced by the editor of FirstThings.  A more telling indicator of her witness in the age of FrancisMercy you won't find.

After briskly putting the sinister global warming movement to rest, she writes,

Enter Jorge Bergolio. Informed objection to the pope’s roster of pending disasters is widely available—but also, at this point, moot. Reducing greenhouse gases has just been deemed a religious obligation. What should concern us now is the ecclesial climate that yielded this extravagant rant.

Despite whatever leverage or compromise made up that notorious Abdication Conclave, isn't Francis the elected man of the cardinals?  Such is our infected Church, yes?

There is nothing to admire in its assault on market economies, technological progress, and—worse—on rationality itself. Bergolio, whom we know now as Pope Francis, is a limited man. His grasp of economics is straitjacketed by the Peronist culture in which he was raised. “Laudato Si” descends to garish, left-wing boilerplate. The pope is neither a public intellectual, theologian, nor a man of science. Yet he impersonates all three.

The encyclical tells us much about the man who delivers it. Straightaway, it certifies the depth and span of this pope’s megalomania. A breathtaking strut into absolutism, it is addressed not simply to Catholics but, like the “Communist Manifesto,” to the whole world. Tout le monde.

Mullarkey has all the Pope's numbers.  He's the Left's man, the kind of tool Obama would want to head Catholic Charities.  He's clever and he's going to accomplish what he was appointed to do, but he's not actually able to be pope.  That requires a unique set of skills, among them an informed Faith.

His placement in that supreme seat as an agent of mischief is producing a sort of mania.  His job description says to point definitively toward what's right, but his agenda is to do everything wrong.  That would twist anyone's thinking.  I wonder if his mind was always this way.

It's difficult to find clear simple rationales when you're bent on so much trouble.  Luther was similar.

Bergolio’s resentment of First World prosperity is of a piece with his simplistic understanding of the “financial interests” and “financial resources” he condemns. He nurses a Luddite yen to roll back the Industrial Revolution for a fantasy of pre-industrial harmony between man and a virginal Mother Earth. He demonizes the very means that have raised millions out of poverty, and that remain crucial in continuing to raise standards of living among the poor.

Those aren't the only good things he demonizes.  He also resents and attacks the pious faithful and those who get in his radical way.

Take no comfort from “Laudato Si’s” restatements of the Catholic Church’s traditional positions on the sanctity of life, the primacy of the family, and rejection of abortion. In this context, orthodoxy and pious expression serve a rancid purpose. They are a Trojan horse, a vehicle for insinuating surrender to pseudo-science and the eco-fascism that requires it.

Promiscuous papal embrace of the climate-change narrative includes a chilling call for the creation of global overseers to manage the Progressive dream: abolition of fossil fuels. The twentieth century gave us stark lessons in the applications of compulsory benevolence. The “global regulatory frameworks” the pope hankers for will, without scruple, crush orthodoxy when it suits.

Or might Bergolio welcome that? His appointment of Hans Schellnhuber to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences raises the question. Schellnhuber is a zealous promoter of the theory of man-made climate change and advocate of population control. He has lobbied for an Earth Constitution, a Global Council, and establishment of a Planetary Court, a transnational legal body with enforcement powers on environmental and population issues. In short, Schellnhuber is the Vatican’s advance man for bureaucratic tyranny on a global scale. It is a telling appointment.

A man of counter-faith at the helm of the Church.  What could be more destructive?



Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Malkin's Had Enough of Hypocritical FrancisChurch ]]>
Michelle Malkin's Had Enough of Hypocritical FrancisChurch

By Frank Walker

           Climate-Controlled and Environmentally Purified for Free

Defending the innocent without arms, preserving the Sistine Chapel without 'evil capitalists,'  Michelle Malkin reveals what's central to the new FrancisChurch Liberation Theology 2.0 namely, hypocrisy.

Unlike Pope Francis, I believe that air-conditioning and the capitalists responsible for the technology are blessings to the world.

Perhaps the head of the Catholic Church, who condemned "the increasing use and power of air-conditioning" last week in a market-bashing encyclical, is unaware of the pioneering private company that has donated its time, energy and innovative heating, ventilating and air-conditioning equipment to the Vatican's most famous edifice for more than a decade.

That's right. While the pontiff sanctimoniously attacks "those who are obsessed with maximizing profits," Carrier Corporation -- a $13 billion for-profit company with 43,000 employees worldwide (now a unit of U.S.-based United Technologies Corp.) -- ensures that the air in the Vatican's Sistine Chapel stays clean and cool.

Last fall, Carrier unveiled a groundbreaking HVAC system for the Vatican to help preserve Michelangelo's masterpieces against pollution caused by the estimated six million visitors who descend on the Sistine Chapel every year to see its famous frescoes.

Read more here.

Aren't capitalists just people working together and agreeing to help each other in the most beneficial way they determine, independently and on their own?  Why is freedom now an evil thing?  Why are we continually being bound up in some broad of nature that compels us to obey these Mao-ist rulers?

Hasn't the Church already ironed out our relationship to nature?  Why is everything some new, never before seen crisis?



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Getting the Straight Truth From Mullarkey; Check Your Catholic Procreation; Sinful Not To Abandon Your FrancisChurch Husband; Michelle Malkin's Had Enough of Hypocritical FrancisChurch ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Getting the Straight Truth From Mullarkey


Check Your Catholic Procreation


Sinful Not To Abandon Your FrancisChurch Husband


Michelle Malkin's Had Enough of Hypocritical FrancisChurch



... ]]>
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch: Wealth is Greed and Greed is Sin ]]>
FrancisChurch: Wealth is Greed and Greed is Sin

By Frank Walker

                     "To to humble papal suites quickly, driver."

Pope Francis has said something again that doesn't sound right.  Then again, when you think about it, it just sounds really wrong.

If you give the key to your heart to greed, it will leave the door wide open to vanity, arrogance and all of the other vices, squeezing God out of the way, Pope Francis said at his morning Mass.

This on its face isn't true.  Greed is one of the seven deadly sins.  Greed is not the worst sin; always giving way to pride or anger, lust or jealousy, etc.  Pope Francis is just making that up.

Wealth isn’t “a statue” that stands inert and has no impact on a person, the pope said June 19 during the Mass in the chapel of the Domus Sanctae Marthae.

“Wealth has the tendency to grow, to move around, to take a place in one’s life and heart,” and once it moves in, fanning the desire to always accumulate more, the heart becomes “corrupted,” he said.

Wealth does not make you want more wealth.  You want more wealth no matter how little you have.  If you are able to gain wealth through hard work, sacrifice, or cunning, then you will be able accumulate it too.  It does not corrupt the heart unless you let it, but it can weigh it down and tempt you to shirk your Christian responsibility, to compromise and sin.  Hence vows of poverty.

Pope Francis is a rich man in every respect.  He has control of billions of dollars and a huge infrastructure at his command.  Every single priest, religious, and employee worldwide is obliged to him.

Pope Francis has power. Isn't greed simply an inordinate desire for the power to possess or the power to command? If he chooses to live simply and give back it is a good example, but it can't truly be said that he isn't rich. So his blanket and indiscriminate attack on wealth is, much like his attack on weapons manufacturers, plain hypocrisy.

The pope focused his homily on the day’s reading from the Gospel of Mark (6:19-23), in which Jesus tells his disciples to “not store up for yourselves treasures on earth,” but rather “store up treasures in heaven,” because “for where your treasure is, there also will your heart be.”

Pope Francis said that deep down, people’s search for more is rooted in a desire for a sense of security, but there is a high risk that person will become a slave of wealth, accumulating it only for oneself and not in order to serve others.

If greed were rooted in a sense of security than it's also cowardice.  But greed isn't cowardice.  Cowardice is.

Soon, any sense of security gives way to vice and division, even in the family, he said, according to Vatican Radio.

This is gibberish.  'Any sense of security gives way to vice and division?'

“Also the root of war lies in this ambition that destroys, corrupts,” as so many wars are being fought because of “greed for power, for riches,” he said.

So if I'm cozy in my blanket until 6am, I'm inevitably causing war?  My security is my greed and my greed is my possessions, therefore the killing?  Is there some point to the Pope's endless smoke and rambling about people having things and liking them?

It’s a war that can be raging in one’s own heart, he said, “because greed keeps going, keeps moving forward,” stringing the person along a path of vice one step at a time.

Greed “opens the door, then comes in vanity — to think you’re important, to believe you’re powerful — and, in the end, pride, and from there all the vices, all of them,” he said.

Greed is the king of every sin and its cause lies not in the heart but in the wealth you possess?

This FrancisChurch theology is really just all about money and power, not Jesus.



Read more at The Stumbling Block








... ]]>
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Dr. Woo's Trinity is Way Too Earthy ]]>
FrancisChurch: Dr. Woo's Trinity is Way Too Earthy

By Frank Walker

  Serene Dr. Woo in her Dear Leader suit with very mopey Jesus and Mary in the corner

Dr. Carolyn Woo, former Notre Dame Business School Dean and now head of Federal bureaucratic agency, Catholic Relief Services, was supposed to have been integral to the Pope's enormous Global Warming Manifesto.

She was present and spoke at it's unfortunate release.

Pope Francis asks us a very simple question in his encyclical: "What kind of world do we want to leave to those who come after us, to children who are now growing up?"

Surely this question resonates with almost everyone. It resonates with me as a mother and as someone who draws on business as a partner to eliminate poverty and as an educator of business practitioners. It is from the perspective of business that I speak today.

Business school academics know all about business, yes?  College historians know history, and most economists know how people live and work too.

Pope Francis poses other questions: "What is the purpose of our life in this world? Why are we here? What is the goal of our work and all our efforts?" Those answer are akin to the mission and vision statements businesses formulate to define themselves, to gain legitimacy from society, commitment from employees, and support from customers.

How is it that the Vicar of Christ himself must pose these questions?   Are not the answers to these questions the essence of the Christian Faith?  According to Dr. Woo, the 'answers' are the visions and missions statements that businesses worldwide have yet to create.

So, the most profound truths of our existence will be determined by corporate boards, then screened for compliance with the UN-FrancisChurch officials, I expect.  Is this Catholicism or some descending cage?

As businesses strive to find those answers, they should realize that the message of this encyclical to the business world is a profoundly hopeful one. It sees the potential of business as a force for good whose actions can serve to mitigate and stop the cumulative, compounding, catastrophic effects of climate change driven by human actions.

Did you see that?  Five 'C' words.  It's not science but it's scary.

One of the principal themes in this encyclical is that all life on this planet is bound together via three fundamental and intertwined relationships: with God, our neighbors and the earth. When one of these relationships is damaged, then the others are, too. So there is a connection between how we treat the planet and how we treat the poor, our neighbors. As Pope Francis puts it, we do not have two separate crises, social and economic, but "one complex crisis which is both social and environmental."

This contrived trinity of God, earth, and mankind is not some principle.  It's just a trap, a net to bind men so tightly with the Prince of this World that piety and virtue become extinct.  High can we fly to Heaven while our planetary rulers move to subjugate us to the Earth?

Don't let them throw a rope around Christ's Church and pull it down.



Read more at The Stumbling Block









... ]]>
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Synod: There's a Working Tool in the Vatican And It Hates the Faith ]]>
Synod: There's a Working Tool in the Vatican And It Hates the Faith

By Frank Walker

     I prescribe a penitential path to sacrilege precisely in these cases?

John Vennari has the scoop on the latest Synod abomination - the just-released compilation of a worldwide 'listening' crusade, the Instrumentum Laboris.  Doesn't that just mean 'Working Tool?'

If you have to remind everybody that you're busy working with tools, you're not really getting anything done, are you?

And after a second round of global consultation, here it is – at Roman Noon, the instrumentum laboris (baseline text) for October's climactic Synod on the Family was released... for now, however – much like last year's first volume – the full sequel is only available in Italian.

Stacking out at 147 paragraphs – some 20,000 words – the text is arranged around three pillars: the challenges families face, the "discernment of the family's vocation," and "the mission of the family today," each of them slated to take up a week of the discussions at the 4-25 October assembly.

Among other highlights, the final portion of the framework deals with the proposed changes of practice cited by their supporters as necessary for the church to better respond to families in challenging situations amid current pastoral practice.

On the assembly's most hot-button issue of all, the instrumentum speaks of a "common accord" among the world's bishops toward "eventual access" to the sacraments for divorced and civilly remarried couples, but only following "an itinerary of reconciliation or a penitential path under the authority of the [diocesan] bishop," and only "in situations of irreversible cohabitation."

If I remember last October, that 'accord' wasn't all that common; and just like gay sex habits, if 'cohabiting situations' were irreversible, they wouldn't be sins.  Who do these irreversible FrancisVatican fools think we are, and how many could find their way down a 'penitential path?'

The text cautions that the proposal is only envisioned "in some particular situations, and according to well-precise conditions," citing the interest of children born in a second union.

Well, I'm satisfied.  They've promised to be precise, like the gears of a Porsche flying down the Autobahn to Hell.

On a related front, ample treatment was given to the state of marriage tribunals, with calls for a "decentralization" of the annulment courts and the floating of the "relevance of the personal faith" of spouses in terms of their understanding of the marital bond as a means for declaring the nullity of a marriage.

We could see that one coming.  His Holiness has been inclined to ramble about the impossibility of making an informed and binding marriage vow these days.  Maybe if we have online auto-annulments then the Sensus Fidei will really start to understand marriage is forever! Ever-forward and pedal to the metal.

In particular, the latter point echoes a longstanding line of the Pope's – having quoted the impression of his predecessor in Buenos Aires, the late Cardinal Antonio Quarracino, that "half" of failed Catholic marriages there "are null" solely on the grounds of unformed faith, a papal commission formed quietly by Francis last summer is studying possible changes to the annulment process independent of the Synod itself. No timeline is set for its work.

Elsewhere, three paragraphs were devoted to pastoral ministry to families "having within them a person of homosexual orientation." While reaffirming the 2003 CDF declaration that "there exists no foundation whatsoever to integrate or compare, not even remotely, homosexual unions and the design of God for the family," the text urges that "independent of their sexual tendency," gays "be respected in their dignity and welcomed with sensibility and delicateness, whether in the church or society."

Haven't most self-professed gay people already been subjected to enough 'tenderness,' so much so that they imagine an outsized 'dignity' in their rejection of marriage and true parenthood?

Perhaps most boldly – reflecting a key emphasis of one of the gathering's three presidents, Cardinal Chito Tagle of Manila – the text emphasizes that "The Christian message must be announced in a language that sustains hope.

Watch out for these liberals like Cardinal Tagle, the future Pope of Hope and FrancisMercy.  They're always 'bold' and courageous.

Stuff your evil old language, Catholic!  We'll tell you what to say.



Read more at The Stumbling Block






... ]]>
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Nothing Catholic About Cardinal Wuerl's Union Rally ]]>
Nothing Catholic About Cardinal Wuerl's Union Rally

By Frank Walker

                  Pro-Solidarity Paragons of Catholic Social Teaching

Why is it somehow that, preserved for all time in that great Compendium of Catholic Social Teaching, we are supposed to pay homage to the thuggish, lazy, and illicit power-grabbing of unions?  Aren't they just the political enemies of the Church?

Cardinal Donald Wuerl has told a gathering of religious and labour leaders that solidarity cannot be taken for granted.

“It is sometimes avoided or even denied because it brings with itself obligations,” the Archbishop of Washington DC said, noting that by the same token there are those who harbour “neglect of and occasional hostility toward solidarity in our social and cultural context”.

Cardinal Wuerl is in full swing for the Leftist FrancisState.  Usually he can just stand back and work his magic.  Why the sudden urgency to become a blatant Democrat operative?

Cardinal Wuerl said: “Solidarity is expressed in works of generosity, forgiveness and reconciliation. Catholic teaching explicitly recognises organised labour as instruments of solidarity and justice. But we cannot take solidarity for granted.”

The cardinal made his remarks at a conference on “Erroneous Autonomy: A Conversation on Solidarity & Faith”, co-sponsored by The Catholic University of America’s Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies and the AFL-CIO, which hosted the event at its headquarters building in Washington.

“What brings fresh urgency to our new evangelisation mission is just how widespread and profound are forces which neglect basic understandings of right and wrong, the common good, the dignity of the human person and our obligations to one another of genuine solidarity,” Cardinal Wuerl said.

“People in this room can point out how these factors have also contributed to a dramatic decrease in union membership in recent years.”

So somehow the enemies of the Faith have caused a drop in union membership?  I thought it was the fact that the state laws stopped enabling them to force workers to pay their protection?

If we've learned anything from this latest Faith-crushing manifesto, it's that encyclicals can be full of lies and worldly policy.  Despite that enormous compendium, isn't most of so-called Catholic 'social teaching' just people twisting, spinning and capitalizing off a handful of relatively recent and somewhat dubious encyclicals?

Labor, yes. Associations, yes. Owners, yes. Managers, yes.

Enormous, coercive, immoral, and anti-Catholic trade unions?  Take the long Catholic view.  Don't buy the Cardinal's unholy politicking.



Read more at The Stumbling Block








... ]]>
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Synod: There's a Working Tool in the Vatican And It Hates the Faith; Synod: Dr. Woo's Trinity is Way Too Earthy; Nothing Catholic About Cardinal Wuerl's Union Rally; FrancisChurch: Wealth is Greed and Greed is Sin ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Synod: There's a Working Tool in the Vatican And It Hates the Faith


Synod: Dr. Woo's Trinity is Way Too Earthy


Nothing Catholic About Cardinal Wuerl's Union Rally


FrancisChurch: Wealth is Greed and Greed is Sin



... ]]>
Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Loving the Poor Like Judas Did ]]>
Laudato Sii: Loving the Poor Like Judas Did

By Frank Walker

       Loving Christ means getting your hands around the entire planet?

In a few words The Tenth Crusade sums up FrancisChurch at the moment of the Global Warming Encyclical.

Pope Francis blasted Catholics labeling his rhetoric about money 'communism'. They are only showing concern for the poor - that's all. It's unfair to say people who care about the poor are communists.

I guess it's never occurred to him that people calling what he's doing communism actually care about and for the poor too--some of them even poor themselves.

Sometimes I get the feeling he thinks before he showed up, nobody cared for the poor.

He must know it isn't advocacy for the poor that convicts him of socialism, its the specific strategies he suggests. It was his constant shilling for the virtues of dysfunction that leaves one penniless and his incitement of contempt for people who study in school and go to work. The class warfare. His going gaga for Cuban communist dictators and tyrants did not help his reputation. It is his abandonment of moral theology and the distribution of Sanctifying Grace - turning the church into a social service agency.

Christ blasted Judas when he tried to turn our mission into the proprietorship of the poor and warned him that first and foremost is the mission of salvation which we have all yet to see in this papacy.

Just as Pope Francis has contempt for a holy and ancient Mass, Judas hated the way Magdalene poured priceless perfume on Jesus feet.  But she was devoted.  She worshiped Him.  She gave Him what meant the most to Him as God.  She loved Him for who He is.  Can't these things be good in and of themselves?

Consumed by money, power and jealousy, truly Judas was a 'social justice' Catholic.



Read more at The Stumbling Block







... ]]>
Thu, 18 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Laudato Sii: Is This an Encyclical or Some Sweeping Manifesto? ]]>
Laudato Sii: Is This an Encyclical or Some Sweeping Manifesto?

By Frank Walker


                  Sweeping Condemnation of Industrial Society

You know something's not right when the AP calls a papal encyclical a 'sweeping environmental manifesto!'  Isn't that code for maniacal rant?

In a sweeping environmental manifesto aimed at spurring action, Pope Francis called Thursday for a bold cultural revolution to correct what he said was a "structurally perverse" economic system in which the rich exploited the poor, turning Earth into an "immense pile of filth."

Is Pope Francis a refined, knowledgeable or spiritual man?  He only strikes me as clever, brutal, and determined.  Do you get the impression that his first version said something like, "a huge pile of s***?"  I've read that the pope can be quite vulgar in a closed door meeting.  I don't know.  I know he didn't produce this 200-page pile on his own, but I doubt that particular line was anyone else's.  Either way I resent this characterization of the Earth, and I think you should too.

Where exactly does Pope Francis want the culture to go?  A free market has no structure, only protections for life and property.  To make a new structure or model is really just central planning; adding some new regulations and requirements.  That kind of thing almost never helps.

Francis framed climate change as an urgent moral crisis to address in his eagerly anticipated encyclical, blaming global warming on an unfair, fossil fuel-based industrial model that harms the poor the most.

So the model warms the globe because it's unfair and it has fossil fuels?  Fossil fuels are just dead.  You can't really make fuel from things that are alive.  The more dead things are, the more fossil-like.  Even a tree has to grow in some dirt.  You use fuel for living things, since they take precedence.

Oil burns cleaner than coal.  Coal burns cleaner than wood.  In Ireland they burn the peat.  Somewhere they cook lizards over dung fires, but something is going to have to burn if you don't want poverty and starvation.  The world is built for this.  It can support prosperity as well as poverty.

The document released Thursday was a stinging indictment of big business and climate doubters, and aimed to inspire courageous decisions at U.N. climate negotiations this year as well as in domestic politics and everyday life. Citing Scripture and his predecessors, the pope urged people of every faith and even no faith to undergo an awakening to save God's creation.

Liberals are always courageous.  The more destructive and evil they are the more courageous they feel.  Even Al Gore, Raul Castro, and Elton John are getting Catholic.

"It is not enough to balance, in the medium term, the protection of nature with financial gain, or the preservation of the environment with progress," the pope wrote. "Halfway measures simply delay the inevitable disaster. Put simply, it is a matter of redefining our notion of progress."

No more balance!  No more financial gain!  No more progress!  Redefine all your notions!

The world has gone mad, the Church has slipped into the catacombs, and what of Peter?



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Thu, 18 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis Isn't Against Modernism, He's Against Modernity Itself ]]>
Pope Francis Isn't Against Modernism, He's Against Modernity Itself

By Frank Walker


            The new beautiful FrancisLand where everything is equal

At FirstThings R.R. Reno has an unexpected twist on the Pope's new Global Warming encyclical, 'Laudato Si.'  It's the most anti-modernist papal letter since Piux IX!

Commentators are sure to make the false claim that Pope Francis has aligned the Church with modern science. They’ll say this because he endorses climate change. But that’s a superficial reading of Laudato Si. In this encyclical, Francis expresses strikingly anti-scientific, anti-technological, and anti-progressive sentiments. In fact, this is perhaps the most anti-modern encyclical since the Syllabus of Errors, Pius IX’s haughty 1864 dismissal of the conceits of the modern era.


Francis describes the root of our problem as a failure to affirm God as Creator. Because we do not orient our freedom toward acknowledging God, the Father, we’re drawn into the technological project. We seek to subdue and master the world so that it can serve our needs and desires, thus treating “other living beings as mere objects subjected to arbitrary human domination.” By contrast, if we acknowledge God as Creator, we can receive creation as a gift and see that “the ultimate purpose of other creatures is not found in us.”

In short, without a theocentric orientation, we adopt the anthropocentric presumption that we are at the center of reality. This tempts us to treat nature—and other human beings—as raw material to do with as we wish. For Francis, “a spirituality which forgets God as all-powerful and Creator is not acceptable.”

Of course, God is exactly what modernity has forgotten, which means that it too is “not acceptable”—exactly Pius IX’s conclusion. The Syllabus of Errors is exquisitely succinct. Laudato Si is verbose. But in a roundabout way Francis makes his own case against the modern world.

One of the signal achievements of modernity has been the development of a scientific culture. It is now global in scope. In all likelihood it will serve as the unifying worldview that will undergird any future global consensus. At one point Francis calls for “one plan for the whole world.” If this comes to pass, the scientists and technocrats will formulate and administer it. The authoritarian consensus about global warming that actively suppressed dissent, as Climategate revealed, is a case in point.

Although he endorses the consensus view about global warming, in what may be an internal contradiction Francis describes “the scientific and experimental method” itself as part of the problem. It “is already a technique of possession, mastery, and transformation.” There’s not the slightest suggestion in Laudato Si that the modern scientist contemplates or savors the truths of nature. Science disenchants, measures, dissects, and otherwise prepares the world for us to dominate and control.

Technology is even worse. For nearly two hundred years, “progress” in the West has largely mean ever-expanding technological achievement from steam ships to trains to cars to the jet airplane. This has a creation-denying, God-denying logic. Technology seeks “a lordship over all.”

Francis allows that science and technology can lead to useful innovations, crucial medicines, and a kind of beauty in airplanes and skyscrapers. One assumes he endorses the use of technology to meet the challenges of global climate change, uses that will amount to an unprecedented attempt to manage and manipulate the earth’s ecosystem. But it remains dark and destructive. “Technology tends to absorb everything into its ironclad logic.”

So runaway Godless science has been destructive.  Without God's guidance it's become a monster.

Another feature of modernity and its faith in progress has been a political commitment to liberty, equality, and fraternity. To be modern is to believe that, for all our flaws, Western societies are more democratic, more egalitarian, and more inclusive than any in history. This is not the Pope’s view. The West is rapacious. He quotes one source approvingly: “Twenty per cent of the world’s population consumes resources at a rate that robs the poor nations and future generations of what they need to survive.”

In effect, the present world system created by European and North American modernity—the world made possible by Newton, Locke, Rousseau, Ricardo, Kant, Pasteur, Einstein, Keynes, and countless other architects of modern science, economics, and political culture—is an abomination. Francis never quite says that. But this strong judgment is implied in his many fierce denunciations of the current global order. It destroys the environment, oppresses the multitudes, and makes us blind to the beauty of creation.

So in addition to deadly science and technology, freedom has run amok and created a monstrous oligarchy of businessmen who enslave and deprive.  They must be reined-in.

I must report an odd, disoriented feeling when I finished reading Laudato Si. Since Vatican II, the Catholic Church has adopted a largely affirming attitude toward Western modernity. John Paul II denounced the culture of death and Benedict XVI spoke of the dictatorship of relativism. But in their teaching it was clear that they intended these as necessary criticisms to restore the religious and moral basis for modernity’s positive achievements.

Pope Francis seems to be changing course. Laudato Si does not explain how modern science can recover a sense of humility and wonder, nor does it lay down a natural-law framework for the proper development of technology. There’s no application of Catholic social doctrine to help us think in a disciplined way about how to respond to environmental threats, or how to reform global capitalism. That would have reflected the Gaudium et Spes agenda as carried forward by the last two popes.

Instead, Francis has penned a cri de coeur, a dark reflection on the systemic evils of modernity. Like the prophet Ezekiel, Pope Francis sees perversion and decadence in a global system dominated by those who consume and destroy. The only answer is repentance, “deep change,” and a “bold cultural revolution.”

'Revolution' is key to understanding Pope Francis.

If Francis continues in this trajectory, Catholicism will circle back to its older, more adversarial relationship with modernity. In the nineteenth century, the Church regarded modernity’s failure to acknowledge God as damning. It led to usurpations of authority, disrespect for hierarchy, and other signs of anthropocentric self-regard. Francis’s concerns are different. He’s worried about the poor, environmental disasters, and the complacent rich indifferent to both. But his analysis is the same, and he shares a similar dire, global view of modernity as the epitome of godless sin.

Yet modernity has changed, which is why so few readers of Laudato Si will think of Pius IX when they read Francis. Today’s progressives are often critical of the West, and in that sense critical of “progress.” Europeans can be hysterical about genetically modified food. They have renounced nuclear energy, the only feasible large-scale alternative to a hydrocarbon-based energy system. Democracy was the signal political aspiration of modernity, but the EU is a post-national political project, a technocratic, post-democratic project. Here in the United States, many are now educated to believe that the history of the West is one long story of oppression and injustice. Optimism has waned, which means that the pope’s pessimism may be received warmly.

Perhaps, therefore, the most accurate thing to say is that Francis offers a postmodern reading of Gaudium et Spes and Vatican II’s desire to be open to the modern world. He seems to propose to link the Catholic Church with a pessimistic post-humanist Western sentiment rather than the older, confident humanism.

The writer of this piece conflates modernity with modernism.  Modernity simply means now.  Modernism, as explained by Pope Pius X, places individual experience and sentiment over doctrine.  The Church has never had an adversarial relationship with the present, but in his new encyclical, Pope Francis seems to.  He wants to erase the foundations of modern life in the hopes that he'll bring a more just result.  But there is no justice in Communism, only thuggish thievery and lies.

Such is the pretense of post-modern and socialist philosophy which dominates our universities and the UN.  The pope shares this and believes that the Church can be conformed to assist and supplement the same revolutionary goals.  He doesn't see that Communism and oligarchic 'capitalism' are two sides of the same modern coin. Neither resemble the free happy life of Christendom before the Enlightenment, but Communism is clearly worse, though somewhat more 'equitable,' if you share that infamous priority.

It's correct to say that Pope Francis dislikes modernity, because he is a radical.  He is keen to tear down the existing social order but, since he has contempt for the natural laws and rights, for freedom and property, he proposes no realistic structure to take it's place.  He is the 'ideologue' which he constantly rails against.  He is bent only on destruction, in the name of mankind and God of course.

As far as the sentimental Modernist corruption of the Faith which Pope's Pius IX and X decried, Pope Francis clearly embraces it.  In his constant pleas for closeness, tenderness and mercy, his demagoguery about the poor and suffering, and his embrace of all religions and philosophies on behalf of his 'cause;' he is exactly what we've been warned about.



Read more at The Stumbling Block









... ]]>
Thu, 18 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Bill Donohue on Laudato Sii: Striking How the Media All Fall in Line ]]>
Bill Donohue on Laudato Sii: Striking How the Media All Fall in Line

By Frank Walker

                                        Pope Francis Fan?

I hear time and again from non-Catholic friends and family how popular Pope Francis is.  Who cares?

Faithful Catholics spend their whole lives making unpopular choices and catching grief.  Now we're supposed to celebrate all the singing and creepy dancing over Francis?

At the release of the worldly Global Warming Encyclical, Catholic League's Bill Donohue writes:

The media are awash with stories on the tension between Catholic GOP presidential candidates and their fidelity to Pope Francis' encyclical on the environment. It is a story worth exploring. But an even juicier story is the decades-long rejection of papal authority by Catholic Democrats in Washington on issues such as abortion.

In recent years, Vice President Joe Biden, House Minority Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former Congressman Patrick Kennedy, and former Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, have all gotten into public clashes with their bishop; in some cases as many as 26 bishops have publicly rebuked them. Some of these Democrats were summoned to meet with their bishop—more than once—while others were told to refrain from receiving Communion. Their public support for abortion rights was, in every instance, the issue that provoked the reaction. Yet their dissent, and subsequent reprimands, were never cast by the media as cause for concern.

Catholics are expected to give their assent to papal teachings, but it is not true that all pronouncements are morally equal. In 2004, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) was explicit about this: "Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion."

It goes without saying that climate change is not on the same moral plane with the intentional killing of innocent human beings. It is striking nonetheless to see long-time dissident Catholic journalists—those who rail against Church teachings on sexuality—lining up single file to express their absolute allegiance to what the pope is expected to say tomorrow.

Striking indeed and telling.  Something's not right, yes?



Read more at The Stumbling Block



... ]]>
Thu, 18 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis Isn't Against Modernism, He's Against Modernity Itself; Laudato Si: Is This an Encyclical or Some Sweeping Manifesto? Loving the Poor Like Judas Did; Bill Donohue on Laudato Si: Striking How the Media All Fall in Line ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Pope Francis Isn't Against Modernism, He's Against Modernity Itself


Laudato Si: Is This an Encyclical or Some Sweeping Manifesto? 


Loving the Poor Like Judas Did


Bill Donohue on Laudato Si: Striking How the Media All Fall in Line



... ]]>
Thu, 18 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Laudato Sii: Close Your Eyes, Empty Your Heart, and Pin Down Your Brain, Oh Catholic! Time to Turn Off the Francis Show and Stay Faithful; Saint Joe Biden is a 'Laudato Sii' Expert; Al Gore Moment: When Peter Fails, Look to the Church ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Laudato Sii: Close Your Eyes, Empty Your Heart, and Pin Down Your Brain, Oh Catholic! 


Time to Turn Off the Francis Show and Stay Faithful


Saint Joe Biden is a 'Laudato Sii' Expert


Al Gore Moment: When Peter Fails, Look to the Church






... ]]>
Wed, 17 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Saint Joe Biden is a 'Laudato Sii' Expert ]]>
Saint Joe Biden is a 'Laudato Sii' Expert

By Frank Walker

                                       On the good side, yes?

The world is so confusing and there's always a new twist.  It's hard to discern truth from lies in a fog of liberal spin and manipulation.  There's one reality that always betrays the truth though.  Liberals play for the same team.

This is because liberals play to win.  Like Our Lord told the Pharisees about a house divided, there's no disorder on the bad side.

For God's sake, look at the Pope's team!

Vice President Biden issued a sweeping endorsement Tuesday of Pope Francis a day after publication of the Vatican’s draft encyclical on climate change, saying of the pontiff, “We have a good one now.”

Biden, the first White House official to comment on the leaked draft, credited the pope for helping to move public opinion on a problem that both the church and the Obama administration have sought to frame as a moral issue.

The remarks came during a speech that was Biden’s first public appearance since the funeral services for his son, Beau Biden.

“There’s a consensus growing,” Biden said, after quoting from media coverage of the leaked encyclical, the official version of which is due to be issued Thursday. “This doesn’t only have a moral component to it. It has a security component to it, as well as an economic component.”

The White House had declined Monday to respond to the leaked draft, in which the Vatican accepts the scientific consensus linking human activity to global warming and calls on the world’s wealthy nations to reduce consumption and cut back on the use of fossil fuels. The draft document chastises climate-change deniers and says the “poor and the Earth are shouting” for action on addressing the causes of warming.

Biden, addressing a White House-sponsored forum on clean-energy investment, noted the recent activism on climate change by a wide range of religious communities, “from leading evangelicals … to the pope.”

“I’m a practicing Catholic. I always joke — they say, ‘Why am I a practicing Catholic?’ I say, ‘Because of the nuns and Jesuits,’ ” Biden said. Then he added, referring to the church’s first Jesuit pope: “We have a good one now.”

Biden went on to read excerpts from an article about the leaked draft from The Washington Post, which in a verbal slip, he referred to as “The Washington Pope.”

“Post. Pope, heh,” he said, correcting the error.  “They sometimes think they’re ‘pope.’ ”

Echoing several of the draft encyclical’s themes, Biden warned that the world was rapidly approaching a “point of no return” for preventing severe impacts from climate change, and he berated members of Congress and climate-change skeptics for blocking progress on reducing greenhouse gases. At Tuesday’s forum, the White House announced several initiatives designed to encourage private investment in technology to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

“It’s not only the morally right thing to do, it’s also a smart economic play,” said Biden, describing climate change as the “single-most important” challenge facing the administration.

It's morally right to lean on businesses or to pour more confiscated money into green slush funds. The Pope is in league with thugs.

Joe Biden has spent his entire life ignoring popes and smearing Catholics.  Now he's a pope wonk, 'echoing themes' and outlining 'components' of encyclicals!



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Wed, 17 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Laudato Sii: Close Your Eyes, Empty Your Heart, and Pin Down Your Brain, Oh Catholic! ]]>
Laudato Sii: Close Your Eyes, Empty Your Heart, and Pin Down Your Brain, Oh Catholic!

By Frank Walker


                            Take your medicine. It's good for you.   

The world renowned 'conservative' Princeton Catholic, Robert George, has published a statement in advance of the Pope's Global Warming Encyclical.  It represents the sort of willful blindness of which atheists accuse Christians.

As we await the papal encyclical that will be published this week, my plea to Catholic friends is to receive it in a spirit of willingness to listen and to be taught by the Holy Father. Do not approach it by simply looking for what one agrees with or disagrees with on matters of climate science or anything else.

One should always listen unless one wants to be deaf, but to be taught one must use discernment, discretion.  One must consider the source.  This is just wisdom, reason.  One would hope to agree with the truth and disagree with falsehood.  Must we suspend those criteria for papal letters Dr. George?

The gift of the papal magisterium to us, the faithful, is just that: a gift--a charism. We are to receive it as such.

Is 'Laudato Sii' a gift from God or from Pope Francis?  Can such a 'gift' be both?  What if this particular gift were a ticking time bomb or a syringe filled with poison?  How should we receive it then?

We can, and no doubt each of us will, appreciate the fact that different teachings or aspects of the teaching contained in the document will be proposed at different levels of authority. That is virtually always true of teaching instruments of this sort. But there will be plenty of time to sort all that out. It should NOT be our first priority. Our first priority should be to open ourselves to learning what is to be learned from the Holy Father's reflections on the physical and moral ecology in the context of the Church's witness to, and proclamation of, the Gospel.

How is it that Dr. George understands what our priorities of thinking should be?  How can we approach the Global Warming Encyclical without considering its level of authority?  If, as Catholics, we are now forced to believe monsterous, destructive, and oppressive lies, we must know, yes?  Why is it that liberals always want to tell you not only what to think but how, and where you must close your eyes to reality?

We are about to hear the voice of Peter. Our first and most important task is to listen attentively and with open-hearted willingness to be taught.

The arrogance of these brainiacs is astounding.  What do they know about hearts anyway?  I've never had an open heart in my life.  It still works.

Oh most Holy Pope Francis.  I shall be attentive to your Joe Biden Theology.  I shall open my heart with willingness!  Oh teach me!

Is this truly our Faith?



Read more at The Stumbling Block







... ]]>
Wed, 17 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Time to Turn Off the Francis Show and Stay Faithful ]]>
Time to Turn Off the Francis Show and Stay Faithful

By Frank Walker


                        Don't be fooled into pretending it's real

A day ahead of Ramadan, and of the final release of the Global Warming Encyclical, we have to ask, "At what point can we recognize that the things Pope Francis writes and says are not rooted in the Catholic Faith, but are merely blanket politically correct assertions?"  Pope Francis is really more like the "Pope Francis Show" than an actual Pope, isn't he?

When I was a boy I used to laugh at the character of Archie Bunker.  He was so funny and he was in no way a hero.    Everyone on that show seemed realistic.  They always argued.  They were poor.  All In The Family was the top program for several years.

It wasn't until much later that I realized that the point of Archie and Edith wasn't our entertainment.  That show was created to confuse people.  It's goal was the transformation of our culture - and it worked.

Much more brilliant than the acting and the punch lines was the creation of the characters.  Most of the thought went into building individuals who were normal, decent, and conservative, yet foolish, selfish, undisciplined, or ignorant.  That's hard to do.  Archie and Edith were two people who would not actually exist.  That's the whole point of television really, to create a false world. I no longer find that show very funny.

It's in the same spirit I believe that the world is now treated to Pope Francis.  There is a lot of thought and preparation behind the character of Francis, and his performance is executed quite well.  The Pope Francis show may seem like a clumsy bull in a china shop but it isn't slowing, or stopping to regroup.  It doesn't think small.  It rolls up the whole world in its carpet.

Pope Francis has invited all faithful to welcome the Encyclical on the environment, entitled "Laudato si, on the care of our common home."

Toward the end of his weekly General Audience in St. Peter's Square, the Holy Father launched an appeal, saying, "Tomorrow, as you know, the encyclical on the care of the ‘common home’ that is creation will be published. This common ‘home,’" Pope Francis stated,  “is being ruined and therefore hurts everyone, especially the most poor."

Is the world our common home or our commune?  Is it being ruined?  Where?  It looks beautiful to me, except perhaps on television, in suburbia, in a mall, or in most churches.  I don't think Pope Francis is talking about ugliness though.  He's talking about gases and Liberation Theology.

"Therefore, I would like to launch an appeal to responsibility, based on the task which God gave to man in creation: ‘to cultivate and protect’ the ‘garden’ in which humanity has been placed."

"I invite all to welcome with an an open spirit this document, which places itself in the line of the Church's social doctrine."

What is an 'open spirit?'  Isn't that something a Christian should avoid?  Perhaps Pope Francis means being open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit?  I think he says that a lot, but I don't think he means it much.  Pope Francis really just wants us to be open to sets of lies.

How many times lately has the Vatican been forced to tell us this heterodox piece of propaganda is in line with the Church's social doctrine, and before it's even formally released?

What is the Church's social doctrine anyway?  Isn't it basically drawn from several somewhat conflicting encyclicals of the more recent popes?  Is that dogma?  Inasmuch as any of those letters are inconsistent with the full magisterium of the Church, they must be rejected.  Ignorance of the past is no excuse.



Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Wed, 17 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Al Gore Moment: When Peter Fails, Look to the Church ]]>
Al Gore Moment: When Peter Fails, Look to the Church

By Frank Walker

                                    Where is our Church?

St. Corbinian's Bear has the best, and most optimistic, piece of analysis on the impending 200-page rant that is 'Laudato Sii.'

We may be witnessing the high water mark of Pope Francis. The Bear has a feeling it's downhill from here.

Why would the Bear say such a ridiculous thing now, of all times? The whole world has turned its gaze toward the Man in White.

First of all, what does he bring to the party, if it is permissible to put it like that? The only so-called science will be second-hand. Nothing new here. It's not like he's an expert in the field. The people who have been impressed with the climate change pseudologia fantastica thus far will continue to believe, and those who don't, won't. How many people do you think will really say, "Oh the Pope has come out on the subject of global warming, so I'm going to change my mind! Honestly, the Bear doesn't think it will be very many.

The Bear does not expect many to actually read a 200-page encyclical. Sorry, but that's the price you pay for writing a 200-page encyclical. The juiciest parts will be cherry-picked by talking heads. The shelf-life will be mercilessly short. The Bear does not expect this to have legs.

The release of the encyclical gives those playing along with global warming an opportunity to talk about it, and even do so in moral terms, which the encyclical will certainly include. And the climate realists will also get to sound off. Again, no big change. In order to be impressed by the moral implications of a scientific theory, one must be persuaded by the science.

Catholics will not change their minds. Expect liberal Catholics to bring up Humanae Vitae inappropriately, and type the phrase "cafeteria Catholic" a lot. The Bear does not recommend engaging them because they're not really listening to your reasoned explanation.

The Bear believes it is unfortunate for a pope who is already suspect in some ways in the minds of many, to so unambiguously align himself with a goofy political fad and all its hangers on. The Bear's theory is that global warming "ticks all the right boxes" for the Pope, economically and politically. He was powerless to resist. That's about the most you can say.

Pope Francis is as at the height of his power as Pope, and perhaps at the height of his celebrity, too (if there is a difference). The Bear would say, were we talking about a secular figure, it's all downhill from here.

When's the last time you heard of Al Gore?

The liberals are expecting a re-alignment with Pope Francis.  They had already captured most of the powerful Catholic institutions and at least half the clergy, but with Francis they expect more.  They seem to think that a certain amount faithful Catholics, who have up till now been conservative, will now tumble over to their side.  After all, they have the papacy.

I don't think that is going to happen and it shouldn't.  What should happen is that faithful Catholics learn to distinguish themselves from the official Church whenever and wherever it is less than Catholic.  We hear time and again about how many Catholics are running for office, how many Catholics believe in global warming, how many want gay marriage, and how many go to Church once a month.  These people aren't Catholics.

After all the true Church militant, which exists in God's eyes, is not filled with heretics.  The Church that God sees is the real Church and we should treat it as such.  No more honor for anything but!



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Wed, 17 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Why, Pope Francis, Do You Talk So Much About Communists? ]]>
Why, Pope Francis, Do You Talk So Much About Communists?

By Frank Walker

                Nine Communists, I mean comprehensible Christians

Why does Pope Francis keep talking about Communists?  I thought there weren't any Communists any more.  Even China has a competitive market with worldwide manufacturing.  Russia has the most pro-Christian government in the world today, and Raul Castro loves Pope Francis so much he's ready to seriously become a Catholic maybe.

(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis said Mass in the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta on Tuesday morning. Following the readings of the day, the Holy Father reflected on the place of poverty in the Gospel, saying that the Gospel becomes incomprehensible if poverty is removed from it, and that it is unfair to label priests who show a pastoral concern for the poor as, “Communists”.

How is it that the work of Christ is meaningless if it's not all about the poor?  It's not. It's only 'incomprehensible' to Francis and to his "Yoda of Catholicism," Gustavo Gutierrez.  Every faithful Catholic since Christ has understood the Gospels without this hysterical poverty crusade.  That's a new thing.

Still, why re-attach the Communist label?

Francis brings this label up himself time and again in the hopes he can shoot it down.  Because it fits.  That's the problem with liberalism.  Its labels are apt so they employ word police.  Just trying saying 'Mr. Jenner,' or noting that women can be lachrymose.

In the 1st reading, which tells  of how St. Paul  organized a collection in the Church of Corinth, for the benefit of  to the Church of Jerusalem, whose members were facing great hardship. Pope Francis noted that, today as then, poverty is “a word that always embarrasses.” Many times, he said, we hear: “But this priest talks too much about poverty, this bishop speaks of poverty, this Christian, this nun talks about poverty ... aren’t they a little communist, right?” On the contrary, he warned, “Poverty is at the very center of the Gospel: if we remove poverty from the Gospel, no one would be able to understand anything about the message of Jesus.”

Straw Man: When priests or nuns speak of poverty no one calls them Communists.  They call them Communists when they promote statism, forced redistribution, and endless unjust policy goals in the name of 'social justice.'  That happens all the time, and that is Communist!

Then Pope Francis repeats one of his slogans yet again.

When faith does not reach the pockets it is not genuine.

I'm no Communist.  I only want to reach into your pocket so you can be a real Christian!



Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Laudato Sii: There's No Need to Spin Pope Francis On the Left ]]>
Laudato Sii: There's No Need to Spin Pope Francis On the Left

By Frank Walker

                    Don't let yourself be politicized, Pope Francis.


NewsMax reports Fr. Sirico's warnings about the politization of the Pope's visit to the U.S.

Pope Francis' upcoming address to Congress, during which he may warn of the dangers of global warming, could turn into a political fiasco, says Rev. Robert Sirico, president of the Acton Institute.

Sirico said Friday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV that the Pontiff's tendency to speak "off the cuff" could be exploited by the right as well as the left.

"Had I been asked, and I wasn't, on whether the Pope should address the joint session of Congress, I would've said no," Sirico said.

Why didn't they ask Fr. Sirico?

"Why? Because it lends a whole political atmosphere to whatever he's going to be saying to the Congress."

Pope Francis is, of course, all politics.  He has a political agenda and it's not good.  Politicization is the point of FrancisChurch.

"There's no way the Pope is going to come out of that chamber without people putting a political spin on it whether to the right or the left," Sirico said.

No spin will be necessary for the Leftists who interpret his speech to Congress.  The only spinning of the Pope's words will be from those 'conservatives' and orthodox who try to make Pope Francis sound faithful, responsible, respectful, or just.

"The Pope is visiting us not as the head of Vatican City State, not as a politician, not as a monarch, but as a pastor, as a bishop."

Pope Francis is a powerful shepherd.  It's just that his staff leads in the wrong direction.  He's also a brilliant politician and a monarch, ruling without limits.

But Vicar of Christ?  Perhaps, somewhat, when the opportunity presents.


Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ If the Left Should Understand 'Laudato Sii' is Propaganda, Then So Should the Right ]]>
If the Left Should Understand 'Laudato Sii' is Propaganda, Then So Should the Right

By Frank Walker

                                  A certain type of shepherd

At Catholic Vote Carson Holloway speculates:

I was about to say that people are eagerly anticipating Pope Francis’s encyclical on the environment, but maybe they are no longer needing to anticipate: According to this news report the encyclical has been leaked to an Italian newspaper.

It is interesting to think about who would leak it and why.  The Vatican condemned the leak and noted that the leaked version is not the final version.  Maybe there are things in the leaked draft that are not going to be in the final version, but that the leaker wants to put “out there,” so to speak, as having the apparent  (although not the genuine, official) support of the pope.  But this is the kind of thing about which somebody on the outside (like most of us) can only speculate.

It is also interesting to see how the news coverage leading up to the encyclical betrays–as usual–considerable misunderstanding of Catholicism by the news media.  There is an article on the Breitbart website that says that the “political left is hoping for a document that ties belief in global warming to a religious obligation.”  To be fair to the political left, the Breitbart article does not name any leftist who has openly expressed this hope.  But even if this is a total misapprehension on Breitbart’s part, it is interesting that the Breitbart writer could make a claim like this.

It isn't necessary to cite an example of leftist writers hoping for the Pope to tie global warming to a religious obligation.  That is exactly what Laudato Sii is all about, and there isn't one voice in the mainstream press who doesn't see it.

Such a claim seems to show a very limited understanding of Catholicism and the nature of the pope’s teaching authority.  The standard formulation holds that the Church has a teaching authority in relation to faith and morals.  But global warming does not pertain to faith or morals.  I don’t mean to say that there are no moral obligations in relation to global warming.  If it is happening, and if it is caused by human beings, and if something can be done to stop it, then there might be a moral obligation to takes steps to stop it.  But only “might,” because such an obligation would depend on the consequences of those steps.

It's not unfair to expect non-Catholics to assume that the Pope's words on Global Warming have some moral and religious weight.  That's because historically his words did.  To most of the post-Christian world the Catholic religion is just years of papolatry, so they are expecting 'the faithful' to simply fall in step.

In fact you will be hard-pressed to find even knowledgeable Catholics who would agree that the Pope has zero authority to preach worldwide emergency response to apocalyptic global warming propaganda.   Instead, most writers will fall over themselves to find some justifiable interpretation for the Pope's outrageous ideas.

The one who really should understand his own moral jurisdiction, and yet does not, is Pope Francis.  Western society is entirely unprepared for such a ruthless, materialistic, and un-Catholic sounding Pope.

Whether global warming is happening or not is an empirical, scientific question, which is not the sort of question over which the pope has the authority to settle.  You would think that the left would appreciate this, since they have complained in other contexts of the Church trying to insert itself into science.

This writer seems to forget that the Leftist machine doesn't operate on consistent intellectual truths.  It is about power and winning.

I am not, by the way, saying that the pope has no business speaking about global warming (as some Republican politicians have said recently).  If the pope really thinks global warming is happening and is being caused by human beings, and if he really thinks it can be stopped, then he might have an obligation to issue a warning and a call to action.  But this call would not be an act of teaching authority, it seems to me, but a kind of grave pastoral and political advice.  Every Catholic would be bound to listen respectfully to this, but would not, I think, be bound to agree with it.

There are so many 'ifs' and 'buts' in this article!

I've heard this 'listen respectfully' phrase quite a bit these days.  Aren't we bound to listen to anyone respectfully...unless of course they have left us with little to respect about themselves or their words?

It is hard to see how belief in global warming could be linked to a “religious obligation” in the way the Breitbart article suggests.

Well, that's the whole point: to make Catholics, of whom the vast majority have been convinced by the media to abandon the teachings of the Faith and line up their souls for Hell, believe yet another lie.  Why should it be so hard this time?  Pope Francis has the entire West behind him.

Heresy drives the Francis pontificate. By their fruits you shall know them.  The question is, how long will we continue to act like these schemes belong to our Faith and our Church?



Read more at The Stumbling Block






... ]]>
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ NC Reporter Conference: FrancisBishop Cupich Embraces the Dissident Machine ]]>
NC Reporter Conference: FrancisBishop Cupich Embraces the Dissident Machine

By Frank Walker


                                Looking very cardinal-esque

Here are the main speakers and topics for the upcoming National Catholic Reporter conference at Dominican University outside Chicago.

Is the National Catholic Reporter even Catholic? Their Bishop Finn didn't think so.

Theology and Liberation: Deep Voices from the Global South

Maria Pilar Aquino, S.T.D.
In the current context of dominant global capitalism, new transformative processes have emerged encompassing social and religious actors, mobilization initiatives, and theological epistemologies, strengthening together the affirmation that another world is possible. This presentation explores the contribution of the deep voices from the Global South to those processes.

Liberation theology refresher course.  Time to bone up!

U.S Catholicism and the "New" Civil Rights Movement:  Back to the Future?

Rev. Bryan Massingale, S.T.D.
The recent killings of African Americans --especially but not only unarmed Black men -- by police and other officials have launched a renewed movement to address systemic racism in our nation.  This presentation explores how this moment challenges the Catholic faith community to face the "unresolved racism" in its own life, as well as the opportunities for more engaged social reflection and justice ministry.

Ride the fake Obama racism bandwagon and contribute to crime, anti-white injustice, and destroyed black neighborhoods.

What might the new face of the church look like?

Jamie Manson
While the “Pope Francis Effect” continues to be a popular phenomenon, the level of disinterest in the institutional church continues to rise, especially among young adults. By exploring some of the new models of church that have been emerging among marginalized faith communities, this presentation will consider what forms of church may be meaningful and relevant to new generations of Catholics.

Marginalized faith communities?  This is cryptic.  Who do you think they mean?

“Take courage; get up, Jesus is calling you.”

Joan Chittister, OSB
Jesus stills calls us despite all the distractions and issues in the world and church. The way forward is rooted in the prophetic message of the gospel which demands that we seek a new way of being church.

FutureChurch: Jesus and the Gospel are calling you.  Sr. Joan knows what they want.

MASS - 4:30 p.m.

Mass for the Thirtieth Sunday in Ordinary Time with Archbishop Blase Cupich as presider will immediately follow the conference for those who wish to attend. All are welcome.

Welcome to Chicago National Schismatic Reporter from FrancisBishop Cupich! (Good Bye Bishop Finn.)



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ If Left Should Know 'Laudato Sii' is Propaganda, Then So Should Right; Laudato Sii: No Need to Spin Pope Francis On Left; Why, Pope Francis, Do You Talk So Much About Communists? NC Reporter Event: Blase Cupich Embraces Dissident Machine ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

If the Left Should Understand 'Laudato Sii' is Propaganda, Then So Should the Right


Laudato Sii: There's No Need to Spin Pope Francis On the Left


Why, Pope Francis, Do You Talk So Much About Communists?


NC Reporter Conference: FrancisBishop Cupich Embraces the Dissident Machine



... ]]>
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Fr. Rutler weighs in on gender, Bruce Jenner, and Gnosticism ]]>
Fr. Rutler weighs in on gender, Bruce Jenner, and Gnosticism

By Frank Walker

Fr. George Rutler writes:

Devotees of Gilbert and Sullivan’s Iolanthe know the lament of Strephon who was half man and half woodland sprite: “My body can creep through a keyhole, but what's the good of that when my legs are left kicking behind?” This came to mind when a picture of Bruce Jenner dressed as a woman appeared on a magazine cover. He received ESPN’s Arthur Ashe Courage Award for having “shown the courage to embrace a truth that had been hidden for years.” Sixty-five years, that is.   

Anyone who can remain awake listening to the conversations of sedentary former athletes on ESPN is perhaps unable to think clearly on any subject of significance, but the declaration that a man is a woman must astonish alert minds, including the Olympic judges who awarded him a medal under the impression he was a man.   

The longest-simmering heresy in Christian history is Gnosticism, which opposes things spiritual to things material, with the consequence that one's authentic identity is “trapped” in the body. The Christian knows that the body is a temple and not a prison. Philosophers like Immanuel Kant gave Gnosticism a sophisticated veneer, but the invariable result is always a creature like Strephon: in mind one thing and in body something else. John Milton wrote, “The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven.” Modernity paid the price for opting in favor of Gnosticism when the myth of Superman replacing God led to a world war. In 1941, Cardinal Gerlier preached in Lyons: “The world of the future will be Christian or it will be hell.”   

Our culture is succumbing to a predilection for a mental construct that seems not far from hellish. I received a questionnaire from Google asking me to check: 1) Male 2) Female or 3) Other. The Book of Revelation (22:15) speaks of pharmakos—with reference to illusions induced by drugs. Science prefers truth to pharmakos even when the truth at first may seem only an hypothesis. In 1965, the Johns Hopkins Hospital pioneered sex-change surgery. Since “gender” is a grammatical term with no proper application to biology, the term “transgenderism” had not yet been coined. Such surgery has been stopped there, and Doctor Paul R. McHugh, Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, explains that sex change is “biologically impossible,” that those who want it are mentally ill, and that those who promote “sex-reassignment surgery” are promoting mental disorder. Women make excellent women, but men do not. The imitation is bound to caricature feminine grace, as if the ideal woman were Mae West on steroids.   

Pope Francis compared the destructiveness of gender confusion and its consequent mutilation to the effects of nuclear annihilation, adding: “Let’s think also of genetic manipulation, of the manipulation of life, or of the gender theory, that does not recognize the order of creation.”   



... ]]>
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Archbishop Wester: Show God More to Certain People; Not Buying the Jubilee Year of FrancisMercy Hype; Is There a 21st Century Nazi Informing the Papal Encyclical? Catholic Climate Scandal: You Can Ride Horses But Not Bears ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Archbishop Wester: Show God More to Certain People


Not Buying the Jubilee Year of FrancisMercy Hype


Is There a 21st Century Nazi Informing the Papal Encyclical? 


Catholic Climate Scandal: You Can Ride Horses But Not Bears





... ]]>
Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Is There a 21st Century Nazi Informing the Papal Encyclical? ]]>
Is There a 21st Century Nazi Informing the Papal Encyclical?

By Frank Walker


             Looks can be deceiving, but they're usually revealing

Catholic Culture reveals:

The Holy See Press Office has confirmed that Pope Francis’s second encyclical will be entitled Laudato Si (Praised Be), a reference to St. Francis of Assisi’s Canticle of the Sun.

The press office also announced the encyclical’s subtitle (“on the care of our common home”) and the names of those who will be presenting the encyclical at its June 18 release.

Joining Cardinal Peter Turkson, the president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, will be Orthodox Archbishop John Zizioulas of Pergamon, who will represent the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and chairman of the German Advisory Council on Global Change.

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber: This is the same 'scientist' who called for a maximum world population of 1 billion.  He's said that, if global warming killed off most of the world's billions, 'in a very cynical way,' we would at least have achieved balance.  He's predicted the Earth will soon explode at current population growth rates so they must be curbed, and he's warned German Chancellor Merkel about the greater need for 'lebensraum,' a term the Nazis once used for greater room to expand the master race

These are insidious causes and frightening statements to hear from one of the very few people selected advise the Vatican, and to present an encyclical from the Vicar of Christ.



See more at


... ]]>
Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Not Buying the Jubilee Year of FrancisMercy Hype ]]>
Not Buying the Jubilee Year of FrancisMercy Hype

By Frank Walker

See how Our Francis loves old ladies, Hispanic kids on crutches, Native American girls with broken arms, and construction women!


I was immediately taken aback at the announcement of a Pope Francis Jubilee Year of Mercy.  Francis has never been about mercy.  He's about license.

I was happy to celebrate the Year 2000 jubilee because I was proud and amazed at our Church's history, but I knew this time Pope Francis was just milking the tradition, breaking ancient protocols for which he cares nothing, and abusing the faithful for his own radical schemes.

The FrancisVatican employs cream of the crop secular PR consultants.  These brainiacs toss Church devotions, traditions, papal events around like cards, commiserating for an angle to ply their new FrancisChurch agendas.  Don't look for any Jesus PR though.  Francis PR implies Jesus PR. It would be redundant.

In Rome apparently, the year 2000 jubilee was less than penitential anyway and many in Italy can see through the charade.

Eponymous Flower has the translation.

The Italian journalist Antonio Margheriti Mastino wrote on his website papalepapale: " Some time ago, a well-known, hypochondriacal Cardinal, perhaps under a permanent state of fear of suffering caused by the psychosis, had said in private that the IOR [Vatican bank]  was in  very poor condition and that it was only a matter of months until it breaks down. Was that exaggeration? Possibly. However, this is not the first time that similar financial situations have occurred and the Holy See has often reacted to it with an extraordinary anniversary. By this he meant that such a generous offer had been made, that could  avoid through repentance and conversion,  to reduce the budget deficit.  Nevertheless, Antonio Mastino continued, "it is a fact that the last remoarseful Jubilee did not earn   much and they had bet all on extensive media coverage. To those, like me,  who live in Rome and experience it live, it seemed like a kind of giant fairground, where all sense of boundaries had gone and in the general penance was the last thing on the minds of the participants which took place in all of  2000. This was so bad that Cardinal Ratzinger raised his eyes to heaven glancing at this psychedelic program of the jubilee  and resignedly said, once every 25 years, okay ... but no more ' ."

On March 15, the Italian journalist Antonio Socci asked on his site antoniosocci: "Will the Holy Year, which has just been announced be centered, as the previous, on  Jesus Christ or will it be centered  on Pope Bergoglio? ... The jubilee years have always been related  since the First in 1300 on dates that had to do with the birth and death of Jesus Christ; including the (very rare) Extraordinary anniversaries. The anniversary year in 2016 is the first anniversary in the history of the Church that is not centered around a historical event of Jesus Christ during his earthly life. Because they needed a reason to convene it in 2016, Bergoglio decided that it should take place on the 50th anniversary of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council. But what's this? For an anniversary?  There was never an anniversary year for a council. Moreover, the Second Vatican Council ended in 1965, not in 1966 and therefore they will not celebrate the 50th, but the 51st anniversary of the conclusion of the 21st Council of the Church.

Therefore, this is an excuse, which is more than any other ideological and self-referential, because the anniversary year refers to a church event, rather than on Christ. (When we look at similar events in the history of the church, you could organize a Holy Year every year.)

Self-Referential!  How can he say that?

Hey, did you see any of this great new gear you can pick up before the Philly FrancisVisit?



See more at



... ]]>
Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Archbishop Wester: Show God More to Certain People ]]>
Archbishop Wester: Show God More to Certain People

By Frank Walker

The Catholic Sun reports on the installation of new FrancisBishop, John Wester, in Santa Fe.

In his homily for his installation Mass June 4 as the new archbishop of Santa Fe, Archbishop John C. Wester recalled that Christ is represented symbolically as both the Good Shepherd and the Lamb of God.

“You and I are called to resign to ourselves in front of Our Lord Jesus as he did when he became one in us,” the archbishop said in Spanish. “As his disciples, the Lord calls us to give one and another so we can be the body of Christ, the Church.”

New Mexico is not Mexico any more but the new Archbishop and illegal amnesty front-man lovingly opened his homily in Spanish.

Switching to English, the archbishop developed these themes more deeply.

“The image of the lamb in our churches points to the Good Shepherd in today’s Gospel, who cares for the sheep so much that he laid down his life for them, becoming the lamb of sacrifice,” he said. “It is precisely as the Lamb of sacrifice that Jesus fulfills his role of shepherd, leading us through the cross to the Father, at whose right hand he sits.”

Saying he was grateful to God for calling him to New Mexico, he added, “I am eager to listen to you and to learn from you how God has been working in your midst, calling you to new and ever-deepening life.”

Archbishop Wester, 64, had headed the Salt Lake City Diocese, which encompasses the entire state of Utah, since 2007. On April 28, Pope Francis named him to succeed Archbishop Michael J. Sheehan. His installation Mass was celebrated at the Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi in Santa Fe.

What drives this impulse for liberal Church leaders to always be 'listening' and 'learning' about God from 'the people,' and what does it have to do with feathered Indian war dances at Mass?  Are we Catholics or are we bird-worshiping Native American animists?

                           FrancisMass altar server?

In his role as archbishop, Archbishop Wester also serves as the metropolitan for the Ecclesiastical Province of Santa Fe, which encompasses all of the dioceses in New Mexico and Arizona, including the Diocese of Phoenix.

Is Archbishop Wester now some Southwestern super-bishop?

“Taking my cue from Pope Francis,” he said in his homily, “I realize there will be times when I lead from the front of the flock, or from behind, but always my place is squarely in your midst, giving thanks for your willingness to receive me, and assuring you of my desire to serve you to the best of my ability.

Translation: Just like Pope Francis, whether I'm here or there, I'm in charge and I'm not going anywhere.

These imperious autocratic liberals are the only ones who feel the need to constantly remind us that they are one of us.  It's their idea of humble.

By pointing out God, who is in everything, to others, especially those who are suffering, he said, “we bring them evangelical hope; that is, we remind them that they are not alone — Christ is there with them, and in the midst of it all, and he will never, ever abandon them.”

Is God in everything?  Is He in a hamburger or a can of paint?

And, why must we point out God 'especially' to some people?  Is God prejudiced?  Does He love 'some' others more than me.  What if I'm not suffering that much?  Should I hope to get sick so that Christ can love me more?

Maybe I should try and sneak into Canada.

When Catholics encounter strangers, “our first concern is not whether they have the proper documentation; our first concern is to welcome them and show them hospitality, and know that we are one with them in Jesus Christ,” he said.

In summary: God loves illegal aliens more than you so you must serve them and do for them as I say, because now I'm 'in your midst' and in charge.

Are you moved to act by this kind of 'Christian' preaching?



... ]]>
Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Catholic Climate Scandal: You Can Ride Horses But Not Bears ]]>
Catholic Climate Scandal: You Can Ride Horses But Not Bears

By Frank Walker

                                   The truth isn't complicated

St. Corbinian's Bear has some rare but much-needed common sense for Catholics today, and also for fans of Pope Francis.

How many photos of polar bears stuck on the ice in the middle of the ocean have you seen? Here's a newsflash: polar bears live on the ice and in the sea. That's because their food -- seals -- live in the same places. It's their habitat.

Granted, polar bears are not as smart (or as good looking) as the Bear's own species, ursus arctos, but they're not stupid enough to swim so far out that they must pitifully die on some oversize ice cube. Where are we to believe these bears came from anyway? An ice floe that suddenly melted while they were off hunting for seals? Or, worse, global warming is happening so fast the ice is melting right under the bear's feet!

This is agitprop. Propaganda. In a word: fake. So we must ask ourselves, why stage fake pictures that make perfectly healthy polar bears look like marooned buffoons? Because they're lying to us big time. Climate change is a crock. Don't believe it and don't trust anyone who peddles it.

There's an American kind of wisdom that's often Protestant.  It's derived from things like scripture, grace, family tradition, self-reliance, and living close to the land.  The more faithful American Protestants today are scandalized by our shackled and politicized Church.  They see a good Pope pressured to resign and a liberal ringer appearing his place, and they are silent.  They see feckless bishops fall in line like cards.

These Protestants don't feel the need to rationalize, to minimize, or to spin like we do.  They look at us today and feel justified in their rejection of the Church's authority.

We can learn from them, not to reject the Church, but to defend it by thwarting the works of it's enemies within or without.  It's a great mistake to try and ride the Church like a horse, and to count on the gullibility of the more faithful followers of Christ.



See more at



St. Corbinean's Bear has some rare but much-needed common sense for Catholics today, and also for fans of Pope Francis.

... ]]>
Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Francis: Don't Be One of Those Medjugorje Catholics ]]>
Francis: Don't Be One of Those Medjugorje Catholics

By Frank Walker


  Insipid ethereal gnostics, full of prayers and ideas and only seeking God?

Zenit News Reports:

During his daily Mass at Casa Santa Marta this morning, Pope Francis called on Christians to contemplate what exactly is our Christian identity, and warned against ways it can be weakened, reported Vatican Radio.

It is true that we are sinners, Francis acknowledged. Yet, he added, when we fall down, God’s strength enables us to get up again and continue our journey.

While sin is part of our identity, the Holy Father said, we are sinners with faith in God “who has anointed us, put his seal upon us” and given us the Holy Spirit as a pledge in our hearts.

How many times is Pope Francis going to remind us that we are all sinners?  Some may find that encouraging.  I find it de-motivating.

So I'm a sinner but I'm anointed.  I'm a sinner but the Holy Spirit is a pledge in my heart.  It was just yesterday that the Holy Eucharist was also a pledge!  How can God be a pledge?

Christians, the Pope said, are those who remain faithful to this God-given identity as the anointed ones who let the Spirit into their hearts, rather than those who follow a particular philosophy.

So although I'm a sinner, I'm a Christian so long as I remain faithful to my 'identity' and let the Spirit into my heart.  Well that's easy.  Spirit c'mon in!  I don't have to follow a particular philosophy.  Well that's good too.  What about a particular theology?  No mention.

The Argentine Pontiff went on to warn of three ways in which this witness can be weakened.

The first applies to those who move for a concrete faith in Christ to "a kind of insipid religion of just prayers and ideas,"  a type which could be compared to the Gnostics in the ancient world.

A Gnostic was a particularly proud sort of heretic.  "Insipid" is an insulting word for people who pray and think, as if prayers and ideas were dull, dead or boring.  This is the Pope's continual straw man.

Who are these terrible people that only pray but never love, who only have ideas but never act upon them?  Hint: None of them are liberals and none of them are dissenters.

These “modern Gnostics,” Francis said, are tempted to avoid the scandal of the Cross. Through their “rather ethereal Christian spirituality," they are content to seek God, Francis said.

Second, there are those who always are searching for some “novelty” in their Christian identity since they have forgotten they have been anointed and given the guarantee of the Spirit. Francis joked that they say: “Where are the visionaries who can tell us exactly what message Our Lady will be sending at 4 o’clock this afternoon?”

Why has Medjugorje been allowed to persist?  It has always been what it is.  There must be a great deal of money involved.

The Pope is right to speak against it, but why now?  Might it perhaps have something to do with the fact that most of its followers are faithful Catholics?  Doesn't it perhaps put devotional Catholics in a bad light, and make those who are attentive to Marian visions look bad?  It certainly does, as it always has, but is the Pope saying that all visionaries have that sort of 'ethereal spirituality' that 'only seeks God?'  I hope not but it sounds like it.

It's clear that Pope Francis is willing to use Church scandals against faithful Catholics.  Look at Kansas City Bishop Finn, Bishop Livieres in Paraguay, and now Cardinal Pell.  All three of these situations came from overhyped scandals.  Medjugorje is just another opportunity to exploit weaknesses.



See more at




... ]]>
Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Vatican Climate Monster-Gurus: If We Hardly Move, Maybe They'll Let Us Live ]]>
Vatican Climate Monster-Gurus: If We Hardly Move, Maybe They'll Let Us Live

By Frank Walker


                        One of the minds behind FrancisChurch

Rorate Caeli reports:

The Vatican has just revealed in today's Bollettino the line-up of speakers for the official presentation of the "Environment Encyclical", Laudato Si, on June 18 at the New Synod Hall.

Of most of our readership would be the presence of Prof. John Schellnhuber on the panel. The father of the "two-degree target" to stave off global warming, he is the founding director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany (which is funded by the German government), Chair of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU), and a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. He was one of the experts (alongside Jeffrey Sachs) tapped by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences to write their joint statement on climate change published in April of this year, titled "Climate change and the common good: a statement of the problem and the demand for transformative solutions".A description of the final document's call for a "zero-carbon world" can be found here; the final published version seems to have been removed from the official website Pontifical Academy of Sciences, but to our knowledge has never been retracted.

A 'zero carbon world?'  Doesn't that mean we'd all have to be dead?  Who placed this anti-human German 'scientist' on the schedule?

In the words of the New York Times, Schellnhuber is "known for his aggressive stance on climate policy" and famously declared in 2009 that the "carrying capacity" of the Earth is less than one billion people.

A scientist known for his aggressive stance on climate policy made an apocalyptic prediction on Thursday.

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, said that if the buildup of greenhouse gases and its consequences pushed global temperatures 9 degrees Fahrenheit higher than today — well below the upper temperature range that scientists project could occur from global warming — Earth’s population would be devastated.

That's interesting.  It was over a billion before I got here and it's been carrying me around pretty well for years.  I hope I get to be one of the ones that stays.  You know, the good ones.



See more at



... ]]>
Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Why Do Banana Republic Bishops Hate Global Warming Critics? ]]>
Why Do Banana Republic Bishops Hate Global Warming Critics?

By Frank Walker

                           Praying you'll become happy with less.

Pedro Biretto Jimeno, Archbishop of Huancayo, Peru is another Latin American Communist in the FrancisChurch style.  If the global warming agenda isn't about crushing the free market with  unreasonable and suffocating worldwide taxes and regulations, then why do these faux-Catholic clerical agents keep acting like it's all about money?

The Archbishop of Huancayo, Peru has said that Pope Francis must prepare himself for criticism following the publication of his encyclical on the environment.

Archbishop Pedro Barreto Jimeno of Huancayo, Peru, told Catholic News Service: “(The encyclical) will have many critics, because they want to continue setting rules of the game in which money takes first place. We have to be prepared for those kinds of attacks.”

That's what Marxists see as capitalism.  It's a rigged system in which someone besides themselves is making the rules.  It's obvious to them that since some are rich and some are poor, that the system is unfair.  Of course, these communists no nothing about serving others since most of them spend their lives shuttling from speaking engagements to catered meetings in hotels.  They are often academics or bureaucrats who've spent their lives pleasing superiors rather than customers.  There seem to be quite a few of them in the South American hierarchy.

The archbishop said that there would controversy once people had read the Pope’s new encyclical because resisting the “throwaway culture” by being satisfied with less means “putting money at the service of people, instead of people serving money.”

What is money, Archbishop?  Isn't just a way for two people to help each other?  Why do you want other people's money so much that you must condemn it?  There's nowhere on earth that people are serving money.  It's a tool.  If you don't like working at McDonald's go to school?  Live with your folks, save your money and open your own burger shack.  If you think Bill Gates is using you, don't buy Windows.

Pope Francis’ upcoming encyclical on ecology and climate is expected to send a strong moral message – one message that could make some readers uncomfortable, some observers say.

“The encyclical will address the issue of inequality in the distribution of resources and topics such as the wasting of food and the irresponsible exploitation of nature and the consequences for people’s life and health,” Archbishop Pedro Barreto Jimeno said.

“Pope Francis has repeatedly stated that the environment is not only an economic or political issue, but is an anthropological and ethical matter,” he said. “How can you have wealth if it comes at the expense of the suffering and death of other people and the deterioration of the environment?”

Lies on top of lies on top of lies.  How is this man an archbishop?

The encyclical is not expected to be a theological treatise or a technical document about environmental issues, but a pastoral call to change the way people use the planet’s resources so they are sufficient not only for current needs, but for future generations, observers said.

It's not technical and it's not theological.  That's a relief.  We don't have to pay attention to any faux-science or faux-theology we might find in it.  It's only harmlessly pastoral, just like Vatican II.  So we don't need to believe anything in it, but we damn sure better follow it like sheep!

The document “will emphasise that the option for stewardship of the environment goes hand in hand with the option for the poor,” said Carmelite Father Eduardo Agosta Scarel, a climate scientist who teaches at the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina and the National University of La Plata in Buenos Aires.

If it's an option, why do I have no choice in the matter?

“What the Pope brings to this debate is the moral dimension,” said Anthony Annett, climate change and sustainable development adviser to the Earth Institute at Columbia University and to the nonprofit Religions for Peace. “His unique way of looking at the problem, which is deeply rooted in Catholic social teaching, resonates with people all across the world.”

Are popes supposed to bring moral dimensions to debates, or are they supposed to defend moral absolutes?  If these things are debatable, then why are they treated as undeniable truths despite the fact they're based upon one sided well-funded junk science?

“Whether you think climate change is a problem or not, you cannot deny that running out of fish, oil, water and other resources is a really big problem. The solution is a radical change in our concept of what makes a person happy. We need to move away from the idea that the more things we have, the happier we’ll be,” Kane said.

Check your things and redefine your happiness because we're getting ready to confiscate both in the name of Christ.



See more at



... ]]>
Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Caritas Nigeria: New Muslim Dictator Can Lead Moral Reformation ]]>
Caritas Nigeria: New Muslim Dictator Can Lead Moral Reformation

By Frank Walker

                      FrancisChurch Caritas Getting Political Again

Boko Haram-plagued Nigeria has a new Muslim President, the 'reformed dictator,' Muhammadu Buhari.  It's somewhat encouraging that the country's bishops feel he is more qualified to lead a moral reformation than the outgoing Christian President Jonathan.

President Muhammadu Buhari has been called upon to lead a moral revolution that will restore the dignity of the Nigerian nation and ensure the prudent management of the country’s resources for the common good of all Nigerians.

The admonition is contained in a statement issued by Caritas Nigeria and the Justice Development and Peace Commission (JDPC) to congratulate Buhari on his inauguration as the new President of the country.

Why do bishops always equate 'dignity' with 'resources' and 'the common good?'  If humans are more important than things, why must they rely upon them to have dignity?  Why are presidents now in charge of distributing resources, and what does it all have to do with a 'moral revolution?'

And what about Boko Haram?

The statement, signed by Fr. Evaristus Bassey, Executive Secretary of the two bodies noted that, “although infrastructural development is important, what is more important is to rebuild our national psyche and broken trust in government through prudent management, transparency and accountability and thereby restore the confidence of ordinary Nigerians in government,” the statement read.

While appreciating the inaugural speech of the President which promised to address the challenges of the country, Fr. Bassey urged the President to “rescue the ordinary Nigerian from the emperors called Governors, who usually take it as their pride of place to plunder at will the resources meant for the common good of all,” he said.

So the imperious governors during the previous administration plundered all the resources meant for the common good?  I thought Buhari was a 'reformed dictator.'  Is he now supposed to tighten his grip over all the Nigerian governors?

The Caritas Nigeria head notes that although the governors of various Nigerian states cannot be prosecuted while in office because of their immunity, they should be constantly investigated by the security services, “and the outcome (of investigations) used as basis for a ‘regular chat’ between the President and the Governors,” Fr. Bassey said. The statement further calls upon the President to act in a proactive manner and to constantly remind the state governors to direct the resources of states to the common good.

So the gentle Catholic Caritas umbrella charity is calling for the newly reformed dictator to constantly investigate Nigerian governors, who are unfortunately immune from prosecution while in office,  until they care much more about the common good.

They sound fairly cozy and onboard with the new Muslim ex-dictator.  I wonder how much Caritas liked the old Christian?



See more at






... ]]>
Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Why Do Banana Republic Bishops Hate Global Warming Critics? Vatican Climate Monster-Gurus: If We Hardly Move, Maybe They'll Let Us Live; Francis: Don't Be a Medjugorje Catholic; Caritas Nigeria: New Muslim Dictator Can Lead Moral Reformation ]]>
PewSitter NewsBytes

By Frank Walker

Why Do Banana Republic Bishops Hate Global Warming Critics? 


Vatican Climate Monster-Gurus: If We Hardly Move, Maybe They'll Let Us Live


Francis: Don't Be One of Those Medjugorje Catholics


Caritas Nigeria: New Muslim Dictator Can Lead Moral Reformation



... ]]>
Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ It's Good They Hold USCCB Meetings in Hotels ]]>
It's Good They Hold USCCB Meetings in Hotels

By Frank Walker

                            Not so much about Jesus or souls


St. Louis Public Radio has a report on the recent U.S. Bishops' Meeting entitled, "Earthly and heavenly concerns dominate meeting of U.S. Catholic bishops in St. Louis."

My only question is, What's so heavenly about it?

The formal 2015 spring General Assembly of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops begins its hard work in committees, much like Congress does. On Monday at the Hyatt Regency downtown, some three dozen committees and sub-committees began candid discussions after hearing the views and research of experts and theologians. No sessions are open to the public; the Wednesday day-long and Thursday morning sessions will be open to news reporters.

Why candid discussions? Why not just hedge and obfuscate?  Gleaning through the report I found the following agenda topics:

  • Plans for Pope Francis’ visit to his city in September for the long-planned World Meeting of Families
  • The Synod on the Family
  • How botanical research gardens can work with development agencies
  • Partnerships that would educate people in the Third World about heating alternatives to the traditional, disastrous cutting and burning of their forests
  • Awakening nations to the devastating toll poverty-powered immigration has on children and family life
  • Plans to make the infamous "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" voter guide much more liberal and FrancisChurch-like
  • Sex abuse reporting
  • New translation of the Liturgy of the Hours
  • Chinese lanterns

Only two of these bulleted items touch upon prayer, faith or sacraments.  These are the two that are in the most peril.  Wait 'till we see what happens to that voter guide!



Read more at The Stumbling Block










... ]]>
Tue, 09 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Church Up To No Good at the UN ]]>
Church Up To No Good at the UN

By Frank Walker


                             Firmly placed within a den of thieves

That Vatican envoy to the UN, Archbishop Silvano Tomasi has repeated a mantra which has become so common in the Church today that you never read a whiff of criticism about it, despite the fact that it's a hysterical Marxist rant.

The Google translation reveals:

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the Vatican's permanent representative to the UN in Geneva, insisted during the annual International Labour Conference to better protect workers. At the same time he praised SMEs. "In 2014 was 1% of the world 48% of the wealth in the world," said Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, who believes that it has become practically impossible to unemployment worldwide still below the level before the financial crisis of 2008 back penetrate. According to Tomasi we can no longer put our trust in the laws of the market to solve problems. "Combating global poverty requires a special effort and forces of governments, workers, labor organizations, civil society and all the private partners." That should contribute according to Archbishop Tomasi to better protection of workers against unemployment and illness. Tomasi still urged for support to SMEs because they "are crucial to the economic recovery."

What is the 'law of the market' anyway?  Isn't it just one man paying his own dollar to someone offering a dollar's worth of something in return?  If that's a 'law' then whose law is it?

Among that group of wonderful contributors to this new non-market solution I've noticed only one actually pays anything.  Those are the 'private partners.'  These are the business leaders who hope to be first in line to back-stab their competitors in the hopes they'll receive some sort of government reward or relief.  Every other party to the good archbishop's poverty saving effort is a payee, as is the Church, unfortunately.

A pair of new prescription glasses costs hundreds of dollars after you pay the monthly insurance premiums.  Why?  They're not iPhones.  It's because the process is so tied up with medical, insurance, and workplace regulatory schemes that we have no choice but to pay that.

Prescription glasses are actually worth about thirty dollars, and there are plenty of people who would be happy and willing to provide them at that price, but they aren't permitted.  There are just so many do-gooders that target you evil market people and  your dollars for love of the poor, that we must pay, pay, and pay.

I've read plenty of Jesus' parables about kings, and farmers, and tax collectors; about fishermen, and shepherds.  I've never read anything against property or in praise of scams.

What did Archbishop Tomasi do for lunch today?



Read more at The Stumbling Block





... ]]>
Tue, 09 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Unfaithful Tea Party Dissident, Our Francis is Not Political ]]>
Unfaithful Tea Party Dissident, Our Francis is Not Political

By Frank Walker


                               Yucking it up for a better world


For the fifth time in his two-year papacy Pope Francis has met with the President of Argentina.  This Latin American socialist is a woman whose enemies mysteriously die before they can testify against her, but we are supposed to believe that she and Pope Francis have nothing political to discuss.

Are they talking about Jesus for an hour and a half?

The Vatican's protocol officer is denying reports that a meeting between Pope Francis and Argentina's president had a political tone.

Guillermo Karcher told local Rosario 3 radio on Monday that the criticism against Francis was "disrespectful." He said Sunday's meeting of the Argentine-born pope with President Cristina Fernandez was far from political.

One of the things I find most upsetting about Pope Francis is this idea that his politicized and twisted understanding of Christian doctrine is not ideological, nor is it political.  The Communists stole our flag, he boldly proclaims, as if that thieving and murderous ideology were just a misnamed Christianity with an atheistic tinge.

The Pope is entirely ideological himself, if the word means opting for power politics over truth.  Francis doesn't sound very Catholic.  He doesn't act very faithful.  He is the least pope-like pope perhaps ever.  The only thing he truly can be said to be is political, a sort of Leftist political agitator in the role of Pope.

Yet we are supposed to all agree that all his activism is just the work of God.  He even warns the world's bishops not be to exactly the way he constantly is, as if He were the only one anointed to promote a thousand destructive and unjust causes in the name of Christ.

That's why it's so important to his proponents in the Obama-Pelosi-Castro circles and in the world-wide media that the Pope's words be given the air of sanctity, that they be treated as something 'far from political.'  Meanwhile the Vatican is packed with leftist hacks posing as bishops who apologize for the UN, insult faithful Catholics, and can scarcely utter a propagandist's prayer.  Global Warming is now Catholic doctrine and there is no room for dissent.  As the Vatican's Margaret Archer asserts, "I am appointed by the Pope" and "that leaves you out in the cold!"

It seems Fernandez does have something to promote in meeting with the Pope at this time.

Fernandez is now in her second term and is not running in October elections because a third consecutive mandate is not allowed. But she remains active in the campaign, and is backing some candidates.

Opposition lawmaker Elisa Carrio was among those criticizing the meeting.

Sounds like Pope Francis has landed once again squarely on the wrong side of that political game.  Why do all these people-first people never side with the people?

That is not something for humble Catholic lay people to determine.  It's enough that we're not disrespectful, that we don't criticize the Pope, or dare to call his FrancisChurch political.



Read more at The Stumbling Block




... ]]>
Tue, 09 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT
<![CDATA[ Is Corpus Christi Just Some Poverty Thing? ]]>
Is Corpus Christi Just Some Poverty Thing?

By Frank Walker

                                          Corpus Christi?

La Stampa reports on last week's Angelus address given by Pope Francis where he continued to incessantly impute some supra-doctrine about the poor.

Pope Francis has poignantly said that Christians have no right to refuse help to those who need it, saying that to partake in the commemoration of Christ's death is to see him in the poor and suffering and to welcome them and offer them help.

First of all the Pope is not poignant.  Secondly, the Eucharist is not a commemoration of Christ's death.  It is Christ himself.  At Mass it is being present at His own sacrifice.  Third, and most importantly, the Blessed Sacrament is not about seeing Christ in the poor and suffering, welcoming them, or offering them help.  That is something else entirely.

Speaking during his weekly Angelus address in St. Peter's Square Sunday, the pope reflected on the meaning of the Catholic feast day celebrated this week, that of The Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ.

Known commonly by its Latin name of Corpus Christi, the feast commemorates Christ's actions at the Last Supper, when he is said to have instituted the Eucharist by first holding a piece of bread and saying: "Take this, this is my body."

Francis applied wide ranging social consequences to that action on Friday, saying those who participate in the Eucharist enter into a communion that requires them to give care for all.

"When we take and eat this bread, we become associated with the life of Jesus, we enter into communion with Him," said the pontiff. "We commit ourselves to realize the communion between us, to transform our life into a gift, overall to the most poor."

"Today's feast evokes this integral message and pushes us to welcome the intimate invitation to conversion and to service, to love and to forgive," the pope continued. "It stimulates us to become, with our lives, imitators of that which we celebrate in the liturgy."

"The Christ who feeds us in the consecrated species of bread and wine is the same that we meet in daily occurrences," said Francis. "It is the poor person who pulls our hand, it is the suffering person that implores our help, it is the brother that asks our availability and waits for our welcome."

This kind of 1970's propaganda is quite the blast from the past.  Why is it that liberals always go back to their tired old playbook?  Who decided that we would now be re-treated to the effeminate, suffocating nightmare that was hippie Catholicism?

When we receive Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament we do not commit ourselves to transform our life into a gift overall to the most poor.  Jesus in the Eucharist is not the people we meet in daily occurrences.  He is not the one who pulls our hand, implores our help or waits for our welcome.  He is Jesus.

Jesus tells us when we help the least of His brothers, we do it for Him, because he loves them so much.  He appreciates our love to them and expects it, but they are not actually Him.  If they are in states of grace Jesus lives within them, but nevertheless Jesus is Jesus and people are people, even in states of grace.

Why must the Pope twist and minimize the Blessed Sacrament, who is God Himself, by turning it all into one big worldly poverty program?  Can't he just defend the faith and teach it?  Isn't that worth doing on it's own?

If you're like many people you spend most of your time helping others.  But is that our faith?  Isn't it so much more?


Read more at The Stumbling Block






... ]]>
Tue, 09 Jun 2015 00:00:00 GMT