Pewsitter News http://www.pewsitter.com/ Pewsitter News en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:24:48 GMT Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:24:48 GMT http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss none info2@pewsitter.com info2@pewsitter.com <![CDATA[ EPA to Pope Francis: Deliver the Credibility. We Know You Can! ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_195130.php
EPA to Pope Francis: Deliver the Credibility. We Know You Can!



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Why is it that both the Vatican and the Obama White House feel they can be so open and  candid about their close collaboration? Is the Administration part of the Catholic Church or is the Church a mouthpiece for the Administration... or is Communism just a modern word for the Gospel like Pope Francis says? Why do we keep hearing the same ugly messages wherever we look?

In a bid to bolster the Obama administration's "moral" case for combating climate change, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency will meet senior Vatican officials Friday to enlist papal support for its policies.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said Pope Francis, who has become a vocal climate advocate since his 2013 election, can be an ally for President Barack Obama's Climate Action Plan.

If ever there was a case that needed some papal bolstering it’s global warming. I wonder how much Jesus the Pope can blow in to that urgent moral crisis. Deliver the Jesus, Pope Francis! Obama knows you can.

"As one of the world's most respected and influential leaders, Pope Francis, and those who advise him, will play a crucial part in advancing climate change [action] domestically and overseas,'' McCarthy, a Roman Catholic, said in an e-mail.

To counter that, McCarthy has done extensive public outreach to win support for EPA proposals, touting their economic and public health benefits. She said the pope could help make her case.

"Focusing our attention on the communities that need it most is at the core of EPA's mission to protect public health and the environment, and there is no voice more credible than the church's to speak to our moral obligation as stewards of our planet,'' McCarthy said.

Wow.  There is ‘no voice more credible’ than the Catholic Church! 

Why is the most left-wing American president in history assigning ultimate moral authority to the Roman Catholic Church?  Is this a new country?  Is there going to be a chapel and confessional next to every 7-Eleven soon?  Why do I feel like my Faith has been turned into a hellish infomercial?

If having every agency, media outlet, and college in the world in your pocket doesn't help you have credibility why give up?  Lord knows there's always more you can do. 

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Thu, 29 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/195130/
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis, Fathers Aren't the Problem ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_195039.php
Pope Francis, Fathers Aren't the Problem



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

After Cardinal Burke’s wise words on the feminization of Mass and the vocation-killing presence of altar girls drew a sea of contempt from every corner of the world, Church-Feminism is bubbling up all over.

The Pope offers his own ‘correction’ by warning against absent fathers, but in the process he paints a grim picture of men.

“Father” is a word known by all – a universal word. It indicates a fundamental relationship whose reality is as ancient as man’s history. Today, however, we have come to the point of affirming that ours is a “fatherless society.” In other words, the figure of the father, particularly in our Western culture, is symbolically absent, vanished, removed. Initially it was perceived as a liberation: liberation from the father-master, from the father as a representative of the law imposed from outside, from the father as censor of the happiness of the children and obstacle to the emancipation and autonomy of young people. In fact, at times  authoritarianism reigned in some homes, in certain cases, in fact, it was oppressive,” parents that treated their children as servants, not respecting the personal needs of their growth; fathers who did not help them to undertake their path with freedom, but it is not easy to educate a child with freedom. Fathers that do not help them to assume their responsibilities to build their future and that of society: this is certainly not a good attitude.

So according to the Pope, the world rejected patriarchy because of the overbearing and selfish domination of oppressive fathers, who just used their children and gave them no freedom. Today, according to Pope Francis, that type of man has been replaced by a father who is equally cruel but in a different way. He gives complete freedom because he doesn’t care at all. He’s all about work and his own fulfillment.

However, as it often happens, we pass from one extreme to another. The problem of our days does not seem to be so much the invasive presence of fathers, but rather their absence, their hiding. Fathers sometimes are so concentrated on themselves and on their work, and at times on their own individual fulfilment, that they even forget the family. And they leave the little ones and young people alone. Already as Bishop in Buenos Aires, I perceived the sense of orphan-hood that youth live today. And I often asked the fathers if they played with their children. And the answer was bad, eh! In the majority of cases {they said]: “But I can’t because I have so much work …” And the father was absent from that child who was growing up. And he did not play with him, he did not spend time with him. Now, in this common course of reflection on the family, I would like to say to all the Christian communities that we must be more attentive: the absence of the paternal figure in the life of little ones and young people produces gaps and wounds which can also be very grave. And, in fact, the deviances of children and of adolescents can in good part be traced to this absence, to the lack of examples and of authoritative guides in their daily life – to the lack of closeness, to the lack of love on the part of fathers. The sense of orphan-hood that so many young people live is deeper than we think.

They are orphans, but within the family, because the fathers are often absent, also physically, from home but above all because, when they are home, they do not behave as fathers, they do not have a dialogue with their children. They do not fulfil their educational task; they do not give to their children – with their example accompanied by words --, those principles, those values, those rules of life that they need, just as much as they need bread. The educational quality of the paternal presence is all the more necessary the more the father is constrained by work to be far from home. At times it seems that fathers do not know well what place to occupy in the family and how to educate the children. And then, in doubt, they abstain, they withdraw and neglect their responsibility, perhaps taking refuge in an improbable relation “on par” with the children. However, it is true that you must be a companion to your child but without forgetting that you are the father. However, if you only behave as a companion on a par with your child, you will not do the child any good.

If there is an epidemic of absenteeism and careless inattentiveness in families, it’s a mistake to pin it only on fathers. Earners are under intense time constraints today. Employers care little about family time demands. Careerism may have nothing to do with it. Mothers work too and children are forced into long school hours, daycare, sports, and endless structured events.

Even when mothers stay home they become chauffeurs, unable to support a peaceful functioning home or neighborhood. With small families, weak communities, few extended family, and the pull of society; they can feel irresponsible and unfulfilled.

Finally in the absence of a true Catholic spiritual life, any free time that men, women, or children have is wasted in empty individualized techno-diversions. Houses become dormitories and families become groups of single tenants. No-one prays.

Modern people suffer from great interior stress because they have little to hold their families together. Father authority is restricted. Mother devotion is often conditional. If things aren’t going along smoothly families explode and the state steps in. Children can have little hope for more than individualized futures.

The authoritarianism of fathers didn’t cause this situation. The feminist project divided women from men, tempting them to look down on the roles of wives and mothers and to have contempt for men. Then the world, having conquered both men and women, moved in.

It’s much more than a problem of absent fathers. It’s an absence of Grace.

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 28 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/195039/
<![CDATA[ Message to World: Learn From the Papal Embrace ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_195040.php
Message to World: Learn From the Papal Embrace



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


The Eponymous Flower reports on the new urgent calls for gay lifestyle accommodations from some European Churches that had long defended the Faith despite Protestant capitulations all around. Recent formulaic papal gay 'events' may have something to do with these changes.

On January 24, Pope Francis has received a Spaniard in audience, who now presents herself  as a man through a sex change.   According to information which had been released she was with her ​​girlfriend in Seville shopping, when she was called by the Pope. That was on December 20, not as initially reported on Christmas Eve. In this call, the Pope offered the invitation to the Vatican and was already predicting the date and time.  This was already the second phone call from the Pope. The first call was made ​​on December 8, Feast of the Immaculate Conception, and was "a first contact," according to Avvenire , the newspaper of the Italian bishops' conference reported today.

If your body doesn’t feel like you want it to, change it. If the Church doesn’t make you feel like you want it to, change it.

In the guesthouse Santa Marta the Pope had embraced the Spaniard, who now calls herself   Diego. Likewise, the friend whom "Diego" brought in the Vatican. The transsexual told the Pope his "dramatic personal and religious thing," said Avvenire . The 48 year-old Spaniard today had undergone gender reassignment at 40 because she felt like a man. Since then they don't "feel" they are understood any longer in their home parish.

The transexual wants, with the girlfriend presented to the Pope - always by his own admission - to "start a family". He claims the Pope said that "he was pleased". La Repubblica therefore headlined yesterday: "Pope Francis receives Spanish Transsexual in the Vatican with His Fiancée."

The Pope telling such a couple they should have a family: Impossible, yes?

Then why is it reported by people for whom the Pope was kind enough to grant audience, who claim to have been moved by the Pope? If they are so grateful why do they betray him with their story? Is the Pope a sucker?

There will be no clarification or justification from the Vatican. They’ll leave the story out there as it is.  Just like they have with so many reports of scandalous heresy surrounding Pope Francis, they will leave it lie where they placed it.

Writer Giuseppe Nardi sees a planned familiar tactic here which the Pope has used for some time. Without formally endorsing his scandalous accommodation, he sends an example to the world’s parishes on what he expects to be done.

The procedure is not new. Also the other foci of Pope promotes a gradual de facto change of climate without explicitly touching the Church's teaching. Some Catholic observers try the approach to the gay agenda to be interpreted only as an apparent approach. It's presented as a test by the Pope to take the Church out of the public line of fire.  Secretum meum mihi, however, speaks of a "move" with which Francis only wants  to make it only less vulnerable. He's  known about the resistors, who would cause a change in the expressed teaching. He had developed his own "method", "around" these resistors. Although in real life instead, it provides basic perceptual changes in front of everyone, while critics may be unpleasantly forced to provide written proof, where the Pope had actually changed the doctrine. It's a  billing system which can not be provided because the Pope does not take care of the writing. A "sleight of hand," says the Argentine website Traditio Catholica. The two phone calls in which transsexuals are an indication of a conscious "planned signal" by the Pope for considerable media attention, broad impact, and yet everything is done informally.

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 28 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/195040/
<![CDATA[ Message to World: Learn From the Papal Embrace; Pope Francis, Fathers Aren't the Problem; Strict Breastfeeding Policy Makes You Un-Catholic? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_195072.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Message to World: Learn From the Papal Embrace

 

Pope Francis, Fathers Aren't the Problem

 

Strict Breastfeeding Policy Makes You Un-Catholic?

 

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 28 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/195072/
<![CDATA[ Strict Breastfeeding Policy Makes You Un-Catholic? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_195071.php
Strict Breastfeeding Policy Makes You Un-Catholic?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


A mother writes Aleteia advice columnist, Zoe Romanowski, about breastfeeding during Mass.

Dear Zoe,  I am the mother of four young children and my baby is almost 14 months. We are attending a new parish at at Mass recently, I was discreetly nursing my son and noticed that a few people around me gave me dirty looks. I don’t want to start escaping to the bathroom in the basement every time my child wants to nurse, but I also don’t want to be a distraction. Am I right to ignore the scowls and go on nursing at Mass?  Sincerely,  Nursing Nellie

****

Zoe replies:

I’m a big fan of breastfeeding, since it’s the healthiest option for a child and a natural way to foster attachment and bonding. For these reasons and more, I support efforts to normalize breastfeeding and to make it easier for mothers to nurse. This includes educating the public about how to be more sensitive to the needs of mothers and children. Which includes people in our churches and communities. 

You say you were "discreetly" nursing your son at Mass, which I presume means you tried not to make it obvious (and you may have even covered up—which some mothers do when breastfeeding in public). If this is the case, I wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep over it. With four young kids in tow, breastfeeding is probably the least of your worries when it comes to distracting behaviors at Mass. I would think fellow parishioners would be far happier with a nursing baby than one who’s crying out of hunger or distress. (And you might point that out if someone ever brings it up.)

Zoe doesn’t mention the other option of walking out and breastfeeding in a less open spot. This would require letting your husband keep an eye on the other kids at Mass for a while, but it’s an option.

If the dirty looks continue, you might consider speaking to your priest. When I once complained about lack of friendliness towards families at my own parish, the pastor made a point to mention it from the pulpit. Of course, you could get a priest who thinks you should head to the bathroom in the basement. In that case, shake the dust from your feet and find a new spiritual home. It's important to be considerate of others, but breastfeeding is a natural and normal parenting choice—do what's best for your child and your family. 

The problems people have with breastfeeding in public aren’t due to a lack of friendliness, but to the demands of modesty. Older people in particular seem to take issue with it. That is probably because they didn’t do that when they were young. It may have been considered rude back then.

It may not actually be rude, but to reject a parish and it’s pastor for something so petty is un-Catholic and smacks of feminist contempt. When there are so few faithful parishes around, why spurn one just because the pastor might want you to keep your breasts out of Mass.

 

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 28 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/195071/
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch Annulments Fast and Cheap! ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194923.php
FrancisChurch Annulments Fast and Cheap!



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

“Secure and Prompt,” that’s the Pope’s new annulment ‘reform’ motto. A declaration of nullity is made when a Church tribunal carefully figures out whether you are actually married.   It’s a tedious and ancient legal process which, based on the skyrocketing numbers granted over the past fifty years, is uniformly abused. Some dioceses grant every single annulment requested.

But it’s not a Catholic divorce, no! It’s just a way to determine whether one of the ‘parties’ was not faithful enough, ‘mature’ enough, or open enough to life to know what they were doing.  So it seems reasonable that Pope Francis keeps asking, “Why should this take so long and be so expensive?”  People who abandon their spouses and give up on their marriages are rarely very faithful, mature or open to life, are they? These should be slam dunks. Secure and prompt, I say.

In a speech delivered on Saturday to participants in a conference on how to handle causes of nullity, Pope Francis encouraged a marriage process that is both sure of its judgements and prompt.

The three-day conference is sponsored by the Pontifical Gregorian University, and marks the 10th anniversary of Dignitas connubii, an instruction of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts to tribunals on handling causes of the nullity of marriage.

Pope Francis praised the document in his Jan. 24 address as “a modest but useful handbook that really takes the ministers of the tribunals by the hand toward the implementation of a process that is both secure and prompt.”

“A secure process because it indicates and explains with clarity the goal of the process itself, namely moral certainty: this requires that any prudent, positive doubt of error be totally excluded, even if the mere possibility of the contrary is not excluded. A prompt process because – as common experience teaches – he who knows the path to follow travels more quickly.”

Everybody knows that when you know what you’re doing you get there faster. I agree with that common sense. 

I like McDonalds. I don’t go there too often but you can get a double-cheeseburger for $1.50 or a breakfast burrito for a dollar. If you scrutinize the menu you’ll find that McDonalds is pretty good and it’s also cheap.  Like Pope Francis says, they know where they're going.

On the other hand I had a mechanic once who was not like McDonalds.  He usually disappointed me.  While you sat in his waiting room you could ponder his shop motto, which said:

You can have your car repaired two of the following three ways:

If you want it good and cheap, it won’t be fast.

If you want it good and fast, it won’t be cheap.

If you want it fast and cheap, it won’t be good.

In a way that motto made perfect sense, especially if you were interested in pleasing customers by lowering their expectations.

I believe in the Pope’s can-do attitude and I’ll take it any day over that defeatist rip-off mechanic, but I don’t think slogans are enough to make solid reductions in Total Annulment Cycle Time while maintaining Six Sigma Quality.

In short, I’ll get a cheeseburger from McDonalds once in a while, but I wouldn’t put my ‘faith’ in one of these new FrancisChurch annulments they’re planning.

Secure and Prompt? Stay Married. Go to Heaven.

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194923/
<![CDATA[ Synod Cardinal Baldisseri for SCOTUS ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194924.php
Synod Cardinal Baldisseri for SCOTUS!



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Lifesite reports on the astounding presentation made by Synod Boss Cardinal Baldisseri to a group of unfortunate Catholic pro-life groups.

An international conference, organised by the Pontifical Council for the Family from 22-24 January, was addressed by Cardinal Baldisseri, organiser of the upcoming Synod on the Family. The expressed purpose of the conference was to provide opportunity for around 80 lay groups to assist the PCF provide input into the synod to be held in October 2015.

Baldisseri defended the right of Walter Cardinal Kasper to assert that divorced persons living in unions not recognised by the Church should be permitted to receive Holy Communion. Baldisseri, in response to a concerned pro-family advocate, told delegates that we should not be “shocked” by theologians contradicting Church teaching.  The Cardinal said that dogmas can evolve and that there would be no point holding a Synod if we were simply to repeat what had always been said. He also suggested that just because a particular understanding was held 2,000 years ago does not mean that it cannot be challenged.

Is this Baldisseri not the sort of radical plant that has hijacked our Church in the Francis Era? Why is he permitted to be called Cardinal and wear the suit? When will these fiends be ejected?

One of the groups represented commented:

Patrick Buckley, international envoy for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, commented: “The Church teaching on the indissolubility of marriage is founded on the words of Jesus Christ. These words may have been spoken 2,000 years ago but for Catholics they remain nothing other than the unchanging commands of God.”

Well-put from Church Militant to Church Morbid.

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194924/
<![CDATA[ Confirming Doctrine is the Essence of Mercy ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194925.php
Confirming Doctrine is the Essence of Mercy



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


The great Tantumblogo of Dallas delivers a potent antidote to the hurricane of FrancisChurch hype which threatens to finally capsize the Barq.

In light of recent prominent events and statements, I thought I would offer the following.  The reason the Church has Doctrine and Dogmas is not just for the sake of having a rigid set of beliefs to enforce some kind of Catholic legal code.  The Doctrines were developed because a) they were revealed directly by God in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, b) because they they can be inferred by human reason through the same Scripture and Tradition over time, and c) because 2000 years of experience has confirmed the wisdom of that Doctrine as setting necessary limits on human behavior and directing human activities towards its ultimate goal, salvation.

Recently, we have been told that Church law “must be oriented toward salvation and must not degenerate into splitting hairs.”  Taken in context with many other similar statements made by the progressive wing of the Church of late, this appears to emanate from a mindset that sees Doctrine in constant conflict with wise pastoral care.  This is a non sequitur, and reveals a terrifying lack of understanding of the glorious cohesiveness of Catholic Doctrine, its great applicability to human life, and its plain truthfulness as being the best if not only guide for the achieving of eternal salvation.

Doctrine is simply truth or as Pope Francis likes to say, “Reality over ideas.” What good does it do to honor and elevate lies and sins; turning off lights so people stumble and fall?   Instead, you shine the light. You let it burn and you proselytize.

This enormous loss of the Truth – and it is incredible that it is LAYPEOPLE who are the loudest and most consistent in saying this in the Church today – is of the utmost importance because ALL the orthodox guidance we receive from the entire Magisterium and Tradition of the Church (including all those Saints, Doctors, priests, bishops, religious, etc, who have died in the Church) says that the Church proposes many things for belief with assent of faith, and that failure to accept and practice even one of them means the rejection of the entire Faith and the placing oneself outside the community of the faithful. That is to say, one is no longer in the Church, in such a circumstance.  And salvation for those outside the Church, especially for those who formally and deliberately reject core Church beliefs, is all but impossible, according to those same Saints, Doctors, and others.

So debating points of Doctrine is not about hair-splitting. It is about discussing and applying matters of the utmost consequence for souls.  But it’s more than that.  Doctrine, and even clear but firm “enforcement” of it, is the truly charitable and merciful way to present the Faith to souls.  Casting doubts, spreading errors, and undermining doctrinal clarity in the name of “pastoral care” is a diabolical malformation of the Faith. It is in fact the representation of a false religion of man, with pleasing fallen man as its highest end, rather than being the true Faith, which seeks to uplift and convert man from his fallenness to an exalted, supernatural state.

So confirming your brethren carefully in the Church’s doctrine is actually the essence of love and mercy… and conveniently this is also the Time of Mercy.

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194925/
<![CDATA[ FrancisChurch Annulments Fast and Cheap! Synod Cardinal Baldisseri for SCOTUS; Confirming Doctrine is the Essence of Mercy; Militant Gay Republican Set To Become Georgetown Student Body President ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194976.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


FrancisChurch Annulments Fast and Cheap!

 

Synod Cardinal Baldisseri for SCOTUS

 

Militant Gay Republican Set To Become Georgetown Student Body President

 

Confirming Doctrine is the Essence of Mercy

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194976/
<![CDATA[ Militant Gay Republican Set To Become Georgetown Student Body President ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194872.php
Militant Gay Republican Set To Become Georgetown Student Body President



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

 

We received a note this weekend from a faithful Georgetown student who’s fighting to recover some remnant Catholic identity at the prestigious and notorious Jesuit institution.  A militant homosexual activist/Catholic/Republican is close to being voted student body president.  Not only does front-runner, Tim Rosenberger, claim to support conservative causes, he also preaches some sort of drag-queen Christianity.

Student ‘Jane Hoya’ wrote PewSitter hoping that readers might help her spread the word about Rosenberger and his much better alternative - real Catholic, Abbey McNaughton.

Georgetown students have a stark choice in their upcoming student government election to affirm a faithful Catholic foundation for their University or to bend themselves to the whims of modernity. While two candidates in this race are purportedly invested in Catholic teaching, only one has shown a consistent and principled dedication to the teachings of the Church.

Perhaps duped by party affiliations, some Georgetown conservatives have been seen supporting a militant homosexual activist in the upcoming race. This student, in addition to consorting with a “priest” who performs as a drag queen, is known to challenge the traditional family and advocate strongly for homosexual “marriage.” He even attempted to get Georgetown’s College Republicans to support the redefinition of marriage. While not actively undermining the traditional family and promoting greater access for H*yas for Choice, this candidate works at a gay dance club with a proudly self-identified pornographer, Dougie Meyer.

Opposite this candidate is a faithful Catholic who is committed to protecting Georgetown’s legacy as the oldest Catholic university in America. Abbey McNaughton is a proud Catholic and she and her campaign vigorously support the traditional family and pro-life initiatives like the Cardinal O’Connor conference. One need only look at the affiliations of her core campaign staff to see the team’s dedication to traditional Catholic values. Many of the staffers are proud members of the Catholic Daughters or the Knights of Columbus. Virtually all of the most senior male members of her team are members of the faithful 2nd Society of Stewards. This group is known to promote Georgetown’s allegiance to traditional Catholic belief and thought and has been instrumental in planning Abbey’s campaign.

Georgetown students have a decision to make in the coming weeks about the future of their University. For two long we have flirted with the forces of modernism and relativism. We must now bring our school back to tradition and the Church.

 

Gay, Catholic, Republican, and possibly head of student government at a Jesuit College: All things to all people, I wonder if he’s ‘pro-life’ too?

 

 

 

... ]]>
Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194872/
<![CDATA[ Faithful Catholic Media, Now Is No Time To Go Wobbly ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194635.php
Faithful Catholic Media, Now Is No Time To Go Wobbly



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

 

D.C. McAllister takes her colleague Rachel Lu to task for the defeatist advice she gives Catholics who refuse to be blown back by the Pope Francis ‘event.’  Lu thinks that it would divide the Catholic conservative base to openly note that Francis talks like a practiced Liberation Theologist and a Pentecostal preacher with a devotion to Mary. We can only lose.

The fact is that faithful Catholics have been for the most part floored and dumbstruck by a Pope who can even prompt the White House to correct him from his right. What was once a clear-eyed effective Catholic conservative media have become a collection of spinning plates, saying little and going nowhere, while Francis-bombs and blasts go off like Boko Haram.

McAllister thinks it’s time to fight, not capitulate to the troubling shift in Rome. The Truth is the Truth and it’s the Catholic’s cause - the only one. Besides, it’s not like conservative Catholics, who are trained to think, will start to vote Democrat just because the Pope sounds like Al Gore.

Lu couldn’t be more wrong. I’ve been criticizing this pope since the week he was elected (here and here), and it’s never been because I hate Catholics or because I’m “mad” at anyone. It’s not because I want to trash the pope or cause conflict. It’s because I care about freedom, and the social-justice schemes and leftist ideology of this pope are wrong and immoral, not because the pope is immoral, but because these ideologies rob people of freedom and of the opportunity to rise out of poverty. It is the duty and right of lovers of liberty—Catholic or not—to oppose any world leader who speaks out in the public square for destructive policies and who has a powerful influence on American voters—and it’s irrelevant what the Left thinks.

McAllister compares conservatives, afraid to criticize Francis because he’s Pope, to Republican moderates who fear Obama because he’s black. But we don’t hate the Pope or the Church; we reject amoral leftism and stand on principle. What’s wrong with that?

In putting the blame for the conflict on dissenters of Rome, Lu is acting much in the same way as liberals who shut down conservatives in the debate over President Obama’s policies. They accuse conservatives of hating him for personal reasons, instead of taking seriously the substance of their criticisms. Those of us who disagree with the president and think his views reflect a socialist ideology do not oppose him because we hate him or because we are trashing an African-American leader. We disagree on principle, and we speak out because we value liberty. The accusation that we oppose Obama because we don’t like him or because we’re racists is pure rubbish. Those who make that accusation do so because they are intellectually bankrupt and have no defense for his ideology. They value the man more than liberty, and they will go to any length—even turning on their fellow citizens and mischaracterizing them—to maintain his authority.

The same goes for Francis. When people like Lu call dissenters “troubled” Catholic baiters who just hate the pope, they are using a liberal tactic to shut down debate because they don’t want to deal with the facts. At the heart of the matter, they don’t want to be put into a position where they have to make a choice between loyalty to right principles (to the truth) and loyalty to their beloved leader (a fallible human being). Instead of doing the uncomfortable thing and taking a stand for right principles—which will put them in opposition to the pope—they attack the critics, those who are speaking out in defense of liberty and against the views of the pope that lead, not to the elevation of humanity across the globe, but to its debasement.

Pope Francis aligns very closely with the goals of his model; the quieter, less vulgar, yet equally ideological, clever and destructive, Paul VI. McAllister reminds us that in Pope Paul’s day William F. Buckley was in no way mesmerized by the Office of the Papacy.

“Pope Paul VI has released an unfortunate encyclical (Popularum Progressio),” Buckley wrote, “particularly unfortunate because its naiveté in economic and other secular matters drowns out passages of eloquence which, had they gone unencumbered by confused and confusing ideological detritus, might have served to remind the responsible community of the inspiring ardor of the pope’s passion for human reconciliation and the exercise of charity on a universal scale.”

“Confused and confusing ideological detritus?” How could he SAY that??!

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194635/
<![CDATA[ I Will Do God's Will In What Is The Very Purpose Of Matrimony, Despite The Antichristian Society. Despite The Cost. Despite The World! And Now, I Am Afraid To Say, Despite The Pope! ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194673.php
I Will Do God's Will In What Is The Very Purpose Of Matrimony, Despite The Antichristian Society. Despite The Cost. Despite The World! And Now, I Am Afraid To Say, Despite The Pope!



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

A Brazilian mother of six has a message for Pope Francis who said on flight from Manila that people didn’t need to be like rabbits, just having children serially one after the other.

I have been blessed with six children. Children I had by six C-sections. My C-sections were never because of convenience or fear of labor pains. Quite the contrary. I have always wanted to give birth naturally, but my firstborn went into fetal distress after 13 hours of labor. Meconium[1] and blood made his birth a medical emergency and the C-section inevitable to save his life. Thank God I gave birth in a time when the C-section is an option. Some decades before, and me and my boy would both be dead. Even though he had a very low initial APGAR[2], my firstborn recovered well and is a bright, family loving, good son.

Pope Francis related the story of a pregnant mother of seven C-section babies whom he’d scolded, saying that she tempted God to make her children orphans.

Unfortunately, in Brazil, the practice of VBACs[3] is still very much discouraged. Down here, the saying goes “once a C-section, always a C-section”. And so, by no fault of my own, I had 6 C-sections. Even though I did not go through the pains of labor, I offered to God the post-surgery sufferings, which can be quite long and painful.

I‘ve had good and responsible doctors. Doctors who assured me I could go on having children despite the number of C-sections. I even know mothers who have more than a dozen children via C-section. Anyway, I was blessed 6 times. Seven, if I count a pregnancy that did not went ahead.

Every day, I face the curiosity, the disrespect, the jokes, the whispers and the comments by many people who think that, just because I have six children, they have the right to give their opinion on what is so sacred to me. I have way too many anecdotes. I have been stopped on the street walk and asked if “I did not care about the environment”. I have been laughed at dozens of times when asked if I did not have a TV at home (BTW, no! We do not, Thank God!), if I knew what caused pregnancies, if I did not have a hobby. And all that spoken inconveniently, without modesty, in front of my small children! I have been called ignorant, irresponsible. I’ve had to give financial explanations to strangers. Our family is frequently looked with disdain. Once, a doctor discretely suggested that I abort my 3rd child because it was somehow “dangerous”. My husband is always asked if his six children are from “the same wife”! Once, when we were outside under a pouring rain and in need of a cab, many taxi drivers went past us making signs with their hands meaning we were too many people. Too many people…. Can heaven be too crowded?

Anyway, we have always endured the criticism with a few compliments here and there. The compliments that exalt my so-called courage were never our support for the sacrifice of having many children. People’s opinions, either good or bad, are irrelevant. Our focus, my husband’s and mine, was always Our Lord. It was always to do God’s will. And to do God’s will in what is the very purpose of matrimony: the procreation of children. Despite the antichristian society. Despite the cost. Despite the world! And now, I am afraid to say, despite the Pope!

In all these years, and there goes 17 years of marriage, I have never heard the pearl the Bishop of Rome gave to the mothers of large families: rabbits! His Holiness was, and I say this with an aching heart, vulgar! Yes, vulgar! I would never dare to compare a catholic lady, wife and mother to an irrational animal. And a rabbit too! How would you think fathers would feel if compared to asses for working too much? Or poor people being called rats for not being dressed up? Or if people in a coma were called sloths? Shall I go on? The comparison is vulgar and denigrates the target of the criticism. It is disrespectful. It is, pure and simple, a lack of charity!

Our Lady of Sorrows please pray for us and Our Church.

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194673/
<![CDATA[ Faithful Catholic Media, Now Is No Time To Go Wobbly; Cd. O'Malley Milks Pro-Lifers for Democrat Votes; I Will Do God’s Will In The Purpose Of Matrimony, Despite Antichristian Society. Despite Cost. Despite The World! And Now, Despite The Pope! ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194674.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Faithful Catholic Media, Now Is No Time To Go Wobbly

 

Cardinal O'Malley Milks Pro-Lifers for Democrat Votes

 

I Will Do God’s Will In What Is The Very Purpose Of Matrimony, Despite The Antichristian Society. Despite The Cost. Despite The World! And Now, I Am Afraid To Say, Despite The Pope!

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194674/
<![CDATA[ Cardinal O'Malley Milks Pro-Lifers for Democrat Votes ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194522.php
Cardinal O'Malley Milks Pro-Lifers for Democrat Votes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Here’s an idea. Let’s take the exclusively conservative movement against the uninterrupted slaughter of unborn children and plaster all kinds of leftist slogans to it. Then we can invite Catholic prelates to come advocate for bigger federal programs while they pretend to care about abortion. After all, what is the point of having a Church if isn’t to shepherd Catholics into amoral statist barns and hand power to the enemies of God and man? Isn’t everything about life?

Dead babies aren’t a constituency anyway. Why advocate for them? And if you care about poor people, this is a great way to make sure there’s a lot more of them.

For the pro-life movement to truly succeed, it must fight not only abortion, but also the broader “throwaway culture” wherever life is being discarded, said Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston at a national pro-life Mass.

“What must characterize the pro-life movement is a special love for the poor, the marginalized, the suffering, and especially human life that is in danger of being discarded,” Cardinal O’Malley said in his Jan. 21 homily at the Opening Mass of the National Prayer Vigil for Life.

The cardinal addressed an overflow crowd at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., the largest church in North America. More than 11,000 people were estimated to be in attendance.

Cardinal O’Malley, who heads the U.S. bishops’ pro-life committee, was chief celebrant at the Mass. Five additional cardinals, 44 bishops, and 343 priests concelebrated the Mass, according to a basilica spokesperson. Some 100 deacons and 530 seminarians also assisted.

Wednesday evening’s Mass kicked off an all-night prayer vigil at the basilica, which ends with a closing Mass Thursday morning. The prayer vigil precedes the annual March for Life, which marks the anniversary of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that led to nationwide legal abortion. The march routinely draws hundreds of thousands from across the country to pray and witness in the heart of Washington, D.C.

Drawing from the Gospel of the day, the story of the Rich Young Man, Cardinal O’Malley cited Pope Francis to explain how one must not only keep the commandments but also love the poor.

Jesus advocates loving your neighbor and helping those in need. He certainly doesn’t teach legal confiscation of property, ruthless regulation of people’s lives, anti-family laws and pro-death policy all blanketed under the excuse ‘loving the poor’, then calling it pro-life.

In the Gospel story, the young man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life. He “went away sad” when Jesus instructed him to go beyond following the commandments by giving all his possessions to the poor and following Christ.

Jesus was asking the man to take a vow of poverty; to become a disciple, not to give all his money to federally-funded Catholic Charities.

So which does Cardinal O’Malley want from the March for Life in Washington: ascetic lives of poverty, their tax money, their Democrat votes, or all three?

 

 

... ]]>
Thu, 22 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194522/
<![CDATA[ On Responsibly Limiting Your Capacity To Make Life? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194416.php
On Responsibly Limiting Your Capacity To Make Life?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

A New Orleans FOX affiliate is responding to the Pope’s new call for ‘responsible parenting.’

Francis said this week that Catholics do not have to breed “like rabbits” and should instead practice responsible parenting.

In New Orleans, Catholics responded from the archbishop on down.

"I have no objection to what he said. I mean, I think it's great,” said a female parishioner outside St. Patrick's Catholic Church in the CBD.

"I just think that it's a changing world, and we're still trying to live by our Catholic rules,” said another woman.

Those were two ‘catholics’ who don’t care what the Church teaches.

(New Orleans Abp.) Aymond said the Pope understands the challenges of family life.

"I'm afraid that what he said might be misunderstood by some, but what he said from I have read and what I believe is that people have to do responsible parenthood, and that a couple together have to decide the number of children that they believe that they can love and raise and the timing in between those births,” Aymond said.

This insidious mantra emerging from the Pope outward forces Catholic couples to justify and rationalize their own children. The NOLA Archbishop says it’s up to them, but you can be sure there are plenty around to advise them what they should decide and when.

Diocesan Director of Family Life, David Dawson, next reminds us that suffering is hard and scary.

"Suffering is hard to do, very hard to do," he said. "I can speak from my own experience of being part of this particular generation, and it's not something that we look forward to. So the idea of having new life that is completely dependent upon us is scary.”

Dawson believes the Pope's perspective with resonate with many.

"Responsible parenthood - not only responsible for when I have a child, but I'm responsible for my spouse, responsible for my sexuality, right? I'm responsible for the decisions that I make regarding my capacity to make life,” Dawson said.

What is responsible? Limiting children is responsible? Not putting unnecessary pain and burdens on your wife is a responsiblity? Your 'sexuality' is responsibilty? You are responsible for the decisions you make regarding your capacity to make life!?

Is this Catholic?

It reminds me of some slogan you might have found on a poster in old East Germany. You wouldn’t see such a poster in China though because there they don’t just counsel you that you should set limits to your family size. They expect you to do it definitively via abstinence, contraception, and abortion, and when those ‘responsible’ options fail, they just come and kill it with no decision required on your part whatsoever.

That's one thing true about China.  They don't breed like rabbits over there, at least not any more.

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194416/
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis Making New Sins Which Conflict With Old Ones ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194417.php
Pope Francis Making New Sins Which Conflict With Old Ones



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Leftist Chicago-based U.S. Catholic Mag is making the most of the Pope’s recent in-flight release where he told the world it wasn’t necessary that Catholics breed ‘like rabbits.’ In fact, the Pope thought three (3) children might be more of an expert-driven guideline. 

Another papal trip, another priceless sound bite. The always quotable Pope Francis provided his usual in-flight entertainment during the Q&A on his return trip from Manila to Rome this week, including this line on responsible parenthood: “Some believe that–excuse the expression–to be good Catholics we must be like rabbits.”

That was a very Francis-like way of saying that to be a model Catholic, a person doesn’t necessarily need to have 12 children. And in fact, it can even be irresponsible to have such a large family. Francis noted that according to experts, the ideal number of children per family is three.

The Pope actually said that three seemed to meet the population replacement level, as if that mattered. What U.S. Catholic’s Scott Alessi writes next is telling.

If you stopped reading there, you might think the pope is signaling a landmark change on church teaching about contraception, but you’d be wrong. Earlier in his trip, Francis specifically condemned artificial contraception and praised Paul VI for articulating the church’s position on birth control in the 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae. The Associated Press went so far as to say that Francis’ comments on contraception during his trip to the Philippines “signal that he is increasingly showing his more conservative bent.”

No, the Pope did not repeal the prohibition against contraception, in fact he had just affirmed it. But what Francis did do was to create in people’s minds a ‘catholic’ mandate for limiting children, one that says conceiving a child can be wrong in certain contexts. This permits the vast majority of Catholic couples, who contracept and sterilize and are too uninformed to question Pope Francis news stories, to gauge their known sin against the new Francis-sin of an ‘irresponsibly-conceived’ child.

The Pope has sown confusion. It’s never wrong for a married couple to conceive a child.

But Francis continues to defy the simplistic “liberal/conservative” divide. He is faithful to the teachings of the church—both the “liberal” and the “conservative” ones—and he is also understanding of the fact that not every person can live up to the ideal. Francis is holding up the value of parenthood while at the same time shooting down the notion that marriage in the eyes of the church is all about making babies.

The pope also shared a story about meeting a woman who was pregnant with her eighth child after having seven Cesarean sections. Though some in the church might hold up such an example as selflessness, Francis called it “irresponsibility,” adding that “God gives you methods to be responsible.”

The writer doesn’t mention how Pope Francis said the woman was ‘tempting God,’ as if she were daring God to end her life, and He may have been ‘tempted’ to do so for the sin of her irresponsibility.

Francis urged every person, in conversation with their pastor, to find a way to achieve responsible parenthood. One would assume the obvious answer is natural family planning, the church’s only approved method of controlling family size. But that option isn’t for everyone, and it won’t always result in keeping a family to the ideal size of three children. (Francis himself said, “I know of many, many legitimate ways to achieve this,” though he didn’t elaborate.)

Personally I can't think of a time I might ask my pastor’s advice. Besides, he would pass something like that to one of his vicars. Nevertheless, it’s outrageous for the Pope to suggest that couples should go to priests to ask whether they should stop having children.

Ultimately what Pope Francis has done here is what happens so often to Protestants, and it leads to apostasy. He’s piling impossible burdens on people by making new sins. There aren’t ‘many, many legitimate ways’ for Catholics to keep families small. There’s only NFP abstinence and that in itself is not really a sure way to keep a family small, nor is it very 'open to life.'

Yes, married Catholics can practice restraint if they wish to try and limit or space children, but if they conceive a child anyway, it’s never wrong. The Pope it seems would have you think otherwise, tempting you to contracept and in doing so, act ‘responsibly.’

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194417/
<![CDATA[ Francis Blames The Inhuman System For His Population Control-Type Statements ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194418.php
Francis Blames The Inhuman System For His Population Control-Type Statements



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Pope Francis dialed back his stumble into Papal population control Wednesday, pulling out his well-worn condemnation of the sinfully unrestrained freedom of the rich and their greedy markets. They are the ones causing poverty, not excessive and irresponsibly-conceived babies.

Pope Francis praised big families on Wednesday as a gift from God, after his comments that Catholics don't have to breed "like rabbits" made headlines this week.

Francis said numerous children don't cause poverty in the developing world, as some have suggested, and that the real cause of poverty is an unjust economic system that idolizes money over people.

He said claims that big families cause poverty are "simplistic."

"Let us all say, that the principal causes of poverty is an economic system that has taken the person from the center and put the god of money in its place," he said to applause from the crowd.

Is it a sin when a 'system' has its own false god? How did the system get the god of money in there and get the person out? Why is Catholic teaching so much about systems these days and what they do to people in the FrancisChurch, and why did he say we shouldn’t breed ‘like rabbits’ if every child is a blessing and he likes large families?

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194418/
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis Making New Sins Which Conflict With Old Ones; Francis Blames The Inhuman System For His Population Control-Type Statements; On Responsibly Limiting Your Capacity To Make Life? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194458.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Pope Francis Making New Sins Which Conflict With Old Ones

 

Francis Blames The Inhuman System For His Population Control Statements

 

On Responsibly Limiting Your Capacity To Make Life?

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194458/
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis, Which One of My Cousins Was Too Many? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194292.php
Pope Francis, Which One of My Cousins Was Too Many?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Blogger Daniel O’Conner asks Pope Francis a pointed Catholic question, which of my 90 cousins were irresponsibly born?

I feel a bit like a knife was placed in my back. Flippancy does that, even when it is from the Vicar of Christ, for I do not believe any good Catholic can, in good conscience, compare generosity with life to being “like rabbits.”

I am one of 90 grandchildren, so my question is this: how many of us should not exist?

I know that Pope Francis does not actually wish I or any of my cousins did not exist – I am simply trying to make a point with strong terms, as he was with his “rabbit” remark. I really don’t think Francis in the least meant the implications that come with using the comparison he used — I just don’t think he reflected much before saying it,

These generous excuses for the Pope’s words never seem to end. The Pope’s problem is not that he expresses himself recklessly, it’s that he does so continuously. He is always in the press, endlessly hyped, and put before us. People understand broadly what Pope Francis thinks despite Catholic efforts to rationalize and spin his liberal ideas.

To imply that there is a problem with Catholics “thinking they have to be like rabbits” is to imply that the problem is simply with the number itself of children they have. What nonsense! If you are capable of caring for another child, and your health is such that would not be imprudent, then there is no reason not to have your 9th, 10th, or 20th child! (Don’t laugh! I, for one, am very thankful for St. Catherine of Siena — she was her mother’s twenty-third child)

Dear Pope Francis, why could you not have said “there is a problem with some people thinking that to be good Catholics, they must have another child even if they cannot care for it or have such bad health that it would put their lives in danger” instead of “some think that that in order to be good Catholics we have to be like rabbits”?

That would have been wonderful if it had happened. Unfortunately the Pope’s reference to ‘rabbit-like’ animalistic breeding will be universally understood as a condemnation of large families. That is the meaning in the words. They imply that actual human reasoning would demand restricted, smaller families particularly in light of risk or hardship. But surprises, mistakes are always a part of having children, for life itself is a risky struggle.

My grandmother had 14 children; and from them proceed 90 grandchildren, of which I am one. I anticipate, thanks to that choice of words yesterday, we can now expect to be called a litter of rabbits fairly regularly. There seems to be the implication that this was very irresponsible of someone, so please permit me to ask, which of us shouldn’t exist?

The universal condemnation of any remaining large families among us, along with many other such policy goals, are precisely why the leftist media has celebrated Pope Francis and will continue to do so.

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194292/
<![CDATA[ TIME Has a Lesson for Francis on 'Responsible Parenting' ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194293.php
TIME Has a Lesson for Francis on Responsible Reproductive Health



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

TIME Magazine is first out-of-the-box to blast the logical break between the Pope’s faithful words against contraception and his unheard-of warning against large families. Is Pope Francis advocating marital celibacy, or NFP abstinence to a degree that families remain small?

Has the Church ever put such demands on the faithful?

It is not the mom-of-seven who should be scolded for "irresponsibility"

On his flight back to Rome on Monday, Pope Francis offered the press corps some friendly advice on family planning. During his recent travels in the Philippines, he said, he met a mother who risked her life to bear seven children. Chiding her “irresponsibility,” he said the Catholic Church’s prohibition on modern contraception does not mean large families are a must. “Some think, excuse me if I use the word, that in order to be good Catholics, we have to be like rabbits,” he said, “But no.”

Now, I can’t argue with the Pope on matters of doctrine — that’s his specialty. But in the Philippines, the Church’s stance on “artificial” contraception is also a national political issue. And its opposition to the use of things like birth control pills and condoms is a matter of public health and human rights. From that perspective, his decree is deeply problematic.

Keep your Catholic doctrine to yourself, Pope Francis. This is about health and human rights! Despite her feminist assertions, TIME’s Emily Rauhala reminds the Pope that, for practical purposes, ensuring 'responsibly-sized' families requires more than just a ‘responsible’ abstinence. It takes artificial contraception and abortions.

The anti-prophylactic rhetoric is also at odds with what we know about family planning in terms of public health. As social policy, abstinence does not work. Multiple studies show that without access to affordable, modern methods of contraception, the number of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies rises, as do rates of sexually transmitted infections and unsafe abortions. (Here is a telling case study from Manila.)

Finally, whether she chose to have seven children, or did not have other options, the woman Pope Francis met — and all others — are entitled to make their own decisions about reproduction and reproductive health without coercion, danger or disrespect.

“Irresponsibility” is insisting on abstinence at women’s expense.

Why is it that people in position to uphold and represent truth think they can make gains via small capitulations or perhaps more ‘dialogue?’ Catholic teaching has never been able to withstand a chipping-away at the fringes. When you remove one beam the whole building collapses.  

Of course there are no rights to what Rauhala calls ‘reproductive health,’ but if small low-risk families are now a moral requirement, how are people going to live that out, Holy Father?

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194293/
<![CDATA[ Who Are the Targets of the Religion of Peace Rhetoric? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194294.php
Who Are the Targets of the Religion of Peace Rhetoric?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Why is it that the cultural overlords who seem to guide the West insist on trying to isolate Muslim Terror from Islam? The task seems absurd, impossible.

The Radical Catholic has a compelling answer. The modern West is not existing on the remnants of a fading Catholicism, but on its own replacement creed.

While the most recent case of Islamic terrorism on European soil has once again provided us with a vivid example of Islam's propensity for bringing out the very worst in man, it simultaneously provides us with an excellent opportunity to reflect upon the concerted effort of global leaders to deflect all trace of culpability from the religion of Islam. Almost on cue, we heard phrases like:

  • "Islam is a religion of peace." (U. K. Prime Minister David Cameron)
  • "All of us recognize that this great religion, in the hands of a few extremists, has been distorted." (U.S. President Barack Obama)
  • "Those who commit such acts have nothing to do with Islam." (French President François Hollande)
  • "Authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence." (Pope Francis)

When a politician stands up and says that "Islam is a religion of peace," we often make the mistake of assuming that he's speaking to us, i.e. to members of the Christian West. He's not. We are not the target of this particular bit of propaganda, and - despite what certain conspiracy theorists might claim - he's not trying to make Islam more appealing to us. He's not even trying to prevent us from acting out in retaliation. While he certainly does not want us to do so, that's not the real reason for his many assurances that "Islam is a religion of peace." He's not talking to us at all. He's talking to them, i.e. to the millions of Muslims who live in our countries who call themselves Muslims and identify as such but know next to nothing about the Koran, who can't read Arabic, who rarely if ever visit a mosque, and who have never visited a Muslim-majority country. These individuals are the true target audience of the media propaganda slogan "Islam is a religion of peace." He's not insulting our intelligence, he's preying upon the ignorance of westernized Muslims in regards to their own religion. He's selling them what is ultimately a counterfeit Islam - a nebulously spiritualized secular humanism clothed in terms familiar to Muslims - and hoping to recruit them as allies in his war against the real Islam - the one that inspires men to murder, torture, rape and mutilate in the name of Allah.

But, you might ask, how could such a blatant deception ever hope to succeed? On its face, it seems almost farcical, not to mention hopelessly doomed to failure, as any of those nominal Muslims could very easily pick up a book - perhaps the Koran, perhaps a book of Hadith containing the words of Mohammed, perhaps the memoirs of any of his numerous companions - and learn what their religion actually teaches. There is 1,400-years-worth of literature written by Muslim scholars on the religion of Islam, much of which is freely available. Why on earth would they choose to believe these politicians - and the Muftis and Mullahs in their employ - over the very works they consider either divinely inspired or of impeccable authority?

That is an excellent question, gentle reader. Before we attempt to answer it, however, it is essential that we acknowledge that this strategy works. We know it works because it's already been done.

To us.

          

Read the Rest.

 

... ]]>
Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194294/
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis Food: Nothing in Excess or Leftover ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194295.php
Pope Francis Food: Nothing in Excess or Leftover



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

I don’t know if Philippine Papal Chef Jessie Sincioco ever gets a good look at the people for whom she cooks.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer reports:

Pope Francis can eat anything, especially beef, and loves ice cream and sweets, especially dulce de leche, but nothing in excess.

Such was the invaluable discovery Chef Jessie Sincioco has made the past three days as she was given the enviable task of preparing the meals of the visiting Pontiff, with the help of the Apostolic Nunciature staff. To Sincioco—and perhaps to any culinary professional—to cook for the Pope is the ultimate honour of her 23-year culinary career.

“When I was told that I would be preparing the Pope’s meals, I went down on my knees, in joy and gratefulness for this biggest blessing,” she said in an exclusive interview with the Inquirer.

Jessie was chosen by the Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Giuseppe Pinto, who knew her restaurant, and by Cardinal Tagle.  She got to meet the Pope before preparing his dinner.

Sincioco set out to prepare in the kitchen the Pope’s dinner of grilled chicken with chimichurri sauce, the popular sauce that is a staple of Argentinean dining, made of parsley, oregano, vinegar, red pepper. The Pontiff is Argentine. It was capped with Italian ice cream with turon and banana cue.

****

The day she was told last September that she had been chosen to be the Pope’s chef, to be assisted by the nunciature’s kitchen staff, Sincioco went online to research the Pontiff’s dining preferences and bought all the books about Francis in the bookstores.

“It was from these readings that I learned that he likes desserts,” Sincioco said. There couldn’t have been a better fit for the job—Sincioco is known for her desserts, from her years at Le Soufflé when she worked as the pastry chef of the iconic restaurant and became known for her soufflés (cheese, chocolate, among others) to her present stint as entrepreneur-chef of Chef Jessie and the revolving restaurant in Eastwood. Aside from the soufflés, loyal diners at Chef Jessie come for her pudding and crepes.

The first meal she prepared for the Pope was last Friday—saffron risotto for starters, pan-fried sea bass with potatoes and vegetables, and dessert of flambé mango with mantecado ice cream.

Francis finished it off, especially the dessert, and when Sincioco asked Pinto how he found it, the papal nuncio said, “Double excellent.”

****

On Sunday, for his last meals in the Philippines (he would leave early Monday morning for Rome), Sincioco made sure to prepare the dishes that Chef Jessie has become known for. For lunch, she prepared spaghetti carbonara, roast beef and chocolate soufflé. For dinner, she made him a special menu of consommé of asparagus and herb, grilled sea bass with a sauce of red tomato and artichoke heart, wild rice vegetable risotto (another favourite at Chef Jessie). For dessert, it was dulce de leche sponge cake. Sincioco said the nunciature gave clear instructions not to prepare so many dishes for each meal because the nuncio would not want anything excessive or anything to go to waste.

 

For Pope Francis, who is reported to have originally considered the name John XXIV, the poor are at the center of the Gospel. He shuns the excesses and waste of our unbridled markets and throw-away culture…but he sure knows how to live!

 

... ]]>
Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194295/
<![CDATA[ Pope Francis, Which One of My Cousins Was Too Many? TIME Has a Lesson for Francis on Reproductive Health; Who Are the Targets of the Religion of Peace Rhetoric? Pope Francis Food: Nothing in Excess or Leftover ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_194296.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Pope Francis, Which One of My Cousins Was Too Many?

 

TIME Has a Lesson for Francis on Reproductive Health

 

Who Are the Targets of the Religion of Peace Rhetoric?

 

Pope Francis Food: Nothing in Excess or Leftover

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/194296/
<![CDATA[ When You Insult Someone's Faith Don't Be Surprised If You Get Slapped? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193787.php
Francis: When You Insult Someone's Faith Don't Be Surprised If You Get Slapped



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Never failing to take an opportunity to minimize the distinctions between various false religions and the truth Faith, Pope Francis reminded the world that ‘every religion has its dignity’ and must never be mocked.

The pontiff said that both freedom of faith and freedom of speech were fundamental human rights and that "every religion has its dignity."

"One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith," he said. "There is a limit. Every religion has its dignity ... in freedom of expression there are limits."

The Pope refers to the unnecessary cruelty and provocation of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, not considering that the purpose of their mockery was to win converts, to ‘evangelize’, and ‘proselytize’ for the cause of the secular atheism. While religious people are repulsed by such cartoons, it’s difficult to win people over to any side without pointed denunciations.

The right to liberty of expression comes with the "obligation" to speak for "the common good," Pope Francis said, cautioning against provocation.

To illustrate his point, he joked about Vatican aide Alberto Gasparri who was standing nearby on the plane.

"It's true that we can't react violently, but, for example if Dr. Gasbarri here, a great friend of mine, says a curse word against my mother, then a punch awaits him," the pontiff said.

The pope was speaking to reporters on a plane as he flew from Sri Lanka to the Philippines on his tour of Asia.

It’s true that everyone’s mother, and every single individual, has their own God-given dignity, but there is much evil in false religion and heresy because those destroy lives and souls. The dignity belongs to the person but not to the lie.

Love demands that people be convinced, corrected, and converted any way possible. To consider human feelings and elements of true faith within various beliefs is good, but respecting as holy what is truly evil just spreads confusion. Shame and mockery can be appropriate to sin. So, if cursing your mother deserves a slug, what do protecting and honoring heresy deserve? It offends God Himself.

You simply can’t respect all religions at the same time because honoring one offends another, and faithful adherence and evangelization are what all religions demand. Offending none means honoring none. That’s why it so important that Popes advocate for the truth Faith, not on behalf of tolerance and coexistence. True peace is only possible within the Church not within the world.

Aside from the prudent council to avoid offending people unnecessarily, the political implications of supporting anti-blasphemy and hate-speech laws are deadly. They will be the practical result of the Pope’s words. Rarely are such laws used on behalf of Catholics. Instead they will be used almost exclusively to silence, punish, and kill those who offend Muslims and worldly secularists. It’s a mistake to promote them.

Pope Francis has said that God never corrects with a slap, but only with a ‘caress.’ If that is true, why then do Islamists have the right to pack punches?

 

 

 

... ]]>
Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193787/
<![CDATA[ When Will Men Once Again Fight For The Faith? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193788.php
When Will Men Once Again Fight For The Faith?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

At Shoebat.com Anthony Bieszad asks the question that must be asked especially today. When will men be ready to fight again for the Faith, or how long will we continue to give up souls and lives before God?

Two people I know asked me about the Charlie Hebo massacre this morning and why it happened. I told them it was simply a manifestation of Islamic teachings in practice, and that if anything, we should be surprised this had not happened earlier.

I was hoping they would ask more questions. But, as I expected, that was the end of the conversation, and they quickly changed to a new topic, as if almost they were embarrassed to be discussing Islam in such a manner.

There comes a crisis period in every civilization when the very identity of a society is threatened. For European Christendom, this often came in the form of Muslim invasions such as those of Poitiers in 732, Constantinople in 1453, or Vienna in 1683.

It is during these times that, in the midst of chaos, those men whose minds have not been corrupted by a lust for power or money, or blinded by zeal for a political cause, or chosen to ignore the current state in favor of a false sense of peace, must ask themselves a fundamental question:

Is it worth saving?

Western Christendom has been betrayed by its leaders and ignored by its people, who have chosen (borrowing from John Adams) the solitude of service over the animating pursuit of freedom. Yet the freedom I speak about here is not what is called freedom today, which is in reality license of the will.

I speak of freedom as the ability to follow Jesus through His holy Faith and in so doing, to place Him once again in His rightful place as King over all men, and as far as the West is concerned, the Heart of Western society.

All of the wonderful things which Western society has made for itself and brought to the people of the world are simply products of its adherence to the Faith which brought it into being.

Then in a few lines Bieszad lays out a problem to which Faith is only the solution.

Western society has been corrupted to the core of its being. Its former self is no longer recognizable, and it hates its own roots. Islam has established itself in these societies, and the governments explicity support its revival.

So is it time for Christians to give up and accept this future?

Never.

Western society’s path toward godlessness it has traveled for the past several centuries is coming to its inevitable end. It is a spiritual vacuum, and Islam is waiting to fill it, and as far as it looks to many a non-christian, Islam is going to be victorious. But this is history according to men, and not to God.

Because Jesus is King, He is also the Lord of history. Men have free will, which He will always respect, but all of history is ultimately oriented towards Him. Man’s history is ultimately the story of his relationship with God. God is Love, He is good, and he is the author of order and not chaos.

God wills that no man fall into error or damnation, but that all be saved and restored to the fullness of their creation. However, like with Israel, God will not act unless (a) men seek Him and (b) they choose to follow Him of their free will.

In closing, he reminds us that we are accountable before God for what we leave to the future. Will they have Faith and salvation or will they share the cruel despair of generations under Islam or atheism?

It is the time to live the Faith — BOLDY, bravely, and unapologetically — because Jesus’ kingship and the future generations of people in the West, whose eternal salvation depends in our decisions today is something worth fighting and dying for.

 

 

 

... ]]>
Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193788/
<![CDATA[ France Responds To Slaughter By Punishing The Innocent And Funding The Problem ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193789.php
France Responds To Slaughter By Punishing The Innocent And Funding The Problem



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


As with 911 and other highly public acts of Islamic jihad, the West is taking the opportunity to blame, punish, and restrict the innocent masses. They must move more vigorously to stamp out anything deemed offensive to the ruthless and powerful, yet pretend to care for the oppressed.

France ordered prosecutors around the country Wednesday to crack down on hate speech, anti-Semitism and glorifying terrorism, announcing that 54 people had been arrested for those offenses since the Paris terror attacks.

The order came as Charlie Hebdo's defiant new issue sold out before dawn around Paris, with scuffles at kiosks over dwindling copies of the satirical newspaper fronting the Prophet Muhammad.

Like many European countries, France has strong laws against hate speech and especially anti-Semitism in the wake of the Holocaust. In a message distributed to all French prosecutors and judges, the Justice Ministry laid out the legal basis for rounding up those who defend the Paris terror attacks as well as those responsible for racist or anti-Semitic words or acts.

Among those detained was Dieudonne, a controversial, popular comic with repeated convictions for racism and anti-Semitism.

The attacks that left 17 people dead are prompting France to tighten security measures but none of the 54 people detained have been linked by authorities to the attacks. That is raising questions about whether the government is impinging on the freedom of speech that Charlie Hebdo so vigorously defends.

France is also moving to try even harder (read, throw more free gov’t money at) efforts to integrate Muslim ghettos. Too much inequality is leading to violence!

The government is also launching a deeper project to rethink education, urban policies and its integration model, in an apparent recognition that the attacks exposed deeper problems of inequality both in France and especially at its neglected, often violence-ridden suburban housing projects.

 

 

... ]]>
Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193789/
<![CDATA[ Here Come the Homeschool Inquisitions? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193790.php
Here Come the Homeschool Inquisitions?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Todd Starnes reports:

A Virginia school district has decided to scrap a policy that allowed it to interrogate Christian homeschool teenagers and their parents about their religious beliefs.

Last November Douglas Pruiett and his wife received a letter from Goochland County Public Schools about updated procedures to the district’s requests for religious exemptions for homeschool students.

Under the updated rules, once a child turns 14-years-old, the district requires that homeschool parents reapply for a religious exemption to public education.

The Prueitts have seven children, three of whom were impacted by the revised policy.

“Each application must be completed along with a statement of your bona fide religious beliefs and a statement from your child age 14 or older stating his/her bona fide religious beliefs,” the policy reads.

In other words, the homeschool kids have to prove to the school board that they love Jesus. And then there was this rather ominous paragraph:

“The School Board reserves the right to schedule a meeting with the parent(s) and, in the case of a student age 14 or older, with the student. The parent of a student younger than age 14 may choose to have his or her child attend the meeting. The purpose of the meeting is for the School Board to determine whether the request for exemption is based upon a conscientious opposition to attendance at a public school or at a private, denominational, or parochial school due to bona fide religious training or beliefs. Such meeting will be conducted in a closed meeting of the School Board.”

It sounds to me like some sort of modern-day religious inquisition – hauling Christian kids in front of the school board to be interrogated about the authenticity of their relationship with Jesus Christ.

What will happen when they start asking some of our bishops if Catholic homeschoolers are Catholic enough?

 

 

 

Todd Starnes reports:

A Virginia school district has decided to scrap a policy that allowed it to interrogate Christian homeschool teenagers and their parents about their religious beliefs.

Last November Douglas Pruiett and his wife received a letter from Goochland County Public Schools about updated procedures to the district’s requests for religious exemptions for homeschool students.

Under the updated rules, once a child turns 14-years-old, the district requires that homeschool parents reapply for a religious exemption to public education.

The Prueitts have seven children, three of whom were impacted by the revised policy.

“Each application must be completed along with a statement of your bona fide religious beliefs and a statement from your child age 14 or older stating his/her bona fide religious beliefs,” the policy reads.

In other words, the homeschool kids have to prove to the school board that they love Jesus. And then there was this rather ominous paragraph:

“The School Board reserves the right to schedule a meeting with the parent(s) and, in the case of a student age 14 or older, with the student. The parent of a student younger than age 14 may choose to have his or her child attend the meeting. The purpose of the meeting is for the School Board to determine whether the request for exemption is based upon a conscientious opposition to attendance at a public school or at a private, denominational, or parochial school due to bona fide religious training or beliefs. Such meeting will be conducted in a closed meeting of the School Board.”

It sounds to me like some sort of modern-day religious inquisition – hauling Christian kids in front of the school board to be interrogated about the authenticity of their relationship with Jesus Christ.

What will happen when they start asking some of our bishops if Catholic homeschools are Catholic enough?

... ]]>
Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193790/
<![CDATA[ Francis: When You Insult Someone’s Faith Don’t Be Surprised If You Get Slapped; When Will Men Once Again Fight For The Faith? France Responds To Slaughter By Punishing The Innocent And Funding The Problem; Here Come the Homeschool Inquisitions ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193857.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Francis: When You Insult Someones Faith Dont Be Surprised If You Get Slapped

 

When Will Men Once Again Fight For The Faith?

 

France Responds To Slaughter By Punishing The Innocent And Funding The Problem

 

Here Come the Homeschool Inquisitions?

 

 

 

X
... ]]>
Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193857/
<![CDATA[ Culture of Rejection in the Faithful Diocese of Albenga-Imperia ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193561.php
Culture of Rejection in the Faithful Diocese of Albenga-Imperia



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

The Eponymous Flower reports on the discreet replacement of yet another faithful bishop under the reign of Pope Francis.

Pope Francis has found a coadjutor for the Bishop of Albenga-Imperia, Msgr. Mario Oliveri with right of succession to the side. As Bishop Oliveri enjoys good health, the papal decision appears as a disempowerment  without disavowing the ruling bishop entirely through impeachment. It is the indirect, more elegant form of impeachment. The direct form was felt by Bishop Rogelio Livieres of Ciudad del Este. A dismissal with no ifs or buts.

A coadjutor, sometimes with right of succession, is an auxiliary device, such as when an incumbent bishop is no longer in a position to fully exercise his office fully for health reasons.  This form is also utilized to correct undesirable developments in a diocese or to  reconcile  a successor fluidly without drastically making  visible a public break.

Other than media-induced allegations there is no explanation as to why bishop Oliveri was removed other than the fact that he demonstrates what happens when the Catholic Faith is observed and a diocese is functional.

No this is occuring in the diocese of Albenga-Imperia Riviera.  The traditional alignment of Bishop Oliveri is undesirable. A minority of the diocesan clergy made fierce resistance to the renewal of the diocese in the Catholic faith, which Bishop Oliveri, by replacing   folk altars in churches with appropriate high altars,  promoting the sacrament of penance, the traditional Rite, establishing old ritual communities, and the unabbreviated preaching the doctrine. Majorities play no role in the church, but it should be noted that the majority of the clergy followed this bishop. The diocese has far and wide the highest number of seminarians who are trained in both forms of the Roman Rite.

But then, Pope Francis took the Chair of Peter and quickly found someone in Liguria to afford the opportunity to get rid of the bishop. They quickly sought the anti-clerical media. The liberal daily, Secolo XIX took over the role of the battering ram. Because of their attitude which is critical of the Church they have already offered skirmish in the past few years with the bishop. That it was seriously meant, with the intention to drive Bishop Oliveri from office, became clear a few days ago even as the German media jumped straight into slander mode.

The bishop has not made a statement but it would not be surprising if he had learned of this change indirectly or through the press.

Unlike Bishop Livieres of Paraguay, Bishop Oliveri is taking the papal humiliation in silence, as is common in Europe. Bishop Livieres had been ordered to Rome, but he had learned from the media of his deposition. In vain he had asked the Pope for an audience. But the Pope granted him neither an audience yet another opportunity to defend himself against the complaints. Then the bishop had informed the media that he had "naturally accepted the decision" of the Pope, but that the Pope would be "responsible" before God for his decision. Bishop Livieres has been also active since then in evangelization, but without a diocese.

Is this the culture of rejection, the culture of encounter, or is it perhaps openness to the Spirit?

 

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193561/
<![CDATA[ Just Like His Role Models, Pope Francis Ready To Pack The Conclave ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193562.php
Just Like His Role Models, Pope Francis Ready To Pack The Conclave



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Consistant with his stated model Paul VI, Pope Francis is signaling that he may begin to increase the number of cardinal electors for the next conclave. This would be consistant with his much trumpted desire to reach out to the peripheries of the Church (and minimize the influence of cardinals from prior pontificates.)

Pope Francis is considering the feasibility of expanding the number of cardinal electors who will chose the next pontiff to 140 from the current 120.

The proposal is contained in a document recently presented to Francis by Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera.

The issue is to be discussed in the consistory, or meeting of college of cardinals, next month.

During the March 2013 conclave that elected Pope Francis, only cardinals who were under the age of 80 at the time of the resignation of the previous Pope Benedict XVI were eligible to vote.

Since then, Francis has been expanding the regional representation of senior Church officials, including the appointment last week of 15 new cardinals from 14 countries.

 

... ]]>
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193562/
<![CDATA[ Church on the Board of the Bank of the Philippines ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193563.php
Church on the Board of the Bank of the Philippines



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

The Church remains quite powerful in the Philippines, at least financially.

The Catholic Church in the Philippines remains to be one of the biggest players in the country's stock exchange, led by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Manila (R.C.A.M.), online news site Rappler reported.

As of Dec. 29 last year, the archdiocese parked $667.47 million (P30 billion) in listed firm Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) alone.

The R.C.A.M. holds an 8.35-percent share in the banking company, making it the fifth largest stockholder entitled to one seat in the board of directors.

Their strong position in the Philippine Bank used to be even stronger, perhaps with close to a controlling interest?

"The Church used to have three seats before but its shares have been diluted," Rappler quoted an unnamed Church financial adviser as saying.

 

... ]]>
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193563/
<![CDATA[ Politics and President, Yes, Bishops of Sri Lanka, No. ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193564.php
Politics and President, Yes, Bishops of Sri Lanka, No.



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Pope Francis, even on visit to the island of Sri Lanka, found it necessary to advocate for some political end. He called for an international truth commission that would address any ‘human rights’ violations which occurred during the 26-year civil war.

Pope Francis called on Sri Lanka to uncover the truth about its long civil conflict and bring religious communities closer together, as he began a visit to the island nation whose wartime leaders were voted out of power only days ago.

Francis, 78, looked tired at an evening meeting of Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim and Christian leaders, and earlier on Tuesday he cancelled a meeting with bishops after a long flight from the Vatican and a sun-baked ride in a jeep along packed roads from the airport.

Soon after landing in Buddhist-majority Sri Lanka, he appeared to make the case for a truth commission to investigate the 26-year civil war, an election pledge of the government voted into office on Thursday.

Then, in yet another story of a Pope too weary at the last minute to keep an appointment, the elephant procession in the hot sun demanded a break. The meeting of the Pontiff with his own bishops was skipped, but a later meeting with the President was still possible.

The pontiff departed past a long line of costumed elephants, reaching their trunks towards his white jeep, which briefly came to a halt surrounded by crowds lining the road. The motorcade's slow progress through the tropical heat took its toll.

"Due to the hot sun he could not go," Sri Lankan Church spokesman Cyril Gamini said of the bishops' meeting. The Pope later met the president as scheduled.

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193564/
<![CDATA[ Culture of Rejection in the Faithful Diocese of Albenga-Imperia; Just Like His Role Models, Pope Francis Ready To Pack The Conclave; Church on the Board of the Bank of the Philippines: Politics and President, Yes, Bishops of Sri Lanka, No ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193606.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Culture of Rejection in the Faithful Diocese of Albenga-Imperia;

 

Just Like His Role Models, Pope Francis Ready To Pack The Conclave

 

Church on the Board of the Bank of the Philippines

 

Politics and President, Yes, Bishops of Sri Lanka, No

 

 

... ]]>
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193606/
<![CDATA[ Francis: I'm Not a Communist and I'm Not an Ideologue. It's Christianity, OK? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193468.php
Francis: I'm Not a Communist and I'm Not an Ideologue. It's Christianity, OK?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

Pope Francis appears to be setting up straw men then knocking them down in his latest offering on world economics. He thinks people may be accusing him of ‘pauperism’ or perhaps making an idol out of poverty.

Pope Francis strongly defends his repeated criticisms of the global market economy in a new interview released Sunday, rebutting those who accuse him of "pauperism" by saying he is only repeating Jesus' message of caring for the poor.

"Jesus affirms that you cannot serve two masters, God and wealth," Francis states in the interview, bluntly asking: "Is it pauperism?"

"Jesus tells us that it is the 'protocol' on the basis of which we will be judged, it is what we read in Chapter 25 of Matthew: I had hunger, I had thirst, I was in prison, I was sick, I was naked and you helped me: dressed me, visited me, you took care of me," the pontiff continues.

"This is the touchstone," he states, asking again: "Is it pauperism? No, it is the Gospel."

It is the Gospel but is it some kind of touchstone, and what does it have to do with pauperism? Does anyone take issue with our Lord’s command to care for the hungry or the sick?

"The Gospel message is a message open to all," the pope continues. "The Gospel does not condemn the rich but idolatry of wealth, that idolatry that renders [us] insensitive to the cries of the poor."

We must neither idolize the poor nor despise the wealthy, but does idolatry of wealth make us ‘insensitive to the poor’ or does it just mean we’re greedy? Why is something always something else?

From here Pope Francis goes on to rail against his perceived culture of waste and culture of rejection, likening them directly to an economic system that puts money at the center and not man.

What does a corrected system resemble? Pope Francis is not too specific but it’s a good guess that he means removing the power of dollars by taxing them on behalf of ‘Gospel’ causes, then regulating the use of what’s left.

The interview closes with the Pope’s assertion that he’s not a Communist nor is he an ideologue, just in case you weren't beginning to tire of hearing him refute unmade slurs. Still he defends Communism, and against a claim that no knowledgeable person would make. He restates that Communism didn’t invent love for the poor. It was always just the Gospel.

As can be seen, this attention to the poor is in the Gospel, and in the tradition of the church, it is not an invention of Communism and [we] need not ideologize it, like sometimes happened in the course of history.

When the Church invites us to win what I have called the "globalization of indifference" it is far from any interest and any political ideology: It moves only from the words that Jesus wanted to offer; wants to make its contribution to building a world where you watch over one another, and we take care of each other.

Pope Francis is the only person I’ve ever heard say that the Church invented first what later became Communism, but I haven’t read much Liberation Theology. It’s quite revealing though, that he thinks many people confuse Communism with Christian charity when only an actual Communist would ever make that mistake.

Most decent hard-working people understand that money is just a tool which its owners have a right to use, and that ‘putting mankind at the center’ can be profitable, especially when you are very good at it. They also know there is nothing charitable about Communism. It’s just statist theft and oppression enabled by popular decadence - the kind of decadence a true functioning sacramental Church is supposed to prevent.

 

 

... ]]>
Mon, 12 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193468/
<![CDATA[ Philippine Communists Hoping Francis Will Obtain Prisoner Releases ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193469.php
Philippine Communists Hoping Francis Will Obtain Prisoner Releases



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

The Philippine Communist group, the National Democratic Front, is hoping to use Pope Francis’ visit to obtain release of jailed members.

Activists and union leaders on Sunday urged the administration of President Benigno Aquino to release all political prisoners in the country and appealed to Pope Francis to intervene on their behalf.

“My father is not a criminal,” said Niki Gamara, daughter of Renante Gamara, a union organizer and peace consultant for the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), at a press conference on Sunday in Manila held by the Philippine human rights group Karapatan.

The 25-year-old activist said her father has been unjustly detained for the last three years on charges of kidnapping and murder, while her mother has been forced into hiding after she was accused of involvement in multiple murders.

Are we supposed to assume this peace consultant’s parents were innocent of these charges?

The NDFP Wiki entry includes the following goals:

  1. Unite the people for the overthrow of the semi-colonial and semi-feudal system through a people’s war and for the completion of the national democratic revolution.
  2. Establish a people’s democratic republic and a democratic coalition government.
  3. Build the people’s revolutionary army and the people’s defense system.
  4. Uphold and promote the people’s democratic rights.
  5. Terminate all unequal relations with the United States and other foreign entities.
  6. Implement genuine agrarian reform, promote agricultural cooperation, raise rural production and employment through the modernization of agriculture and rural industrialization and ensure agricultural sustainability.
  7. Break the combined dominance of the U.S. and other imperialists, big compradors and landlords over the economy. Carry out national industrialization and build an independent and self-reliant economy.

“Now that Pope Francis is arriving in the country, we are hoping that we can convince him to join us in our plea, to give the Aquino administration a conscience, to release all political prisoners and give justice to all victims of human rights abuses,” she added.

Will the Pope do for the Philippine Communists what he did for Castro and his spies in America?

 

 

 

... ]]>
Mon, 12 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193469/
<![CDATA[ JK Rowling is Not One of Those Fundamentalists ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193470.php
JK Rowling is Not One of Those Fundamentalists



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

How desperately do our elites cling to the idea of religious ‘tolerance?’ Even in the face of enormous and widespread social unrest at their foisting a murderous Islamic subculture upon Europe, they stick to their false ‘catechesis.’

The "Harry Potter" author responded sharply to Murdoch's tweet that while "Maybe most Moslems peaceful," all were responsible for "growing jihadist cancer" until they worked to destroy it.

Murdoch's tweet Friday came two days after the deadly terrorist attack in Paris at the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The media mogul also tweeted: "Political correctness makes for denial and hypocrisy."

Rowling sent a handful of tweets Sunday attacking Murdoch. She wrote that since she and Murdoch were both Christians, she felt responsible for him and would "auto-excommunicate." She mockingly accepted the blame for the Spanish Inquisition and for any violence by Christian fundamentalists.

"Oh, and Jim Bakker," she added, referring to the American televangelist who was jailed for fraud.

A five hundred year-old lie and a pitiful televangelist are just like ISIS! ‘Fundamentalism’ (actually believing your faith) is the true enemy.

Sadly, on the Paris massacre Pope Francis has the same message today, but he doesn’t have a side job like Rowling and Murdoch. Making statements about religion is his full-time gig.

 

 

 

... ]]>
Mon, 12 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193470/
<![CDATA[ Francis: Fundamentalism, Ideologies Push Out God, Kill People ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193471.php
Francis: Fundamentalism, Ideologies Push Out God, Kill People



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

On Sunday Pope Francis railed against the 'throwaway culture' and the 'culture of rejection' claiming these things ensured there was ‘no room at the inn,’ that King Herod would slaughter, and that pain and tension would tear humanity.

The Pope's speech started from the image of Christmas, where next to the angels who proclaim peace, there is the "tragic reality" of rejection. "The Christmas stories themselves show us the hardened heart of a humanity which finds it difficult to accept the Child. From the very start, he is cast aside, left out in the cold, forced to be born in a stable since there was no room in the inn (cf. Lk 2:7). If this is how the Son of God was treated, how much more so is it the case with so many of our brothers and sisters! Rejection is an attitude we all share; it makes us see our neighbour not as a brother or sister to be accepted, but as unworthy of our attention, a rival, or someone to be bent to our will. This is the mind-set which fosters that "throwaway culture" which spares nothing and no one: nature, human beings, even God himself. It gives rise to a humanity filled with pain and constantly torn by tensions and conflicts of every sort".

"Emblematic of this, in the Gospel infancy narratives, is King Herod. Feeling his authority threatened by the Child Jesus, he orders all the children of Bethlehem to be killed. We think immediately of Pakistan, where a month ago, more than a hundred children were slaughtered with unspeakable brutality. To their families I wish to renew my personal condolences and the assurance of my continued prayers for the many innocents who lost their lives. The personal dimension of rejection is inevitably accompanied by a social dimension, a culture of rejection which severs the deepest and most authentic human bonds, leading to the breakdown of society and spawning violence and death. We see painful evidence of this in the events reported daily in the news, not least the tragic slayings which took place in Paris a few days ago".

The culture of rejection slaughters Pakistani children and causes a breakdown of society, creating violence and death. The culture of rejection caused the Paris massacre according to Pope Francis.

The culture of rejection blocks the Palestinian two-state solution.

"It saddens us to see the tragic consequences of this mentality of rejection and this "culture of enslavement" (ibid., 2) in the never-ending spread of conflicts. Like a true world war fought piecemeal, they affect, albeit in different forms and degrees of intensity, a number of areas in our world, beginning with nearby Ukraine, which has become a dramatic theatre of combat. It is my hope that through dialogue the efforts presently being made to end the hostilities will be consolidated". Dialouge is also needed between Israelis and Palestinians as they search for "a solution which can enable Palestinians and Israelis alike to live at last in peace within clearly established and internationally recognized borders, thus implementing the "two state solution".

Next the Pope condemned ‘fundamentalist terror.’ Religious fundamentalism ‘eliminates God,’ ‘perpetrates horrendous killings.’ It makes God an ‘ideological pretext’

"The Middle East is tragically embroiled in other conflicts which have lasted far too long, with chilling repercussions, due also to the spread of fundamentalist terrorism in Syria and in Iraq. This phenomenon is a consequence of the throwaway culture being applied to God. Religious fundamentalism, even before it eliminates human beings by perpetrating horrendous killings, eliminates God himself, turning him into a mere ideological pretext. In the face of such unjust aggression, which also strikes Christians and other ethnic and religious groups in the region, a unanimous response is needed, one which, within the framework of international law, can end the spread of acts of violence, restore harmony and heal the deep wounds which the ongoing conflicts have caused. Here, in your presence, I appeal to the entire international community, as I do to the respective governments involved, to take concrete steps to bring about peace and to protect all those who are victims of war and persecution, driven from their homes and their homeland".  The Pope continued "A Middle East without Christians would be a marred and mutilated Middle East! In urging the international community not to remain indifferent in the face of this situation, I express my hope that religious, political and intellectual leaders, especially those of the Muslim community, will condemn all fundamentalist and extremist interpretations of religion which attempt to justify such acts of violence".

Someone must define what exactly the Pope means when he attacks ‘ideologies.’ Apparently ‘fundamentalism’ creates ideologies, so when you firmly believe your faith it becomes an ‘ideology,’ and no longer the truth?

Is an ideologue just someone who supports a plan of change through terror, war, or politics; who believes something political? Is it someone who supports a concrete agenda?

If this is the case Pope Francis may not be a fundamentalist, but he is as much an ideologue as anyone.

 

 

... ]]>
Mon, 12 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193471/
<![CDATA[ Francis: I’m Not A Communist And I’m Not An Ideologue. It’s Christianity, OK? Pope: Fundamentalism, Ideologies Push Out God, Kill People; JK Rowling Is Not One Of Those Fundamentalists; Philippine Communists Hope Francis Will Spring Prisoners ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193473.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Francis: I’m not a Communist and I’m not an ideologue. It’s Christianity, OK?

 

Pope: Fundamentalism, Ideologies Push Out God, Kill People

 

JK Rowling is Not One of Those Fundamentalists

 

Philippine Communists Hoping Francis Will Obtain Prisoner Releases

 

 

 

 

 

 

... ]]>
Mon, 12 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193473/
<![CDATA[ New Cardinal from Communist Vietnam Very Non-Confrontational ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193315.php
New Cardinal from Communist Vietnam Very Non-Confrontational



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

The newly-made Cardinal from Communist Vietnam does not believe in confronting the state with Rosaries. He sees things such as poor economic management and painful ‘immigrant’ experiences as causes of weakness in Catholic fervor.

The economic recession is causing the depopulation of rural areas, with former farm workers, including Christians, crowding the peripheries. The emigration experience often brings a sense of confusion, abandonment and fragility “Many end up not going to church anymore, no longer praying,” Nguyên Van Nhon explained in his interview. Nguyên Van Nhon’s pastoral concern has always led him to seek ways to protect and share the Christian faith in given situations, even in the face of the unsettling changes Vietnamese society is going through. With this in mind, the future cardinal has also developed his way of approaching political leaders and powerful bodies.

In the face of statist confiscation of the contributions of Catholic faithful, the Pope’s new cardinal advocates peace and avoidance.

At the end of 2007, after years of relative progress, relations between civil authorities and certain circles within the local Church became tense again. What sparked the tension was the authorities’ failure – despite repeated promises made – to return some ecclesiastical properties that had been confiscated by the regime in the 1950’s, including the old headquarters of the apostolic delegation in Hanoi and some land apparently belonging to the Redemptorist parish, land that was used to build a hotel on. While religious figures and groups of faithful in Hanoi organised public demonstrations and “rosary protests”, Nguyên Van Nhon, who was Bishop of Dalat and President of the Vietnamese Bishops’ Conference at the time, tried to avoid adopting positions that would have created too much friction: “Continuous fighting and clashes will not do anyone any good,” he said.

Dialogue is always the Church’s path:

According to Nguyên Van Nhon, the protection of Church property should not involve conflict. It was important to show that the purpose of these properties was to serve the mission which had the good of the Vietnamese people at heart: “The Church,” the bishop reiterated, “asks for these properties to be returned to it, not to serve its own interests, to hoard or to accumulate riches but to ensure that they are used to the advantage of all people.” While some Western media talked about a regime that was “frightened” by the mobilization of the Church, Nguyên Van Nhon kept on stressing that “the Church always follows the path of dialogue and respects civil authorities.”

“Because of this stance, he was installed as Coadjutor Bishop with the right to succession in the Archdiocese of Hanoi.”  It seems the Pope’s new Cardinal could not be more appeasing of Vietnam’s Communist Oppressors.

Given the transition phase Vietnam is going through, the Archbishop of Hanoi believes that it is more beautiful and more necessary to spread the Gospel everyday without seeking to be centre stage, than to paint the picture of a Church as a militant force constantly denouncing the restrictions and misdeeds of a political system that has in fact for years been engaged in a delicate and fruitful dialogue with the Holy See. By bringing into the College of Cardinals a bishop who was mistreated by those who reproached him for not being a fighting leader, perhaps the Jesuit Pope is trying to suggest that in Asia, as elsewhere, there is currently a greater need for pastor bishops that warrior bishops.

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193315/
<![CDATA[ Vatican Ruling: Was Abp. Romero Martyred for Peace and Love? Oscar Romero, A Martyr to What Cause? On Francis, FirstThings Steps Back From the Cliff, But Message Still Rings; New Card. from Communist Vietnam Very Non-Confrontational ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193316.php
PewSitter NewsBytes



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


Vatican Ruling: Was Archbishop Romero Martyred for Peace and Love?

 

Archbishop Romero, A Martyr to What Cause?

 

On Francis, FirstThings Steps Back From the Cliff, But the Message Still Rings

 

New Cardinal from Communist Vietnam Very Non-Confrontational

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193316/
<![CDATA[ FirstThings Steps Back From the Cliff But the Message Still Rings ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193282.php
On Francis, FirstThings Steps Back From the Cliff But the Message Still Rings



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

 

The editor of FirstThings, R.R. Reno, has come under fire for the breathtaking piece this week by Maureen Mullarkey who seemed to paint Pope Francis perfectly with just a phrase. Apparently Reno exercises no jurisdiction over his bloggers’ posts.

I’ve lost count of the emails from readers and friends upset by Maureen Mullarkey’s sharply worded posting on Pope Francis on her blog, which we host. Is First Things turning into an organ for anti-Francis polemics? Are we flirting with sede vacantism?

Of course not. We host Maureen’s blog, as we do Peter Leithart’s. They’re not official spokesmen for First Things. They write what they want to write and post what they want to post without consulting me or going through our staff. We host their blogs because we think their voices are worth hearing.

Next comes the money quote:

“in this instance I strongly disagree with Maureen’s assessment of Pope Francis.”

She calls him an “ideologue.” I see no evidence that Francis has a political or social outlook that fits with any particular modern ideology, left or right. He likes to make pungent, often hyperbolic statements about economic and other matters, but by my reading the consistent source of his rhetoric is biblical, not ideological.

(For the record, I also disagree with Maureen’s view that President Obama is ideological. He’s an almost pure example of postmodern liberalism, which combines technocratic over-confidence with leftish political-social sentiments that don’t rise to the level of a consistent ideology.)

What is an ideologue anyway? According to Mr Reno it’s not someone who uses the Bible as a source for pungent hyperbolic statements, and it’s not a left-leaning over-confident technocrat. Whatever ideologues are, Pope Francis hates them. He denounces them repeatedly calling them Pharisees and the worst sort of Christians, so for his sake I hope Reno is right about him.

In practice though, many Catholic pundits seem to think an ideologue is someone who doesn’t believe Catholic teaching is applied sporadically across the political spectrum. There’s a political word for that. It’s called ‘moderate.’  If you're not politically moderate you may get called an ideologue. 

Whether Mullarkey now agrees with Reno about the Pope’s simply pungent statements or whether she’ll continue to maintain Francis is an ideologue and a 'meddlesome egoist,’ it’s amazing how far the papacy has fallen in terms of Christian respect. Pundits will blame other voices who are critical and accuse them of disloyalty and disunity, but the Pope’s own historic contribution cannot be discounted. While he rails against Catholic ‘ideologues,’ most honest individuals can clearly judge his political leanings by his words and his leadership.

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193282/
<![CDATA[ Vatican Ruling: Was Archbishop Romero Martyred for Peace and Love? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193283.php
Vatican Ruling: Was Archbishop Romero Martyred for Peace and Love?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

 

UK’s Catholic Herald reports:

Archbishop Oscar Romero was murdered “in hatred of the faith”, a panel of theologians at the Congregation for the Causes of Saints has ruled.

Archbishop Romero was assassinated while serving Mass in El Salvador in 1980 by Right-wing death squads. His murder came a day after he had said in a homily that soldiers should obey God’s commands and put down their guns.

Was Romero murdered for preaching peace? Has anyone ever been killed for that?

If right-wing is synonymous with ‘conservative’ what then is conservative about death squads anyway? The political situation was more likely a battle between a Communist Left and a strong man Franco-type dictatorship. Those may have been to the right in El Salvador but in no way ‘right-wing.’

If the country was divided between Communism and Fascism, on which side were the Archbishop’s sympathies? It certainly may help explain his murder. Must one conclude that Romero was killed because ‘right-wing death squads’ were seeking death, or because he loved the poor and hated violence, or is there more to the story?

Can we assume his killers were tasked with eliminating political enemies on the Left? Why was Romero on their list? Perhaps one could tell from his writings to which this article makes only brief reference.

Archbishop Romero’s Cause was opened at the Vatican two decades ago but was delayed for years as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith studied his writings, amid debate over whether he had been killed for his faith or for political reasons. In 2013 Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, president of the Pontifical Council for the Family and official promoter of Archbishop Romero’s Cause, said the process had been “unblocked”.

To be martyred one generally must die for their witness like St. Thomas More, St. Sebastian, St Lawrence, or Blessed Miguel Pro.  Fr. Pro was executed for ‘illegally’ carrying out his priesthood thus making him an enemy of the ruling Mexican Left in his day.

As in Communist Eastern Europe, faithful Catholics are historically targeted from the Left. Spain’s Franco was no enemy of the Church, but rather its defender.

Despite the Vatican’s ‘conclusive’ assurances, more information should come out on Romero’s writings, his cause, and why it was blocked all these years. What exactly was Catholic about his ‘martyrdom’ beyond the fact that he’d recently said everyone should lay down their guns? That may have been a decidedly unjust idea.

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193283/
<![CDATA[ Archbishop Romero, A Martyr to What Cause? ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193284.php
Archbishop Romero, A Martyr to What Cause?



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


 

 

The Boston Globe’s CruxMag says a major obstacle to Archbishop Romero’s sainthood has been eliminated.

A panel of Vatican theologians has ruled that Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador, the great hero of Latin America’s progressive liberation theology movement who was shot to death while saying Mass in 1980, is a martyr.

Liberation Theology is the condemned twisting of Catholic Faith into a materialist anti-capitalism. Its epidemic spread in the Latin American Church had been checked by Rome after the election of Pope John Paul II. In the process, the cause of Leftist icon, Archbishop Romero was blocked.

The finding removes a major hurdle to declaring Romero a saint, something Pope Francis has signaled he wants to do. Among other things, being declared a martyr means that no miracle is required for beatification, the final step before sainthood.

For decades, some conservative critics of the liberation theology movement, both in Latin American and Rome, have argued that Romero was killed more over politics than religion, and thus he doesn’t qualify as a martyr in the technical sense of someone who died for the faith.

Though a Vatican commission has now declared him a martyr there is reason to be skeptical. As yet, no real justification has been made for their conclusions. Romero himself seemed to misunderstand the concept as does his promoter, Pope Francis.

Francis said Romero spoke of a “martyrdom of mothers,” whose sensitivity to all that threatens human life and welfare is a source of enrichment for society and the Church.

If mothers are martyrs, are all of them now saints too?

Next, Crux’s San Martín gives a highly biased description of liberation theology and Romero’s support for it.

Liberation theology can mean many things, but in general it’s an interpretation of Christian faith through the perspective of the poor.

It’s ominous these days how often we hear socialism described as something just natural to the ubiquitous ‘poor,’ as if poor people didn’t sometimes seek freedom and opportunity, and at what point did the Christian Faith develop these slants and ‘perspectives?’ I always thought it just was what it was, you know...doctrine.

At times, it presented a reading of scripture opposing all hierarchical structures and institutions, including those of the Church.

Sounds like there just might have been something anti-Catholic about liberation theology. Perhaps it’s just secular socialism with a Christian face.

Experts say that Romero’s defense of liberation theology came in response to a right-wing Salvadorian government that was brutally killing and torturing rural poor in the late 1970s.

Romero is the most prominent victim of the 75,000 people believed to have been killed in El Salvador’s bloody civil war, which went on from 1980 to 1992.

So the twelve year Salvadoran civil war was just a case of a right-wing government oppressing the poor and torturing them? Sounds like a very one-sided civil war! Were no poor on the side of the government? Was it a rich/poor civil war? Do they have those?

By 1980, Romero had written to US President Jimmy Carter pleading with him to cease sending military aid, saying the $1.5 million the United States sent every day for more than 12 years was “being used to repress my people.”

Archbishop Romero petitioned Jimmy Carter to cut off aid to the country. President Carter was a leftist. The Salvadoran government was to the right of the rebels. If Carter were to comply with Romero it would clearly have damaged the government, hence Romero was their enemy and aided the left side.

Still, is throwing the weight of the Church in with Jimmy Carter, on behalf of the socialist side of a civil war, and then being assassinated, a case of Catholic martyrdom?

 

 

... ]]>
Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193284/
<![CDATA[ The Cuomo Eulogy: When Politicians Dictate to the Church ]]> http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_193027.php
The Cuomo Eulogy: When Politicians Dictate to the Church



By Frank Walker
Pewsitter.com


It seems to be generally understood by faithful Catholics, as opposed to some powerful bishops, that high-profile funerals for notorious sinners are a scandal. That’s why it is so painful and frustrating to see our Church continue to honor the lives of anti-Catholic politicians when they die.

It’s clear that the Church in America feels somehow beholden to its enemies, and it’s unsurprising therefore, that such men are comfortable taking charge of the Holy Mass and bending people's ears with their darkened thoughts.

New York's Deacon Kandra was unimpressed.

A brief homily based on the readings is always given after the gospel reading at the funeral liturgy and may also be given after the readings at the vigil service; but there is never to be a eulogy.

And in the rubrics:

Following the prayer after communion, the priest goest to a place near the coffin. The assisting ministers carry the censer and holy water, if these are to be used. A member or a friend of the family may speak in remembrance of the deceased before the final commendation begins..

Taking all that into consideration, it seems clear some sort of brief remembrance might be appropriate at the end of the service but not in the place of the homily. It is often left to the discretion of the pastor to determine how long it will be; sometimes, the pastor or celebrant will allow multiple reflections to be offered. (The administrator at my parish has a simple rule: “One body, one speech. End of discussion.”)

In this case, I don’t know when or how Andrew Cuomo spoke; I didn’t see it. A reader who watched the whole Mass on TV and told me “I was spellbound.” Well, good. But 40 minutes? Really?

Ted Kennedy’s remarks at the funeral of his brother Robert and Bishop Hannan’s eulogy for John F. Kennedy. For length, tone, content and delivery, both are unrivaled.

Notwithstanding the shock at his praise for another infamous ‘c’atholic dynasty, kudos to Deacon Kandra for his instruction. Too bad nothing was said sooner.

 

 

 

... ]]>
Wed, 07 Jan 2015 00:00:00 GMT http://www.pewsitter.com/addons/news/view/193027/