Cardinal Farrell Keeps Denying [Or Covering Up]

I can only assume Farrell is an active, enthusiastic, participating member of the Lavender Mafia given the lengths of lying to which he will go to protect 'Uncle Ted'! He lived with the vile pervert and claims he knew nothing! Give me a break, Farrell!

From Gloria.tv 

Vatican Cardinal Kevin Farrell's credibility is shattered to the point of no return.

Talking to Associated Press (July 31) Farrell claimed that he “never once did even suspect” that his former boss, Washington Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, 88, committed homosexual abuses.

With this formulation Farrell may attempt to conceal the fact that he actually knew about the allegations, but did not want to believe them and, worse, did not act on them. Farrell was a protégé and flatmate of McCarrick.

He is realistic enough to understand that his version “might be hard to believe”. He claims that he was focused on "running the archdiocese" of Washington [auxiliary bishops are not "running" dioceses] and not caring what McCarrick was doing,

“Now, people can say 'Well you must be a right fool that you didn't notice.' I must be a right fool, but I don't think I am. And that's why I feel angry.” But others have more reasons to be "angry" than Farrell.

Farrell's statement is not credible because, as Associated Press puts it, McCarrick's homosexual misconduct was "an open secret”.

According to the standards Pope Francis set for the Karadima case in Chile, the two McCarrick cronies, Cardinal Farrell and Cardinal Tobin, will have to resign.

This Saint Wrote More than Shakespeare and Dickens Combined - by Dr Geoffrey Brushwood

Happy Feast of St Alphonsus Maria de Liguori!

From Gloria.tv

Happy feast day of Saint Alfonso Maria Antonio Giovanni Cosimo Damiano Michaele Gasparo de' Liguori (1696-1787). In the authentic Roman Rite, his feast is on the 2nd of August.

Saint Alfonsus was born in Naples whilst it was ruled by the Hungarian empire. He is a Doctor of the Church for his numerous writing, more than Shakespeare and Dickens combined.

His contribution to Moral theology mirrors Thomas Aquinas’ contribution to Dogmatic theology.

By the ripe old age of 16 he had earned doctorates in both canon and civil law and went on to win every single case he argued in the Neapolitan courts. Until a case was ‘fixed’ against his client the Duke of Gravina Vs Medici the Grand Duke of Tuscany.

He left the courts disgusted at what they were, saying “world I know you now”.

He joined the Oratory in Naples and only left when a visionary nun advised him that he was to start a missionary priestly order, The Congregation of the most Holy Redeemer, the Redemptorists, in 1732.

He worked tirelessly, and was made a bishop in his old age. His Theologia moralis went into nine editions in his own lifetime and kept his printer Ramondini happy for generations.

He also wrote the beautiful Glories of Mary and Visits to the Blessed Sacrament, a MUST reads for any catholic. And many other works. He fought against the Jansenist heresy.

He was an accomplished harpsichordist and composed many beautiful hymns. His Tu scendi dalle stelle is THE Italian carol, a beautiful duet between a soul and God.

His hymn ‘O Bread of Heaven’ is a beautiful catechesis on the Eucharist, and his Stations of the Cross will make the hardest of hearts weep.

As if these weren’t sufficient talents for one man he was also an accomplished painter.

This amazing saint is my favourite. And just like me a doctor in the Church :-).

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 2 AUGUST – SAINT STEPHEN I (Pope and Martyr)

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 2 AUGUST – SAINT STEPHEN I (Pope and Martyr): Stephen, a Roman and the son of Jovius, was the archdeacon of Rome when Pope Saint Lucius I entrusted him with the care of the Church s...

2August, A Chesterton Calendar

AUGUST 2nd

Just as one generation could prevent the very existence of the next generation, by all entering a monastery or jumping into the sea, so one set of thinkers can in some degree prevent further thinking by teaching the next generation that there is no validity in any human thought. It is idle to talk always of the alternative of reason and faith. Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. If you are merely a sceptic, you must sooner or later ask yourself the question, ‘Why should anything go right; even observation or deduction? Why should not good logic be as misleading as bad logic? They are both movements in the brain of a bewildered ape?’ The young sceptic says, ‘I have a right to think for myself.’ But the old sceptic, the complete sceptic, says, ‘I have no right to think for myself. I have no right to think at all.’

‘Orthodoxy.’

Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 44686-44694). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.

3 August, The Roman Martyrology

Tertio Nonas Augusti Luna vicesima prima Anno 2018 Domini

August 3rd anno Domini 2018 The 21st Day of the Moon is commemorated the finding at Jerusalem, [in the year 415,] of the body of the most wounded Stephen, the first of all the martyrs, and of those of holy Gamaliel, Nicodemus, and Abibon. 
Their place was revealed by God to Lucian the Priest, in the time of the Emperor Honorius. [The body of St. Stephen now rests at Rome in the Basilica of St. Lawrence beyond the Walls.]
Upon the same day, were born into the better life: 
At Constantinople, the holy martyr Hermellus. 
In India, upon the coasts of Persia, the holy Monks and others whom King Abenner, when he was persecuting the Church of God, caused to be tormented and slain in various ways. 
At Naples, in Campania, [in the year 97,] holy Aspren, Bishop of Naples, who was healed of sickness by the holy Apostle Peter, and thereupon procuring himself to be baptized was ordained Bishop of that city. 
At Autun, [in the year 490,] the holy Confessor Euphronius, Bishop [of that see.] 
At Anagni, [in the year 1105,] holy Peter, Bishop [of that see,] who fell asleep in the Lord , famous for his observance as a monk first, and afterwards for his careness as a shepherd. 
At Philippi, [in the year 60,] in Macedonia, holy Lydia, a seller of purple, who was the first of all to believe the Gospel there at the preaching of the holy Apostle Paul. [Acts xvi. 14.] 
At Bercea, in Syria, [about the year 450,] the holy women Marana and Cyra, [Virgins of Bercea.] 
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins. 
R. Thanks be to God.

Memes of the Day

Cardinal McCarrick and the Last Novus Gasp

A hard hitting, justly angry essay from Michael Matt. Starve the beast! No more money for settlements and lavish life styles for the Lavender Mafia and their 'lovers'!

From The Remnant

Cardinal Carrera assists Cardinal McCarrick. Also pictured are Cardinal Pell, Cardinal O'Malley, and Cardinal Mahony. (Photo Cred: Paul Haring | CNS)

The Barque of Peter is stuck in an unholy see of “filth.” Many of its occupants struggle to normalize their relationships with the cabin boys. On the poop-deck is Theodore (“Uncle Ted”) Mc Carrick, and behind him are numerous clerics, all saluting McCarrick and sporting blue-striped sailor ensembles. Apparently, he liked his victims and “lovers” to wear such outfits on occasion. Those saluting encourage the oarsmen, as the barque forays deeper and deeper into the filth:

“Forward, forward, there shall be no turning back,” as Pope Francis has stated with regard to the changes of Vatican II. 

Cardinals Farrell, Maridaga, Wuerl and O’Malley, among many other Cardinals, are behind these men. As they stand there, their long flowing white frocks billowing in the wind, they sport blindfolds and weighing scales. Resembling Lady Justice in such attire, they proclaim their innocence of any knowledge of any impropriety, sexual or financial, and they say that they are “shocked” and dismayed. They wonder openly how Uncle Ted could have gotten away with all of this seemingly well-known behaviour, although even if they had known, they say in lawyer-speak, it would not have been within their jurisdiction to unveil his evil. In other words, “It was not my job! I know him not!” Moreover, they say, while the conduct in question was “immoral,” it was not illegal. But, like the raven, they quoth “Nevermore.” We shall see! #Seminarians&PriestsToo. 

Behind such high-ranking prelates, in turn, are the clerics who speak of “mercy” and compare the righteous anger at McCarrick and his clerical cohorts, conspirators, and enablers to a “mob” persecuting Jesus, the sinless Lamb. Even within the hierarchy, the words of Christ himself have become truly perverted, so that good is bad and bad is good. 

The usual suspects in Rome start threatening to shut down the blogs complaining about those who give voice to the self-evident proposition that both marital adultery and clerical sodomy and sexual impropriety are prohibited by both our Tradition and the Bible. These clerics seek to persecute those of the Faithful who hold true to our Tradition. This, they say, is in “the best interests of the Church,” of course, not because of that individual’s malice or any hidden homosexualist agenda on his part. The threat to punish free, truthful and open speech and opinion is, rather, styled as an attempt to punish “hatred,” and it is financed, ironically, by the donations of the laity themselves and contrary to their intent in giving said monies. 

THE REAL SITUATION FOR US: 

Bill McGurn of The Wall Street Journal compares the McCarrick situation to a watershed moment akin to the Reformation: 

A reform serious and meaningful must emerge from it, or must assuredly the Church will split. In this process, let us thank God and His Providence for the First Amendment, which will protect the laity in doing what we need to do to rid ourselves from such evil men and their evil ways. 

Thank God, the McCarrick story broke before the Dublin Synod, which was undoubtedly going to take “the logic of Amoris” and apply it to active homosexuals “in the Church.” Amoris, after all, makes the astonishing claim—especially after the pederast abuse crisis—that continuing an adulterous relationship can be better than healing a broken sacramental marriage. Moreover, it seems to assert that some non-sacramental relationships can be more filled with grace than sacramental marriage. 

Within this context, the current Bishop of Rome allegedly has said that there is no Hell. And, his ghost-writer on Amoris, cardinal Heal-Me-With-Your-Mouth-Fernandez, has allegedly stated that he believes “all are saved.” Within this theological/philosophical context, the behaviour of people like Uncle Ted, would seem to be, possibly, as moral as the sexual behaviour of married couples. Once Christ’s precise words on adultery have been denied or undermined, as they have been in Amoris, then over-ruling the Bible’s prohibition on homosexual sodomy and other forms of clerical deviance would be a piece of cake. All of this was, from a Catholic perspective, seemingly an attack on “the family” as that notion was and is Biblically enshrined. As such, in light of Uncle Ted, it looks as if these men may have been seeking to normalize their own deviancy, and it is unsurprising, as such, that they are now seeking to overturn—“reinterpret”—Humanae Vitae. 

What to do now, especially since Cardinal Farrell—who lived with McCarrick for six years and was one of his proteges—was recently selected to head the quiet revolution in sexuality envisioned at the Youth Synod, which, incidentally has been plagued by allegations that the preliminary commission refused to take seriously the recommendations of Traditional Catholics? This pontificate of sinful facilitation must surely feel stymied at this moment in time. The filth of it all has been revealed to the world, and investigations will surely follow, in one form or another. Can they now get away with what was possibly planned? The only rational action lest they row themselves further into their own filth is to stop this Synod, NOW! It cannot get any better for them, and we must let them know this, immediately. Along those lines, we—those of us who believe—must use every weapon at our disposal to free our Church from its recalcitrant clerics and the squalid reality in which the Church finds itself. The Church is ours, it is Christ’s, and we must take it back from such evil men. We cannot allow them to scourge Christ and stand idly by as they attempt to wash their hands of the situation, as Pontius Pilate and people like Cardinal O’Malley appear to have done, while possibly all neatly dressed in blue-and-white naval stripes. No amount of lawyering should be allowed to facilitate their hand-washing. Thus, the question arises: How do we fight a clerical and hierarchical Church, when we are only lay people?

Well, although lay, we have been called also as part of “The People of God,” and we can resist; we have Christ on our side. In this regard, one author has recommended that we put our ideological differences aside when it comes to this issue. In essence, many of us view ourselves as being Traditionalists, Conservatives or Liberals. But all of us are disgusted by this. As such, coming together for this limited purposes seems like a good idea. 

Many authors say that we should simply stop giving money to corrupt bishops and priests. In the interests of coming together in the face of this crisis, it must be noted that Church Militant’s Michael Voris has recommended this course of action: Let them reap what they have sown; let the dead bury their dead. Much of our money recently has been diverted to abuse settlements and the support of “lovers” and extravagant lifestyles. Let’s turn off the spigot. From now on, let us donate only to good priests and parishes. Pope Francis has said that he wants a “poor church for the poor.” Let them have it. 

On The World Over with Raymond Arroyo, it was recommended that we set up another—third—commission to look into this predatory behaviour within the Church. Undoubtedly we should petition the Vatican to set up such a commission for “The Good of the Church.” This should be a lay-led, but Church-empowered commission “with teeth,” says Marjorie Murphy-Campbell, a mother, attorney and canonist. If such a commission ever does see the light of day, undoubtedly this kind lady should be on it. However, it is unlikely that this hierarchy will open up fully—at least not within this context! 

Raymond Arroyo, himself, notes that in addition to homosexual predation and rape, the commission should also involve financial impropriety, for where there is one, there is normally the other. Similarly, Father John Zuhlsdorf, a well-known priest and blogger, yesterday stated that perhaps Pope Francis should appoint a canonical Special Prosecutor, an Inquisitor, who shall look into the Dioceses in question. All of these suggestions are good and desirable. Let’s open the books of the Church and see how many settlements of this sort have been made nationally, and who knew what and when. After all, the Church is a charity and the hierarchy is a fiduciary of our money. We have a right to know what was done with it and whether it was used in a way that serves our intent. 

But, add to all of these another idea, one not yet spoken of openly: Civil investigation and prosecution. After all of this—after all of these years and all of these scandals—we Catholics should not only tolerate, but request—nay, demand—that the State and Federal authorities become involved in rooting out the predatory rape culture that seems to have infiltrated our seminaries and Church. What we see appears to be an institutional, national and international set of behaviours which qualify for protection under State and Federal versions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizational Act (RICO). It also smacks of human trafficking and organized exploitation and rape, something Pope Francis has put on his list of priorities, and something upon which our civil law frowns, as well. 

If, ultimately, somehow, remarkably, such predatory sexual contact under duress does not qualify for prosecution, then there is a gap in the law which must be closed. Let us petition our government for new laws that protect us all from such men. Never again can we have a Cardinal attempt to dismiss such predatory behaviour as being “immoral.” From henceforth let us make sure that it is unequivocally viewed as being illegal, and let us make sure that when bishops know about it, they are under a duty to act. 

Thus, from this point forward, let us lift our heads from the sand and stand behind the civil-criminal authorities, such as Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Josh Shapiro, who seeks full-disclosure from the Vatican on issues like this. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and let us not forget that civil society—unlike the hierarchy—responds directly to us: We, The People. In this regard, and at this moment, the interests of the civil authorities and the interests of the Catholic laity are aligned. This is equally true for the personal injury-lawyers and those who seek civil redress for the harm done to our seminarians. Let us welcome such actions, for without the law we are now lost! 

Show Steve the Money

As I said yesterday, not one more penny to this den of vipers, this coven of false shepherds! Contribute only to your Parish in such a way the Diocese can't get their hands on a penny, contribute to orthodox and Traditional Orders, Institutes and charities. Check Regina Magazine for their suggestions for 'Safe Spaces for Catholic Money'.

And, literally! For Christ's sake, whatever you do, not one penny to Peter's Pence! Starve the Head and the vile, evil, corrupt Members will die!

Another article from Regina on starving the beast.

From Regina Magazine

A Wealthy Catholic Donor Rebels

His name isn’t ‘Steve’. He’s a recently-retired Midwesterner, a convert to the Faith and a married man.

He also donates in the mid five figures to the Catholic Church every year.

Recently, he’s decided to divert a significant portion of that money away from his diocese.With the horrific revelations about America’s highest-ranking Cardinal’s decades-long sexual abuse of young boys, seminarians and priests – and the bishops and media who were aware and complicit –he’s one of a number of wealthy Catholic donors who are growing increasingly uneasy about what their donation dollars are funding.

Steve sat down with REGINA to explain his reasoning.

REGINA: How long have you been contributing to the Church?

STEVE: My wife and I have been contributing since we have been married. Let’s just say Pope Paul VI was pope when we began our support.

REGINA: How did your thinking change?

STEVE: The first time my thoughts changed in regard to our contributions happened years ago when our bishop started a direct diocesan appeal to fund diocese programs. All parishioners were told they had to contribute to this appeal in order to meet our parish’s obligation. If they did not, then parish funds would have to fill the gap.

REGINA: Whoa!

STEVE: That came as a bit of a surprise to me. After I digested it and became accustomed to the idea (and complied), our contributing more or less went back to normal for our parish.

REGINA: How would you describe your giving over the years?

STEVE: Over the years my wife and I have responded charitably to many major parish funding initiatives in addition to filling the role of a leader for fund raising for a new parish. We actually increased our contributions significantly about ten years ago. As we get older our interest in learning more about the faith increased and our contributions followed along.

REGINA: After the 2002 sex abuse scandals, did you change your contributions?

STEVE: No. We were told (and we wanted) to believe that it was a very small number of priests nationally. Very few incidents seemed to be happening around us.

REGINA: Yep. Sex abuse doesn’t play well with the laity, especially the wealthy laity.

STEVE: As a result, we went along with our normal giving habits and even gave occasional larger contributions.

REGINA: Business as usual.

STEVE: I can remember watching the movie ‘Spotlight’ and reflecting back to 2002 when the scandal broke. Being in the Midwest it seemed like the Boston problem was isolated, exposed and dealt with even though the victims are still suffering today.

REGINA: Probably lots of people thought the same thing.

STEVE: Over the years I would run into former Catholics who left the Church because of the scandal. I always thought that it would have been better for them to stay because the Church needs members of strong character in the laity. The answer is not to abandon Her but to stay and help Her return as the moral authority.

REGINA: Interesting that you thought that the people with strong characters would leave the Church. In the last 16 years, did you have the sense that the ‘mess has been cleaned up'?

STEVE: Yes – until the past couple of years.

REGINA: What happened?

STEVE: Through different media and groups, we now make a practice of learning about the true faith. What we have learned has heightened our awareness. We now know that the mess was not cleaned up. It has been exposed as being far-reaching and the ‘mess’ IS still going on.

REGINA: Do you have a sense that the dioceses are starting to hurt for money?

STEVE: I have no real evidence of this. On the surface, they seem to be operating in the same manner they have for years.

REGINA: How have you have started changing the way you contribute?

STEVE: We made the decision earlier in 2018 to divert a significant portion of our regular Church (and as an extension the diocese) support to other worthwhile and safe apostolates.

REGINA: Why divert funds?

STEVE: We did not take this decision lightly. We are disheartened with the USCCB’s stand on various issues but more importantly their collective silence and typical response when they do comment on matters relating to all the confusion within the Church and how her moral authority has been compromised.

REGINA: And what’s been the result?

STEVE: The feedback we have received from these entities has reinforced that we made the right decision. The current Cardinal McCarrick disaster and the non-response of the USCCB show that we made the right decision earlier this year.

REGINA: So where do you stand now?

STEVE: We still contribute our obligation to our parish, but the excess is supporting Catholic causes outside of our diocese.

REGINA: Do you think that other wealthy people are also troubled by what they are contributing to?

STEVE: If you are an informed member of the laity, I do not know how you cannot be troubled. These are intelligent people, so I believe they are troubled.

REGINA: What are they doing about it?

STEVE: The problem lies that many devout Church members have limited resources for finding alternatives in lieu of contributing directly to their parish or diocese. Who do you trust?

REGINA: That’s exactly why we are doing this ‘Safe Spaces for Catholic Money’ series. Every dollar contributed today is far more valuable than it was in the past — mainly due to the lack of contributions that have resulted from people a) leaving the Church, b) not attending Mass, and c) not willing any of their estate to the Church. Do you think that wealthy contributors are aware of this fact?

STEVE: Probably not.

REGINA: Are wealthy people thinking about all of this?

STEVE: I do hear of others considering reducing their contributions that make their way to the bishops.

REGINA: How do the bishops respond?

STEVE: From what I have seen, if you do express your concern to your bishop and you are lucky enough to get a response, the response is typically vague and non-committal.

REGINA: What's different about the 2002 scandals and today?

STEVE: There are two significant differences. First, we are now starting to hear how much the Church has paid to settle these abuse cases. I am reading it is in the billions of dollars. These are dollars contributed to the local parish and then funneled to the bishops. Good Catholics honor their duty to support local parish expenses and programs. Now when I hear that a settlement has been paid by a diocese, I know that part of the money is extracted from parish funds or direct diocesan appeals.

REGINA: So Catholics are still paying off victims of homosexual abuse by priests.

STEVE: The other difference, and it dwarfs the billions paid out – if that is even possible – is the scandal at the seminary level. It puts into doubt just what is happening during the formation of our priests.

REGINA: Yep. The kind who will ‘play ball’ so to speak.

STEVE: When we have been told by our Lord that we are blessed because we believe without seeing (faith) – the revelations of the Cardinal McCarrick scandal has to have an effect on that faith. That alone makes this far different that 2002. That said, now is not the time to leave the Church. My wife and I remain faithful to the Church and pray for strong moral leadership.

The Priorities of the Left

'Nuf said!

A Statement from 'Uncle Ted's' Enablers, the USCCB

More arse covering, weeping crocodile tears of repentance, and lies, 'But we had no idea'!

From the USCCB

President of U.S. Bishops Conference Issues Statement on Course of Action Responding to Moral Failures on Part of Church Leaders

 

August 1, 2018

WASHINGTON—Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston and President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, has issued the following statement noting the steps the U.S. Bishops Conference will take in addressing the failures of the Church in protecting the people of God.   

Cardinal DiNardo's full statement follows:

"The accusations against Archbishop Theodore McCarrick reveal a grievous moral failure within the Church. They cause bishops anger, sadness, and shame; I know they do in me. They compel bishops to ask, as I do, what more could have been done to protect the People of God. Both the abuses themselves, and the fact that they have remained undisclosed for decades, have caused great harm to people's lives and represent grave moral failures of judgement on the part of Church leaders.

These failures raise serious questions. Why weren't these allegations of sins against chastity and human dignity disclosed when they were first brought to Church officials? Why wasn't this egregious situation addressed decades sooner and with justice? What must our seminaries do to protect the freedom to discern a priestly vocation without being subject to misuse of power?

Archbishop McCarrick will rightly face the judgement of a canonical process at the Holy See regarding the allegations against him, but there are also steps we should be taking as the Church here in the United States. Having prayed about this, I have convened the USCCB Executive Committee.  This meeting was the first of many among bishops that will extend into our Administrative Committee meeting in September and our General Assembly in November. All of these discussions will be oriented toward discerning the right course of action for the USCCB. This work will take some time but allow me to stress these four points immediately.

First, I encourage my brother bishops as they stand ready in our local dioceses to respond with compassion and justice to anyone who has been sexually abused or harassed by anyone in the Church. We should do whatever we can to accompany them.

Second, I would urge anyone who has experienced sexual assault or harassment by anyone in the Church to come forward. Where the incident may rise to the level of a crime, please also contact local law enforcement.

Third, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops will pursue the many questions surrounding Archbishop McCarrick's conduct to the full extent of its authority; and where that authority finds its limits, the Conference will advocate with those who do have the authority. One way or the other, we are determined to find the truth in this matter.

Finally, we bishops recognize that a spiritual conversion is needed as we seek to restore the right relationship among us and with the Lord. Our Church is suffering from a crisis of sexual morality. The way forward must involve learning from past sins.

Let us pray for God's wisdom and strength for renewal as we follow St. Paul's instruction: 'Do not conform yourselves to this age but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and pleasing and perfect' (Romans 12:2)."

Chevalier Charles Coulombe on The Parson's Tale

The Chevalier and Mr Frankini discussing a book recently published by Tumblar House, The Parson's Tale. The Chevalier points out that this Tale from Chaucer is seldom translated into modern English, usually just being summarised in modern translations.

Thus, the moral teaching of the Parson on fashion is lost. This leads to a discussion of fashion and morality.

The Author of 'The Dictator Pope' on the Rodríguez Maradiaga-Pineda Corruption Scandal

So Francis waited a year to accept this corrupt pervert's resignation? Why am I not surprised?

Chevalier Sire tweeted this as a series of tweets. I've merged them for ease of reading.

From @DictatorPope, the official Twitter account of Chevalier Henry Sire, SMOM (suspended), author of The Dictator Pope and Phoenix From the Ashes.

For my readers: on 20 July it was announced that the Pope had accepted the resignation of Bishop Pineda, the auxiliary bishop of Tegucigalpa who has been accused of a wide range of sexual and financial offences. What is worth noting is that he had submitted that resignation a good 12 months earlier, when the findings of the papal enquiry into his case were first available. Why did it take 12 months to accept his resignation?

Presumably because of the continued protection given by Cardinal Rodríguez Maradiaga, who even put Pineda in sole charge of the archdiocese during his own recent absences. The result was the state of fear suffered by those who had accused Pineda, and who supposed that the high-level protection he enjoyed was enabling him to escape scot free.

The world's media have continued to ignore this evidence that Card. Maradiaga, the man chosen by Francis, in a characteristic act of cronyism, to lead the reform of the Church, has been presiding for years over a uniquely sinister scene of corruption in his own archdiocese.

Maradiaga and Pineda will one day face their reckoning, and in the meantime we, as Catholics, should rightly feel a deep sense of revulsion and disgust.

Abortion Activist Quits Catholic Church, Walks Out of Mass Because New Priest is Pro-Life

'How many kinds of Catholicism do we have?', is the question posed by a friend who posted this article on FishEaters Forum.

My answer,

There is only one kind of Catholicism! It's called Catholicism, you know, that Faith that's been around for 2,000 years, that Faith delivered once for all to the saints, that Faith with an unchanging Teaching, the Faith of that Church Our Lord said that the gates of hell would not prevail against and that He would be with forever?!

I don't know what 'faith' this woman belongs to, but it sure as hell ain't Catholicism. However, I'm afraid that she belongs to the same 'faith' many of our Bishops and Priests belong to.

However, I feel deeply sorry for this woman and those like her. Their opposition to the Faith of Christ was enabled by 50 years of false shepherds and bad catechesis. The 'faith' they learned at the hands of those men had nothing to do with Catholicism but, they had no way of knowing that it was heresy, pure and simple, since their 'shepherds' were handing it on to them.

From LifeNews

God forbid a Catholic priest preaches what the Catholic Church teaches. But because of that, Mary Elizabeth Williams, a staff writer for Salon and self-proclaimed Catholic, doesn’t know how she can be Catholic anymore.

William’s parish got assigned a new priest who is outspokenly pro-life and for traditional marriage, she wrote in a July 29 piece. That’s not a surprise, as these beliefs are in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. But apparently this newfound information caused her to walk out of Mass. She agrees with a Catholicism that is “spirituality rooted in real world action, one that speaks out from the pulpit against greed and violence” and praised her parish for collecting food for the poor. But a priest teaching doctrine is “the other kind of Catholicism,” the bad kind.

She and her daughter “flinched when he spoke of ‘traditional’ marriage, which can ‘only be between a man and woman,’” she wrote. She knew the “Vatican’s official stance on marriage equality,” but preferred the previous priest who quoted Pope Francis’ unverified statement about gay marriage (“God makes us who we are and loves us as we are”).

The major thing that set her off and caused her to walk out was his position on abortion. She had to “figure out where my daughters and I fit in within a culture that is inhospitable to women,” she wrote. This “inhospitality has become intolerable,” she added, because the priest dared to quote Mother Teresa saying that “the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself.”

She continued to write about why this is harmful to a woman, using a 2012 story of a pregnant teen with leukemia who, according to the CNN link she provided, “had been undergoing chemotherapy, died from complications of the disease.” But according to Williams, the teen was denied chemo because she was pregnant. Seems like she didn’t thoroughly read the link.

She doesn’t “expect any parish to contradict the church’s official stance on key issues,” however, she said a priest cannot “speak authoritatively on the motivations of women with regard to their own bodies” because he has “never faced that choice — or likely even spoken honestly with someone who has.”

Afterwards she had a talk with her 14-year-old daughter about “what to do when our personal beliefs don’t match up with what someone in authority says we should do.” It’s probably safe to say she will not be returning to Mass, claiming that “it’s not our beliefs that have changed; it’s our staffing.”

The Free Press

I seem to have let my noon post on Catholic economics and related subjects slip through the cracks. At any rate, here is Belloc discussing 'The Free Press' and how its 'freedom' is entirely contingent on pleasing its advertisers.

From the ChesterBelloc Mandate

Side by side with the development of Capitalism went a change in the Press from its primitive condition to a worse. The development of Capitalism meant that a smaller and a yet smaller number of men commanded the means of production and of distribution whereby could be printed and set before a large circle a news-sheet fuller than the old model. When distribution first changed with the advent of the railways the difference from the old condition was accentuated, and there arose perhaps one hundred, perhaps two hundred "organs," as they were called, which, in this country and the Lowlands of Scotland, told men what their proprietors chose to tell them, both as to news and as to opinion. The population was still fairly well spread; there were a number of local capitals; distribution was not yet so organized as to permit a paper printed as near as Birmingham, even, to feel the competition of a paper printed in London only 100 miles away. Papers printed as far from London,[Pg 10] as York, Liverpool or Exeter were the more independent.

Further the mass of men, though there was more intelligent reading (and writing, for that matter) than there is to-day, had not acquired the habit of daily reading.

It may be doubted whether even to-day the mass of men (in the sense of the actual majority of adult citizens) have done so. But what I mean is that in the time of which I speak (the earlier part, and a portion of the middle, of the nineteenth century), there was no reading of papers as a regular habit by those who work with their hands. The papers were still in the main written for those who had leisure; those who for the most part had some travel, and those who had a smattering, at least, of the Humanities.

The matter appearing in the newspapers was often written by men of less facilities. But the people who wrote them, wrote them under the knowledge that their audience was of the sort I describe. To this day in the healthy remnant of our old State, in the country villages, much of this tradition survives. The country folk in my own neighbourhood[Pg 11] can read as well as I can; but they prefer to talk among themselves when they are at leisure, or, at the most, to seize in a few moments the main items of news about the war; they prefer this, I say, as a habit of mind, to the poring over square yards of printed matter which (especially in the Sunday papers) are now food for their fellows in the town. That is because in the country a man has true neighbours, whereas the towns are a dust of isolated beings, mentally (and often physically) starved.

Meanwhile, there had appeared in connection with this new institution, "The Press," a certain factor of the utmost importance: Capitalist also in origin, and, therefore, inevitably exhibiting all the poisonous vices of Capitalism as its effect flourished from more to more. This factor was subsidy through advertisement.

At first the advertisement was not a subsidy. A man desiring to let a thing be known could[Pg 12] let it be known much more widely and immediately through a newspaper than in any other fashion. He paid the newspaper to publish the thing that he wanted known, as that he had a house to let, or wine to sell.

But it was clear that this was bound to lead to the paradoxical state of affairs from which we began to suffer in the later nineteenth century. A paper had for its revenue not only what people paid in order to obtain it, but also what people paid in order to get their wares or needs known through it. It, therefore, could be profitably produced at a cost greater than its selling price. Advertisement revenue made it possible for a man to print a paper at a cost of 2d. and sell it at 1d.

In the simple and earlier form of advertisement the extent and nature of the circulation was the only thing considered by the advertiser, and the man who printed the newspaper got more and more profit as he extended that circulation by giving more reading matter for a better-looking paper and still selling it further and further below cost price.[Pg 13]

When it was discovered how powerful the effect of suggestion upon the readers of advertisements could be, especially over such an audience as our modern great towns provide (a chaos, I repeat, of isolated minds with a lessening personal experience and with a lessening community of tradition), the value of advertising space rapidly rose. It became a more and more tempting venture to "start a newspaper," but at the same time, the development of capitalism made that venture more and more hazardous. It was more and more of a risky venture to start a new great paper even of a local sort, for the expense got greater and greater, and the loss, if you failed, more and more rapid and serious. Advertisement became more and more the basis of profit, and the giving in one way and another of more and more for the 1d. or the 1/2d. became the chief concern of the now wealthy and wholly capitalistic newspaper proprietor.

Long before the last third of the nineteenth century a newspaper, if it was of large circulation, was everywhere a venture or a property dependent wholly upon its advertisers. It had ceased to consider its public save as a bait[Pg 14] for the advertiser. It lived (in this phase) entirely on its advertisement columns.

New York Abortion Activists Spied On Pro-Lifers, Then Lied About Them In Court

Baby-killers lie! Who's surprised at that?

From The Federalist

The district court’s detailed summary of the facts exposes the lies and tactics abortion activists and politicians rely upon to silence pro-life voices.

In May 2018, New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman resigned from office in disgrace following reports that he had physically assaulted four women. Before his departure, Schneiderman had launchd a year-long investigation into peaceful pro-life protestors. He eventually filed suit against 13 individuals in June 2017, alleging violations of the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE) and the state and city corollaries.

Ironically, in a press release announcing the lawsuit, Schneiderman accused the protestors of “threatening, violent, and obstructive behavior” at Choices Women’s Medical Center, a Queens, New York abortion facility.

However, after holding a hearing on the claims, a federal judge found the attorney general’s witnesses were not reliable and “that despite the availability of hundreds of hours of video evidence, the [attorney general] has not cited a single video that corroborates the witness testimony claiming near-weekly violations. Instead, the video evidence contradicts the escorts’ accounts of protestor conduct on specific occasions.”

While the decision obviously represents a victory for the defendants, most of whom are members of the Church at the Rock or Grace Baptist Church, the district court’s detailed summary of the facts proves important for another reason: It exposes the lies and tactics abortion activists and politicians rely upon to silence pro-life voices.

Government Surveillance of Pro-Life Activists

In her 100-plus page order, Judge Carol Bagley Amon, a George H.W. Bush appointee, dispassionately detailed Schneiderman’s efforts to keep the Christian protestors quiet, and why. At a press conference held outside the Choices facility to announce his lawsuit against the protestors, Schneiderman declared this is “not a nation where you can choose your point of view.”

In furtherance of these efforts, the attorney general dispatched undercover investigators to Choices, with most of the investigators “pretending to be patients and their companions, and wearing hidden cameras recording video and audio.” But, as Bagley Amon explained, “[d]espite these investigative activities, the [attorney general] did not call any of its investigators as witnesses, and introduced few of the undercover videos as evidence.”

In addition to the undercover investigators, Schneiderman used two of the abortion “escorts”—volunteers who walked abortion clients into the Choice facility—to help gather evidence. The escorts, Pearl Brady and Theresa White, wore recording devices and helped prepare a “protester dossier” that collected personal information about the protestors.

White recorded the protestors’ license plate numbers and periodically searched the Internet for information about the protestors. Brady also conducted Internet searches to learn information about the individuals protesting outside Choices and “created and maintained a Facebook account in which she pretended to be ‘Shelly Walker,’ a vocal and fictitious anti-abortion advocate. Brady used this fake account to ‘friend’ some of the protestors on Facebook, gather information about them, and determine whether they posted online any of the photos and videos they took outside Choices.”

In Court, Pretend You Don’t Know The Truth

Brady also used Facebook to communicate via “group chat” with fellow escort witnesses about how to testify in depositions: “Just remember,” she said, “yes, no, I don’t know, I don’t remember, and I don’t understand the question. Short answers. Don’t elaborate. This is for them to get more information, and it’s our job to give them as little help as possible.” These “directions” led the federal judge to question Brady’s veracity.

The attorney general called Brady, White, and several other escorts to testify as witnesses at a hearing held between February 12 and March 6, 2018. The judge found these witnesses’ testimony largely unreliable based on the “inconsistencies between [the witnesses’] descriptions of protestor conduct and the conduct shown in the supporting videos and photographs.” Although the district court generously called the witnesses’ sworn testimony “exaggerated descriptions of protestor misconduct,” “inconsistencies,” or “misremembered specific events,” the truth is the abortion activists lied.

For instance, one escort testified that two protestors “moved into [her],” but when questioned further revealed they had not actually moved “into her” but only close to her. The same escort had also testified in a deposition that the defendants had unlawfully obstructed clients from entering the abortion facility, but admitted after being confronted with a video recording that there was no such obstruction.

The district court also reviewed the security videos admitted as evidence and concluded that, contrary to the attorney general’s claim, the videos did not show the protestors obstructing access to Choices. Additionally, a security guard falsely testified that protestors would “shoulder check” clients, but when questioned on cross-examination, he admitted that what he really meant was that someone accidentally bumped into another person.

More Doctored and Exaggerated Evidence

Beyond the false testimony from the abortion escorts, the attorney general attempted to prove one of the protestors illegally intimidated clients when she filmed women on two occasions. The judge, however, noted that the protestor credibly testified that they “began filming because they had ‘a lot of incidents where the escorts would just surround, surround us ladies, at least those that were giving out literatures, [sic] and they would purposely push us out the way [sic] so, to have something documented, to have it on video just to protect ourselves because it’s going to be, when they call the cops, I want to be able to show the cops we didn’t do anything wrong.” Given the escorts’ propensity to lie, the protestors acted prudently, as well as legally, since they avoided capturing the clients’ faces on video.

Nonetheless, Bagley Amon refused to find that the witnesses intentionally lied at the hearing, stating instead “their overstatements of what occurred and who caused it are colored by their views that the protestors are overzealous and that it is the escorts’ mission to shield patients from any interaction with them.” But it wasn’t just the abortion activists’ testimony that was euphemistically “overstated,” it was also forms the abortion facility kept supposedly detailing confrontations with the protestors.

The attorney general attempted to admit these forms, which consisted of “Clinic Escort Recaps” and “Protester Experience Questionnaires,” but the judge refused to give that “evidence” any weight, finding the forms were not reliable. For instance, the Clinic Escort Recap forms, which escorts completed during a debriefing inside the abortion facility after the protestors left, purportedly provided an overview of the day’s events and noted any significant incidents. But the details included were false.

Bagley Amon illustrated this problem by pointing to one Clinic Escort Recap that stated: “Mary Lou called [the police] at 8:10 after being shoved by Ron and Griepp.” But, as Bagley Amon noted, the escort admitted during the hearing that the men did not “actually shove her,” but just moved toward her very quickly.

The attorney general also sought to prove the protestors violated the law by sharing the responses clients provided in “Protester Experience Questionnaires.” These questionnaires asked clients to summarize any interaction with protestors and any efforts to prevent them from entering the abortion facility.

The judge refused to consider this evidence because only a sampling of the questionnaires was submitted. Most were destroyed. When asked about the facility’s decision to destroy the forms, the abortion facility’s director of the volunteer escort program lied, claiming she had a system for deciding which questionnaires to keep, before eventually admitting she had no system.

Bad Behavior Is a Bad Reason to Respond In Kind?

Although the judge refused to call the abortion facility witnesses liars, she nonetheless concluded that their testimony was “insufficiently reliable” to support the attorney general’s accusation that the defendants used force against the escorts and clients. The district court likewise rejected claims that the defendants intentionally harassed the clients, in violation of the access laws. Yet the judge added a word of caution, telling the defendants that her “decision should not embolden the defendants to engage in more aggressive conduct,” noting that some of the protestors’ actions came close to crossing the line.

Goodwill and non-confrontational offers of help, however, won’t placate abortion activists, as seen most recently when the Texas-based Whole Woman’s Health abortion facility lobbied the South Bend, Indiana mayor to prevent a pregnancy resource center from locating next door. The nearly 35-year-old Women’s Care Center pledge to prohibiting all protesting on its property and stressed that there has never been an act of violence associated with its organization.The judge added a practical point that pro-life protestors would be wise to heed: When a client asks to be left alone, voluntarily disengaging is evidence of goodwill. Continuing to hound the women will annoy and not persuade, and not only violates the law but would be contrary to the defendants’ stated objectives.

Nonetheless, the Democratic major, Pete Buttigieg, vetoed the common council’s rezoning approval necessary for the Women’s Care Center to open. Buttigieg justified his decision based on the same type of evidence Bagley Amon found worthless— abortion facility employees’ self-reported, anecdotal claims of violence.

Whole Woman’s Health’s reliance on fake statistics benefited the abortion provider no more than the New York-based Choice abortion facility’s attempt to silence protestors with false claims of violence. Following the mayor’s veto and the common council’s failure to override the veto, a business owner across the street offered to sell his property (which was properly zoned) to the Women’s Care Center. This location proves even more ideal, because women facing crisis pregnancies will be able to access the pregnancy resource center without crossing paths with the protestors picketing across the street.

Word of the Day: Terce

TERCE. Third hour of the Divine Office, which is to be said at about 9 A.m. The beginning hymn is in commemoration of the Holy Spirit's descent on the Apostles and is followed by three variable psalms, a short reading, versicle and response, and the collect of the day. Terce is now technically part of the hora media (middle hour), said after Lauds and before Vespers. (Etym. tertius, third.)

+++++

With the gutting of the Divine Office and its replacement with McOffice, secular clergy and Religious who do not pray the Office in common are now allowed to pick one of the Little Hours (Terce, Sext, and None) to recite sometime between 'Morning Prayer' and 'Evening Prayer' thus totally destroying the ancient framework of the Office. That framework may go back to Apostolic times, and was definitely in place by the time of St Benedict, Father of Western Monasticism in the sixth century AD. It is based on the Psalmist's 'Seven times a day I have given praise to thee, for the judgments of thy justice.' Psalm 118:164.

Apropos My Post 'Confession Should be Outlawed, Says Chair of Indian Women’s Commission'

My answer to Confession Should be Outlawed, Says Chair of Indian Women’s Commission!

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 1 AUGUST – THE CHAINS OF SAINT PETER

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 1 AUGUST – THE CHAINS OF SAINT PETER: During the reign of Theodosius the younger, his wife Eudoxia went to Jerusalem to fulfil a vow, and while she was there she was honoured...

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 1 AUGUST – THE SEVEN HOLY MACCABEES

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 1 AUGUST – THE SEVEN HOLY MACCABEES: At Antioch in Syria took place the martyrdom of the Seven Holy Maccabees, seven Jewish brothers who lived in Old Testament times. Accor...

1 August, A Chesterton Calendar

AUGUST 1st

A man must be orthodox upon most things, or he will never even have time to preach his own heresy.

‘George Bernard Shaw.’

Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 44684-44686). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.

2 August, The Roman Martyrolgy

Quarto Nonas Augústi Luna vicesima Anno 2018 Domini

August 2nd anno Domini 2018 The 20th Day of the Moon were born into the better life: 

At Nocera-dei-Pagani, [in Campania, Italy, in the year 1787,] holy Alphonsus Mary de Liguori, Bishop of Santa-Agata-de'-Goti, and Founder of the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer. Illustrious for the zeal for the salvation of souls shown both by his writings, his words, and his ensample. Pope Gregory XVI. enrolled his name with those of the Saints, and the Supreme Pontiff Pius IX. gave him the title of Doctor of the Church. 
At Rome, in the cemetery of Callistus, [in the year 257,] the holy Pope and martyr Stephen. He was celebrating Mass during the persecution under the Emperor Valerian, when the soldiers broke in. He finished his office before the altar without fear or trembling, and then was beheaded as he sat upon his throne. 
At Nice, in Bithynia, [in the fourth century,] the holy Theodota and her three sons, who were all burned [alive] in the fire together by the order of Neretius, Consular of Bithynia, after he had first caused the eldest son, whose name was Evodius, to be beaten with clubs for his faithful confession of Christ. 
In Africa, [in the year 211,] the holy martyr Rutilius. He had fled from one place to another in order to escape the persecution, and had sometimes bought himself out of danger, when he was unexpectedly arrested and brought before the President. He was long put to the torture, then given over to the fire, and so crowned with a noble testimony. 
At Padua, [in the second century,] the holy Maximus, Bishop of that city, who died a blessed death, famous for miracles. 
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
R. Thanks be to God.

Memes of the Day