Wolves at the Vatican - Diocese of Scranton

Wow. What an article by Christopher Ferrera at the Remnant.

(www.RemnantNewspaper.com) It has been my great privilege to write for this venerable journal regarding some of the most important events in recent Church history, including the election of Pope Benedict XVI, which Michael Matt and I were fortunate enough to witness in Rome itself beneath the very balcony of Saint Peter’s Basilica. But how does one gather his wits on such short notice to offer a useful assessment of an event as epochal as the abdication of a Roman Pontiff, and in particular this Pontiff, whose dramatic gestures have favorably altered the landscape of our devastated ecclesial commonwealth in ways we could only hope for during the long and increasingly ruinous pontificate of John Paul “the Great.”

Two questions immediately present themselves: Can a Pope resign, that is, abdicate, and why did Pope Benedict do so? The first is easily answered, at least technically. As the Catholic Encyclopedia observes: “Like every other ecclesiastical dignity, the papal throne may also be resigned.” Indeed, “[t]he reasons which make it lawful for a bishop to abdicate his see, such as the necessity or utility of his particular church, or the salvation of his own soul, apply in a stronger manner to the one who governs the universal church.” And while there is no higher earthly authority to which a Pope can tender his resignation, “he himself by the papal power can dissolve the spiritual marriage between himself and the Roman Church.” We can dispense by anticipation with any contrary canonical arguments we can expect hear from the amateur canonists of the Internet. None other than Pope Boniface VIII, that great exemplar of the papal supremacy, decreed the inherent capacity of a Pope to resign his own office, which decree is codified in the Corpus Juris Canonici (Cap. Quoniam I, de renun., in 6).

So, technically and logically at least a Pope has the capacity to renounce his own office as Vicar of Christ. And the abdication of a Pope, while exceedingly rare, is not unprecedented. There are several examples, including the well-known abdication of Pope Celestine V in 1294. One case is particularly striking: Pope Benedict IX (1033-44), who “had long caused scandal to the Church by his disorderly life, freely renounced the pontificate and took the habit of a monk,” to be succeeded by Clement II. (Benedict IX attempted to reclaim the papal throne after Clement’s death, but evidently failed in the endeavor).

But the abdication of Benedict XVI appears to be sui generis—a purely discretionary decision by a pontiff who is neither incapacitated nor under some objective duty to resign on account of, say, personal scandal or a contested election that has thrown the Church into turmoil, as we see with the abdication of Pope Gregory XII during the Great Western Schism. Quite the contrary, by all appearances, including the elegant text of his own statement of resignation, the Pope retains to the full his intellectual acuity and suffers from no life-threating medical condition, as the Vatican itself insists.

Why, then, did Benedict XVI abdicate, and so suddenly? The proffered explanation of declining health and strength, which has afflicted any number of Popes who remained in office until God called them, would suggest a Pope who has simply failed in the virtue of perseverance and done something contemptible. (Dante for this reason places Pope Celestine in Hell.) But charity counsels that we seek another explanation. Hilary White of Life Site News has pointed me to the view of theologian Brian Flanagan, who opines that the Pope’s “resignation” reflects a two-fold rationale: “the possible practical benefits of having a younger man… at the helm, preventing the administrative and bureaucratic mayhem of the last years of John Paul’s papacy, [and] this move symbolically brings the papacy down to its proper size. The papacy can now be clearly seen as a crucial office of the universal church, but one in which the pope remains an officeholder, rather than an irreplaceable, magical figure.”

I think Flanagan may have it have half right: the Pope has abdicated because he perceives that he is simply unable to mitigate any further the ecclesial chaos John Paul “the Great” left behind after the vast crowds had dispersed and their rowdy cheers of “Santo Subito” had faded away. I believe—or at least I want to believe—that Benedict sees as the only hope for an ecclesial restoration the elevation of a younger, fitter conservative to the Throne of Peter. I also believe that Benedict has concluded that if he were to remain in office for several years to come, something disastrous would happen that a more vigorous successor, if elected now, might be able to avert—about which more in a moment.

In assessing this hypothesis we must begin with the Pope’s extraordinary statement of abdication—the first of its kind in Church history—to see what we can see. Given the enormous historical importance of the document, I set it forth entirely here:

Dear Brothers,

I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church. After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry. I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.

Dear Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and work with which you have supported me in my ministry and I ask pardon for all my defects. And now, let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff. With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer.

From the Vatican, 10 February 2013

The first clue the document provides about what is really going on is that it was issued during a Consistory convoked for the canonizations of saints of the pre-Vatican II epoch: First, the martyrs Antonio Primaldo and 799 companions, beheaded at Otranto, Italy in 1480 by invading Turkish soldiers after they refused to convert to Islam. (It is said that the headless body of Primaldo, a humble tailor, stood erect and could not be toppled until every last of one his companions had been martyred.) Second, Laura di Santa Caterina da Siena Montoya y Upegui (1874-1949), the virgin foundress of the Congregation of the Missionaries of Mary Immaculate, who led a mission to convert the Indians of Latin America. Third, Maria Guadalupe García Zavala (1878-1963), foundress of the Handmaids of St. Margaret Mary and the Poor and a victim of the Mexican government’s persecution of the Catholic Church.

Tellingly, what appear to be Pope Benedict’s final three acts of canonization—generally acknowledged by theologians to be an infallible act of the Magisterium because it establishes a cult for the universal Church—involved only classic candidates for sainthood. Their heroic virtues were patent and were accompanied by the highest fidelity to their stations in the Church. This is quite unlike the non-infallible beatification of John Paul II, establishing only a local cult in the dioceses of Rome and Krakow (although this crucial distinction was promptly ignored). Concerning this beatification, Vatican spokesmen offered the astonishing rationale that “Pope John Paul II is being beatified not because of his impact on history or on the Catholic Church, but because of the way he lived the Christian virtues of faith, hope and love... John Paul II is being beatified for holiness, not his papacy….” A Pope whose beatification had nothing to do with his pontificate, and yet is called “the Great,” is another of the innumerable oddities that litter the post-conciliar landscape of the Church.

Now, Pope Benedict’s abdication is to take effect a mere seventeen days from today, on February 28, 2013 at precisely 8 p.m. This means that Benedict will avoid the dubious canonization of John Paul II and the simply absurd beatification of Paul VI. The steamroller driving toward those vexatious events, sweeping aside all reasonable objections, has suddenly been stopped dead in its tracks. Did the Pope abdicate, at least in part, to slow down John Paul II’s saint-making machine, which was threatening to canonize the Council of which Benedict himself (in his more candid moments) has been so critical? We may be permitted think so.

Consider: Benedict might have been wrestling with the propriety of raising John Paul to the altars of the universal Church and declaring Paul VI a beatus, thus placing his papal imprimatur on what he himself, when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, described as a post-conciliar “process of decay”—a process only Pope Benedict has done anything to reverse since the Council. Yet, Benedict was also under tremendous pressure from “conciliarist” forces to perform both acts in order to shore up the collapsing credibility of the conciliar aggiornamento. At this very moment, the trickle of traditionalist critiques is becoming a torrent of criticism by respectable theologians of the mainstream, as the “spirit” of the Council wanes while its disastrous effects become too obvious to explain away any longer. (See, for example, the posthumously revealed commentary by the eminent non-traditionalist theologian Fr. Divo Barsotti, whose diary records this damning assessment: “I am perplexed with regard to the Council: the plethora of documents, their length, often their language, these frightened me. They are documents that bear witness to a purely human assurance more than to a simple firmness of faith.”)

Thus, we can surmise that Benedict faced a dilemma: If he simply refused to exercise the papal primacy to canonize the Council, he would be met with a storm of outrage from conciliarist militants. But if he yielded to pressure and proceeded with those acts, he would have to answer to his own conscience and ultimately to the Judge of us all. Fearing that he would be unable to resist the pressure to perform the ceremonies demanded and already arranged, awaiting only his approving act, he might have concluded that his best course of action was to jump off the steamroller before it could reach its destination. It stands to reason that if Benedict were at all committed to the idea of “Saint John Paul II the Great” and “Blessed Paul VI,” he would have remained in office at least long enough to perform the necessary papal acts. Yet he has left office, in a purely discretionary manner, just as those acts were slated to occur—during the ironically designated “Year of Faith” that is taking place in the midst of the “silent apostasy” that is our inheritance from the previous two pontificates.

Or perhaps, even if this was not the Pope’s conscious intent, the Holy Ghost has intervened by prompting him to abdicate rather than inflicting further damage to the Church by acceding to the Council’s canonization via improvident acts of the Magisterium. As this newspaper noted in a recent news item, it does appear to be a miracle that, just days ago, the seemingly imminent canonization of John Paul II was abruptly postponed until at least 2014. Was that postponement Pope Benedict’s doing in anticipation of his abdication? Did he act under the influence of the Holy Ghost? These are reasonable questions in view of the shocking decision by a reigning Roman Pontiff to renounce his office even though he is neither physically nor mentally incapacitated.

Benedict’s statement does cite his awareness of his own declining mental and physical state, but these are only the normal consequences of aging. If the italicized sentences are read carefully in context, however, they provide key indications of why the Pope has abdicated in the circumstances peculiar to his pontificate. While still physically and mentally sound, he feels himself too weak of mind as well as body to confront “questions of deep relevance for the life of faith” and “to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel…”

Here we confront what I believe the Pope must know but we do not: that something wicked this way comes. Has Pope Benedict been driven from office by the wolves he feared when his Pontificate began? Recall his momentous words in the sermon during the Mass for what the conciliar neo-modernists refuse to call his coronation, but rather an “inauguration,” as if the Pope were a mere elected official: “Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves.” Among the wolves are, as always, the numberless external enemies of the Church, many of whom demanded precisely that he resign. The apostate Sinead O’Connor is typical of these. Pointing to the sex-abuse scandals that racked the pontificate of John Paul “the Great,” O’Connor declared that “Benedict is in no position to call himself Christ’s representative. The pope should stand down…”

But we can be certain that the wolves the Pope has in view are preeminently the ones nearest to him, encircling him within the very confines of a Vatican bureaucracy that has crushed the monarchical papacy under the massive machinery of an ecclesiastical democracy installed during the post-conciliar revolution, with its “collegiality” and its “reform” of the Roman Curia. I am reminded here of Bishop Fellay’s revelation that during his audience with Pope Benedict at Castel Gondolfo in August 2005, he pleaded with the Pope to take action to restore the Church fully: “You are the Pope!” said Bishop Fellay (in substance) when the two of them were left alone for a moment. But the Pope, pointing to the door of the room in which the audience took place, replied forlornly: “My authority ends at that door.”

And what is outside that door? The wolves in the Pope’s own household. The Pope himself confirms a veritable overthrow of the papacy to the extent such is humanly possible. Seen in this light, the Pope’s unprecedented discretionary abdication takes on an apocalyptic aspect. And it was Benedict himself who made it a point to link his situation precisely to the apocalyptic Third Secret of Fatima. During his pilgrimage to Fatima two years ago Benedict revealed what the Secret in its entirety foretells, which is more than what we see in the vision published in 2000 standing alone:

Beyond this great vision of the suffering of the Pope… are indicated future realities of the Church which are little by little developing and revealing themselves.… Thus it is true beyond the moment indicated in the vision, it is spoken, it is seen, the necessity of a passion of the Church that naturally is reflected in the person of the Pope; but the Pope is in the Church, and therefore the sufferings of the Church are what is announced...

As for the novelty that we can discover today in this message, it is that attacks on the Pope and the Church do not come only from outside, but the sufferings of the Church come precisely from within the Church, from sins that exist in the Church. This has always been known, but today we see it in a really terrifying way: that the greatest persecution of the Church does not come from enemies outside, but arises from sin in the Church.

In light of these statements one must ask: What does the Pope know that he has been constrained not to tell us? Why does he speak of terrifying “future realities” that are developing “little by little” without telling us what they are? Does he know, for example, why, as we see in the vision, a future Pope meets his end atop a hill outside a ruined city filled with the dead, from which he has escaped only to be executed by a band of soldiers? Has he read the words of the Virgin that would clarify the vision’s post-apocalyptic scenario? (Only a fool would think that the Mother of God assigned to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Vatican Secretary of State who covered up the Father Maciel scandal, the task of “interpreting” a vision she herself must have explained quite clearly.) Are the Virgin’s words intimated in the Pope’s statement that “beyond the moment indicated in the vision” the details of a terrifying future are “spoken,” not merely seen? What part of the Secret is beyond the moment indicated in the vision if not a text that speaks where the vision is silent?

Whatever the Pope sees coming must be the motive for his abdication, unless we are willing to conclude that he simply wearied of his office and decided in his weakness to abandon it. No, there must be more. I echo the sentiments of the Editor in concluding that Pope Benedict has sacrificed himself to the wolves, lying down in front of them while they sniff the corpse of his pontificate in puzzlement, surprised by their ultimately easy prey, and momentarily distracted from what may already have been put in motion respecting the next conclave.

Benedict, we can suppose, has placed his hope in the Holy Ghost and the election of a successor who might resist where he can no longer resist, repel what he can no longer repel, restore in full what he no longer has the strength to recover in full from those who have kept it from us—including, one must say, the two ill-starred predecessors it is insanely proposed to exalt as among the greatest of Popes. This seems to be what Pope Benedict is saying when he declares, surely in the light of Fatima: “let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff.”

All of this, of course, is speculation. But reasonable speculation is all we have in the face of this astounding and frightening development. The Pope who, whatever his failings, ended the diabolical suppression of the traditional Roman Rite permitted by his predecessors, and who lifted the preposterous “excommunication” of the bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X, has suddenly resigned. We are left in a mixed state of bewilderment, gratitude, fear for the future, and hope for what the Holy Ghost may yet bring about despite the best laid plans of the wolves who now look down upon our fallen Pope, pondering their next move. Our Lady of Fatima, confound them!

SSPX on the Abdication of the Holy Father - Diocese of Scranton

Most interesting. But has the ship already sailed in regards to the SSPX? Quite possibly.

The Society of Saint Pius X has learned of the sudden announcement about the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, which will be effective on the evening of February 28, 2013.  Despite the doctrinal differences that were still evident on the occasion of the theological talks held between 2009 and 2011, the Society of Saint Pius X does not forget that the Holy Father had the courage to recall the fact that the Traditional Mass had never been abrogated, and to do away with the canonical sanctions that had been imposed on its bishops following their consecration in 1988.  It is not unaware of the opposition that these decisions have stirred up, obliging the pope to justify himself to the bishops of the whole world.  The Society expresses its gratitude to him for the strength and the constancy that he has shown toward it in such difficult circumstances, and assures him of its prayers for the time that he wishes to devote from now on to recollection.

Following its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the Society of Saint Pius X reaffirms its attachment to eternal Rome, Mother and Instructress [Mater et Magistra] of Truth, and to the See of Peter.  It reiterates its desire to make its contribution, according to its abilities, to resolving the grave crisis that is shaking the Church.  It prays that, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the cardinals of the next conclave may elect the pope who, according to the will of God, will work for the restoration of all things in Christ (Eph 1:10).

Menzingen, February 11, 2013,

on the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes

Pope Benedict to resign - Diocese of Scranton

The first Vicar of Christ to resign in 600 years.

In the consistory for canonizations today, Pope Benedict XVI announced he will resign, "for the good of the Church", on Feb. 28.
--------------------

Text of the address:

Dear Brothers, I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church. After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry. I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.

Dear Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and work with which you have supported me in my ministry and I ask pardon for all my defects. And now, let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff. With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer.

Quinquagesima Sunday - Diocese of Scranton

Happy Quinquagesima Sunday!

Huh?

Do you mean to say that YOUR catholic parish didn't celebrate Quinquagesima Sunday?

Not surprising.

Quinquagesima is Latin for "fiftieth", or "fiftieth day before Easter".

Today is a special day, reminding us that the physical suffering and renewal of our souls through the Lenten sacrifices are close at hand.

Wednesday, actually.

Traddy and his family spent a refreshing morning at a catholic parish somewhere in the diocese of Scranton where tradition and God are celebrated.

A very traditional Mass in their own tradition was celebrated, the homily was well done, with no thought to the entertainment of the congregation.

Traddy and his family will be returning, and watch here for more information on this particular parish.

"O come, let us worship and fall down, and kneel before the Lord our maker: for he is the Lord our God."

God love you!

7 Year Old Asks The President to Not Kill Babies - Diocese of Scranton

Check this out!

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/29/7-year-old-asks-obama-please-change-the-law-killing-babies/

Catechesis or Heresy? - Diocese of Scranton

Since the 1960s and Vatican II, a heretical revolution has overtaken Catholic catechesis and theology, just as it has in the liturgy of the church and the faith of the average church goer. I have taken the time to meet and speak at length to several students of our Scranton diocese high schools, and these students seem to know hardly anything definite. They lack the basic knowledge that I had in catholic elementary schools back in the late 70's. I of course was taught by several older nuns and now looking back, it seems to me that they were unaffected by Vatican II.

In other words, I knew and could explain my faith and religion to others.

Now, these students spend time learning the history of other religions. They are taught to respect and even celebrate these differences, even though fifty years ago these differences were defined as heresy. But they neglect their own Catholic Faith. They have never heard of a nightly examination of conscience, devotion to the Holy Name, or Grace, Faith, and Works. We used to teach our young catholics about Heaven, Hell, and the Last Things. Today how we feel is more important. Relativism has taken over.

Today some truths are ignored or outright denied. Angels and demons are portrayed as symbols, not the real spiritual beings we know them to be. They are superstitions worthy of scorn.

The priest is seen primarily as a counselor, there more to help us deal with football season being over or seen as the "parish administrator" there to plan the bazaar. A rather corporate like view of one that is supposed to be acting in persona Christi.

The Real Presence is only a symbol of Christ, and the Incarnation of God in Jesus Christ is to be questioned. Do you remember when the chalice was veiled due to its sacredness? Do you remember when altar boys held patens beneath your chin in case the blessed sacrament should fall to the ground?

Confession is not deemed to be important. One only has to see the availability of the sacrament to understand what priests think of it today.

Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is barely thought of. Try to find a church offering this devotion.

Miracles did not happen, they were stories invented by the writers of the Bible to suck the superstitious population into accepting Christ.

The inspiration of the Bible is a myth and can be rationally explained.

These are some of the outright lies being taught or hinted at to Catholics in our post-conciliar times. They all contradict Catholic Tradition, and violate many of the defined dogmas of our Faith.

How did these Protestant ideas find their way into holy Mother Church? Why are they allowed to circulate? Why hasn't Rome smashed these heresies, and in some cases, why do they seem to embrace them?

If what our religion has taught for 2,000 years was right, how can it now be wrong? Am I to believe that some in the church, who strive to promote the ideas of Protestant heresy suddenly have learned some truth that men such as Ignatius, Aquinas, and Augustine were unable to grasp?

What do you think?

Terrible Day - Diocese of Scranton

40 years of murdering our children.

4 more years of occupation by a man that makes others pay money to fund our willful murder.

When does it end?

Islamic Threat Against the West - Diocese of Scanton

The peaceful, friendly Mohammedans boldly remind Europe of their goal - a worldwide Caliphate.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/20/watch-the-wild-vid-of-islamists-protesting-in-england-shariah-is-an-inevitability/

Check it out and pray for leaders who will protect the population from the evil of Islam.

Lol! No one's going to protect us except us! And that is why they are so hellbent on disarming the populace.

Get a gun, get a permit to carry, and shoot often, become an expert. You'll be glad you did.

American Hostages Taken - diocese of Scranton

It seems that an Al Qaeda affiliated group has several Americans they are holding hostage in a natural gas plant in Algeria. Pray that the President can turn his attention away from stealing our liberty to do something about this.

SSPX Future? - Diocese of Scranton

Sadly, it seems that what we have thought we knew for sometime is true.

It has always been my hope that the SSPX would come home, be reconciled with Rome, and be an ally in the troubled times ahead.

We have known there is a small group of priests, led by Bp. Williamson who have operated as obstacles to the talks. While several of those priests have been expelled from the SSPX, now it would seem that perhaps they are organizing a "true" SSPX.

It has also been rumored that Bp. Williamson will be in the United States in two weeks to consecrate a new SSPX Bishop.

Can you say "excommunication"?

I truly think Bp. Fellay wants to see SSPX regularize. If Williamson and his misguided compatriots are truly gone perhaps the way forward for Rome and the Society is less muddied.

We must pray for all concerned. The SSPX coming back into the Church is of utmost importance to the future of the church.

PAX

Race Relations - The White Position - Diocese of Scranton

It is about time that the white position is stated. Has Buchanan been called a racist for this article? Most likely, and I will be too. I've been called several things for posting similar comments myself. How anyone can read this and think "that guys a racist" is beyond me.

So, read and enjoy, and be sure to comment below!

BUCHANAN TO OBAMA
By Patrick J. Buchanan

Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America .. Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation.. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.... This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.. Jeremiah Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude??

Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona ? And Johnstown, and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids...? Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ? Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?

Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?

Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.

Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago. This needs to be passed around because, this is a message everyone needs to hear!!!

I'm for a better America…
I am
Not racist,
Not violent,
Just not silent anymore.

Traddy's Back! - Diocese of Scranton

Well friends, we have suffered, we will suffer more, but we must trust in God and fear nothing. He will lead us forward. We only need to let him.

It's been a while since I've posted, nearly the whole election cycle, which saw the American people vote for a baby killing Marxist to lead them to ruin. 

What's been going on with the Traddy? Baby number 4 made her appearance and we are eternally grateful to God for her good health. 

I lost my job through no fault of my own. I have other things I am working on, but it has been slow. 

I'll be around more now. We have a lot to do. The heat is about to get turned up on Catholics around the world, and now here in America. From the French resolve to "watch" Traditional Catholics to learn if they should be clamped down on, to the American president's desire to hold the Catholic Church accountable for refusing to follow his abortion mandates, things are about to change in a big way.

Stay close to God, pray and do penance.

God bless you!

Fast and Humiliation

Fast and humiliation.

Something Catholics are called to do.

To help save the Union, will you join me in three weeks of fast and humiliation?

Give something up just as you would during Lent, however make it substantial. There must be suffering involved.

Pray on your knees. Like George Washington did. Like Abraham Lincoln did. Be humble before your Creator.

God love you.

Islamarealism

September 2 was an important anniversary. Anyone know what it was?

Read this article on the atrocities carried out by Muslims on the innocent children attending school in Beslan. Never heard about that? Could it be because the liberal media is too busy portraying wicked Mohammedans as peace loving, God fearing people who are made to look bad by some "extremists"?

One only needs to read their "holy book" to learn that every Muslim is expected to carry out jihad and to kill the unbeliever. That nice Islamic man at work? Europe was filled with "nice Islamic men" until they reached the numbers they need to effect change. Look at France, Spain, and now England, where   Muslims attacked people assembling for a rally.

Have a read Here