Where's Waldo?

I saw in the papers last week where our freshly minted Bishop went out to meet the poor and downtrodden at the soup kitchen.

Fine and dandy.

No problems there.

Except that I wish he hadn't made it a photo op.

Not too pleased about that.

Since then, what's he done? Has he been seen?

Anyone know?

Need A Blessing!

I'm kinda back to a regular schedule. We just closed on our house, and have spent much time packing, moving, and now unpacking, all while trying to go about our normal lives.

If anyone knows of an orthodox priest left in our diocese with access to the Back Mountain area that would bless a house without sniggering at the request and if you can pass that info along in the comments or via email, it would be appreciated.

Likewise we are looking for a parish somewhere on our side of the Susquehanna now. If anyone knows of a hidden gem, let me know. You can contact me privately, we don't want the diocese to find out, do we?

Respect For Christ In The Eucharist - One Priests' Perspective

by Rev. Robert Lange

Americans have the option of receiving the Holy Eucharist on the tongue or in the hand. The Vatican granted us the option of receiving on the hand in 1977. This was accomplished by an indult, a lifting of the law, so we may receive either way, on the tongue or in the hand. The indult was granted because the American Bishops told the Vatican that their parishioners were clamoring for it. “We can feed ourselves” was one of the specious arguments put forward.

After Apostolic times, the Church gradually adopted Communion on the tongue as the universal practice. In the early fourth century the Arians, who denied the divinity of Christ, revived the practice of receiving Communion in the hand specifically to show a lesser respect for Christ, believing that He is not “equal to the Father.”

The universal Church law, which requires Holy Eucharist to be distributed to the faithful on their tongues, remains in force; it remains the law. However the indult has the effect of making the law inapplicable where in force.

Foreseeing the demand for the indult coming, the Sacred Office for Divine Worship sent a letter to the presidents of the bishops’ conferences to advise them how they may implement this option if granted. The letter spoke about reverence for the Holy Eucharist being the number one priority. With this in mind, the letter went into great detail trying to explain this crucial concern. The letter contained the following specifics.

Communion on the hand is an option; it is not the primary way of receiving. Catholics must be catechized to understand this important point. No one is to be forced to receive on the hand.

When receiving the Body of Christ on the hand, the faithful must be aware of the fact that each and every particle, no matter how small, is truly the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Therefore no particle should ever be discarded or treated with less than total respect due to the Body of Christ.

The faithful must also be reminded that their hands must be clean to receive our Lord, Jesus Christ.

When ordained in 1986, I was a proponent of receiving Communion in the hand, but time has changed my thinking on this issue. Seeing so many abuses and forming a deeper respect for Jesus’ true Presence in the Holy Eucharist were the factors which forced me to rethink my position.

On March 28, 1965, when the catholic college I was attending opened their newly renovated chapel, we students were told how to receive the Holy Eucharist: standing and in the hand. There was no option given. May I add that this was fully twelve years before any American diocese received the indult, which allowed for that option.

Why did those priests, abbots and bishops disobey the authority of Rome? Communion in the hand became the norm for American Catholics in the 1960’s. In many cases the practice was not presented to us as optional, but as the way to receive.

In my twenty-four years as a priest, I have served in many parishes and witnessed many Eucharistic abuses caused by receiving in the hand. I have picked Jesus off the floor from under pews and picked Him out of hymnals. I have followed people back to their seats and asked if they would give me the host back (they bring it out of a clinched hand or out of their pockets) and have witnessed many other sacrilegious desecrations of the most Blessed Sacrament, far too many and varied to mention, some so shocking most people would simply not believe my words.

As I began to see these desecrations of the Holy Eucharist, I began to understand how very sickening, disheartening and avoidable all of this actually has been. Many religious education programs teach the children how to receive on the hand, with at most a cursory mention of the traditional way of receiving on the tongue. Why? The Church documents do not support such teaching. It was the same with many American dioceses in the 1960’s when the faithful were being coerced into receiving on the hand a decade before being granted the indult.

Father Benedict Groeschel, a familiar face to EWTN viewers and an accomplished author, announced on his “Sunday Night Live With Fr. Groeschel” program that he considered Communion in the hand to be an abomination. That is strong language!

Blessed Theresa of Calcutta was asked what was the worst thing that has happened to the Church in her lifetime. She replied without hesitation, “Communion in the hand.” Again powerful language!

Why would these two great figures of our time be so fervent in their opinions regarding this issue if it did not affect their whole being? Somehow I think they would agree that Communion in the hand is a true American tragedy.

Our Holy Father, Benedict XVI leads by example. Since becoming Pope, anyone receiving Holy Eucharist from him must receive on the tongue and kneeling. He is not requiring a change throughout the world, but is giving us a profound message by example.

Proper respect shown to the Holy Eucharist is primary. Please consider these thoughts before receiving Holy Communion this Sunday. Thank you.

[We offer the above for your own personal consideration only, making no judgment on this issue ourselves]

[Send in your views]

[Michael Brown retreat in Maryland-D.C.-Virginia area: the approach of special times and Michael Brown retreat in Pittsburgh]

[Further note on picture: "In May of this year Bishop Loverde gave me permission to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in my chapel –The chapel is on the second floor of my home. The Eucharist had been reserved in the chapel less than a week when this picture was taken from the front porch of a neighbor’s home.

The person taking the picture was enamored by the beauty of the valley and decided to take a picture for her collection. When she aimed the camera towards the valley and tried to focus for the picture, she says the light coming from my house was so bright she said it was difficult trying to look into camera to view the picture to be taken (It was a cloudy day and I did not have a light on in the room /chapel where the light is coming from.) She took the picture and the image – the Star of David- is what came out on her digital camera. She did not know what to make of it. Not being Catholic, she had no understanding of the Sacrament of the Eucharist (Holy Communion). My opinion is that Our Lord wanted to give us a beautiful reminder of His true presence in the Holy Eucharist – Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity! It is a reminder that he is with us always, that we are never alone, that he is the Son of God and the Son of Man. It is a vivid reminder that he truly suffered and died on the cross and that he is present in this world – until his Second Coming – in this most special manner - the Eucharist.

Just as the Star appeared over the stable in Bethlehem when the Christ Child was born, so the Star of David has appeared through the window of my Chapel on St. David’s Church Road, Fort Valley, Virginia, to remind us of His care, love, protection, and presence in our lives today and always.

Fr. Robert Lange, December 2007]

The Age Of Bambera Begins

Well, what are everyone's feelings on this occasion of our new Bishop? It is nice to have a Bishop again, that is for sure.

Everyone seems to agree he is a nice guy.

We will see if he can lead the Church through these tough times.

We will see if can be a shepherd to all of his flock, including those who consider themselves traditional.

We will see if he is truly open to dialogue, if he will speak to those in the traditional community, with a true desire to see to their spiritual needs.

We will see if he will uphold Church teaching and hold our "Catholic" democrat politicians accountable for their actions.

We will see if he truly defends the life of the unborn.

We will see if he can preserve the deposit of faith and apply it to the times rather than adapt it to the times.

We will see if he can teach true Catholic faith and morals.

We will see if he is willing to protect our children from the gay priests in our midst.

There is a lot to see in the coming months.

And we will be watching.

How It Will Happen

I have covered this before, but it bears repeating. This is a reposting from the blog Civilus Defendus. We (meaning YOU) really have to open our eyes and see what is all around us. I can't drive to the store without seeing women covered from head to toe. The Muslims are here in large numbers, larger than you think.

The men I have noticed, are not real Muslim men from the middle east around these parts. They are what are known as jailhouse Muslims, blacks that end up in prison and convert to Islam.

Islam is a plague and one only has to look to modern Europe to see what is in store for America if our leaders continue to hide their heads in the sand and pretend that Islam is all warm and fluffy, and not the scourge it has proved itself to be time and again.

We have to be aware of what is happening, what will happen, and how it will happen. Most of what is covered in this first installment you can see all around if you open your eyes.

The Four Stages of Islamic Conquest
STAGE 1: INFILTRATION

Muslims begin moving to non-Muslim countries in increasing numbers and the beginning of cultural conflicts are visible, though often subtle.

* First migration wave to non-Muslim “host” country.
* Appeal for humanitarian tolerance from the host society.
* Attempts to portray Islam as a peaceful & Muslims as victims of misunderstanding and racism (even though Islam is not a ‘race’).
* High Muslim birth rate in host country increase Muslim population.
* Mosques used to spread Islam and dislike of host country & culture.
* Calls to criminalize “Islamophobia” as a hate crime.
* Threatened legal action for perceived discrimination.
* Offers of “interfaith dialogue” to indoctrinate non-Muslims.

How many nations are suffering from Islamic infiltration? One? A handful? Nearly every nation? The Islamic ‘leadership” of the Muslim Brotherhood and others wish to dissolve each nation’s sovereignty and replace it with the global imposition of Islamic sharia law. Sharia law, based on the koran, sira and hadith, condemns liberty and forbids equality and is inconsistent with the laws of all Western nations. As the author and historian Serge Trifkovic states:

”The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history.”

Quote Of The Day

"...from somewhere or other the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God. In the Church too this state of uncertainty reigns.
It was believed that after the Council a sunny day in the Church’s history would dawn, but instead there came a day of clouds, storms and darkness.”


- Pope Paul VI, 1972

More On The SSPX-Rome Talks

On February 18, Fr. Franz Schmidberger, superior of the Society of St. Pius X’s district of Germany, granted an interview to the site Internet Kathnews. In it, he says that the doctrinal discussions with Rome are certainly going to require much time. He recalls to mind that the principal points of divergence remain ecumenism and the relations of the Catholic Church with other religions, and especially with Judaism, “which does not worship the same God” as the Catholics. Here are some large extracts from the interview:

“For the first time we are in a position to expose calmly to competent authorities our concerns about the declarations of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar developments. These discussions are certainly going to take a long time, maybe even years. But perhaps our interlocuters recognize already after only a short time that the Priestly Society of St. Pius X is incontestably Catholic, even if there are still points of discord. This would be a huge step forward. The very discrete nature of the interviews is vital for their success, for ‘the good makes no noise, and noise does no good’. (…)

“We must avoid an exaggerated optimism about these conversations. Bishop Fellay says it will be a miracle, if they lead to a real success. (…)

“An agreement between the Holy See and the Society can mean nothing other than the following: that Rome recognizes the voice of the Magisterium prior to the council. The Society has never upheld its own positions, rather it has made itself the spokesman of the Popes, especially those who reigned from the French Revolution until Vatican Council II. The situation has changed since 1988: our objections to Rome are taken seriously and she is trying to answer them. (…)

“With the lifting of the excommunication, new faithful have joined us, barriers have been dismantled, but because of media publicity, new barriers have been raised. Nonetheless, I believe that the Pope’s courageous decision has had a positive effect not only for the Society and its apostolic work, but even more so for the entire Church. (…)

“With Benedict XVI, the Church has entered upon calmer waters. The rehabilitation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in its traditional celebration, the lifting of the decree of excommunication, the doctrinal discussions with the Holy See are very positive acts of this pontificate. At the same time, we regret the visit to the Synagogue of Rome, and above all the words of the Pope declaring that with the Jews we worship the same God.

“We Christians, we honor the Holy Trinity and we worship Our Lord Jesus Christ, consubstantial Son of the Father. The Jews of today, on the other hand, admit neither one of these two fundamental points of our holy religion. And as there is no other God but the Most Holy Trinity, no other Lord but Jesus Christ, we do not worship the same God as the Jews.

“These things were different for the just of the Old Testament: they were open to the truth of the Trinity and the divine filiation of the promised Messiah. The Pope strays in an alarming way from the words of the first Pope, St. Peter: “There is salvation in no other [but Jesus Christ]” (Acts 4:12). That applies to the whole world, including the Jews and the Moslems.”

(Source: kathnews. Traduction française: DICI n?211, March 6, 2010)

Clerical Scandals And The "Negligence Of The Pastors"

by John Vennari

Note: In light of the recent Church scandals in the news, this article published in 2002 is of even greater relevance.

It is hard to imagine a more distasteful subject than pedophilia and homosexuality in the Roman Catholic priesthood. It is even more disturbing to consider that homosexuals successfully targeted the Catholic Church for infiltration.

Yet these are the issues we are forced to confront at the same time Fatima revisionists claim that the 1984 Consecration of the world fulfilled Our Lady’s request for the Consecration of Russia, and that we are now witnessing the triumph of the Immaculate Heart. If the current state of the Church is an indication of Her triumph, I shudder to think of what would be Her defeat.

Crisis Foretold

In 1981, Father Joaquin Alonso, who had many conversations with Sister Lucy, and who was the official Fatima archivist for sixteen years, said, "It is therefore completely probable that the text (of the Third Secret of Fatima) makes concrete references to the crisis of faith within the Church and to the negligence of the pastors themselves [and the] internal struggles in the very bosom of the Church and of grave pastoral negligence of the upper hierarchy."(1)

Today’s clerical scandals are not because of mandatory celibacy, nor are they because we do not have women priests, married priests, or because there are no laity in Church authority. Rather, they are the result of the "negligence of the pastors" that Father Alonso (pictured above) maintained to be the essence of the Third Secret of Fatima.

The scandals are also the result of what Sister Lucy called the "diabolical disorientation" afflicting "so many persons who occupy places of responsibility" in the Church.(2) As will be demonstrated, the upper hierarchy has been so negligent and disoriented that it presided over a massive influx of homosexuals into the Catholic priesthood and religious orders.

And homosexuality is the real issue.

Most of today’s clerical scandals are not true cases of pedophilia (preying on pre-adolescent children) but of priests preying on teenage boys.(3) That’s homosexuality. Further, the homosexual network by and large is favorable to pedophilia and same-sex liaisons with teenagers.

This fact is admitted even by pederasts and many homosexuals. In 1998, for example, North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) representative David Thorstad eagerly proclaimed to a standing room only "gay" and lesbian group gathered in Mexico City that: "Pederasty is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization …"(4)

Further, it is well known, though not often reported in the press, that NAMBLA is a welcome participant in "Gay Pride" parades nationwide.(5)

Church Targeted

Father Enrique Rueda documented in his 1982 landmark work The Homosexual Network, Private Lives & Public Policy that homosexuals successfully targeted religious organizations for infiltration, especially the Roman Catholic Church.

The reason is clear. "There is no question" writes Father Rueda, "that the main stumbling block in the theoretical and practical acceptance of homosexuality by American society has been traditional religion. This has been perfectly understood by the leadership of the homosexual movement."(6) Further, "the importance of gaining the support of the churches or at least neutralizing them is widely acknowledged by homosexual leaders."(7)

The New York Times, for example, ran a story on January 25, 1977, entitled "From a Quiet Seminarian to Homosexual Spokesman". Journalist Lucy Fosburgh interviewed William R. Johnson, a homosexual activist who was "ordained" in the United Church of Christ.

In this interview, Johnson indicates several factors which are important for the advancement of homosexuality in the "church". (When Johnson says "church", he is misusing the term to mean all so-called Christian denominations as well as the Catholic Church.)

Johnson’s principles, explains Father Rueda, constitute a model program for the conversion of a "church" into an agent of the homosexual movement. The factors considered important to Johnson are:

* The desensitization of the church of sexual ethics.
* Promotion of pro-homosexual legislation by religious bodies.
* Organization of official commissions or similar bodies charged with studying the homosexual question.
* Establishment of homosexual organizations within the churches. (The so-called "Catholic" homosexual organizations of New Ways Ministry and Dignity will be discussed shortly.)
* The ordination of homosexuals to the ministry, preferably "liberated" homosexuals who are identified with the movement’s ideology. Johnson stated, "At the time I was deciding to try to get ordained, everybody told me: ‘Just pretend, hide the fact you’re homosexual. That’s what everybody else has done.’ But I couldn’t do it. I didn’t see how I could be a person of God and not be honest about myself".
* Willingness of homosexual clergymen to accept dual roles as leaders in their religious bodies and the homosexual movement—in fact, as agents of the movement within their churches. Johnson explained that his notoriety catapulted him into leadership in the homosexual cause. "It became apparent" he said, "that gay people were no longer willing to be shunted into the back room of the church today in an atmosphere of secrecy and guilt."(8)

Johnson’s priorities, comments Father Rueda, not only indicated how important the religious institutions are to homosexuality, but provide a checklist for ascertaining the degree to which a specific religious institution has been infiltrated by the homosexual movement.(9)

The Hierarchy Let it Happen



Father Rueda then documents a vast homosexual network among various denominations, including the Roman Catholic Church. Significantly, Vatican II’s encouragement of "inter-religious dialogue" is what made possible the pan-religious cooperation among homosexual groups.(10) Today’s high number of homosexual priests is one of ecumenism’s first fruits.(11)

Father Rueda chronicled five primary means by which homosexuals infiltrated seminaries, chanceries, and Catholic institutions.

1) Patterns of Collaboration, citing many instances of cooperation between Roman Catholic institutions and leaders of the Homosexual Movement.

2) Intellectual Infiltration: This is done by Catholic theologians and "experts" who publicly challenge the Church’s condemnation of homosexuality, and suffer no ecclesiastical penalty for doing so. A few examples follow:

* A 1977 editorial in the influential Jesuit magazine America made the false claim, "the application of Scriptural texts that condemn homosexuality is dubious at best".(12)
* Dominican Father Donald Goergen authored a widely-distributed, pro-homosexual book entitled The Sexual Celibate. Far from suffering penalties from the Vatican’s Congregation for Religious, Goergen was elected Provincial of the Chicago Dominican Province, after the book was published.(13)
* The February 1981 issue of Notre Dame Magazine, contained an article by Father Robert Griffin who spoke of a young homosexual man (un-named) who confessed that he had been "unfaithful" to his homosexual partner. Father Griffin writes that he absolved the young man’s "sin of unfaithfulness" and sent him home to his boyfriend.(14) There is no record that Father Griffin was ever disciplined by the bishops or the Vatican.

3) Networking: These are pro-homosexual groups such as the Catholic Coalition for Gay Civil Rights, "Call to Action" and numerous other organizations. Hundreds of Catholic "priests and religious in good standing" belong to these openly pro-homosexual groups.(15)




Father Enrique Rueda documented in his 1982 landmark work The Homosexual Network, Private Lives & Public Policy that homosexuals successfully targeted religious organizations for infiltration, especially the Roman Catholic Church.

4) Homosexual Clergy: Father Rueda quotes a number of pro-homosexual clergymen, most notably, Christian Brother Gabriel Moran. While speaking to the 1977 Conference of Christian Brothers, Brother Moran intimated that religious communities were the ideal setting for homosexual relations.(16)

Then there’s the following quote taken from Communications, a newsletter for homosexual Catholic clergy: "I am finishing up my theological studies at the Jesuit School of Theology in Chicago. I was ordained last June. I work part time as assistant pastor of an inner-city parish in the Black community. I am gay. I have been out with my superiors since I was a novice, and aware of my gayness, they have approved me for vows and now for ordination."(17)

Father Rueda also explained the tactic of the homosexual movement to present "homosexuality and heterosexuality" as "two varieties of the same question".

5) Homosexual Orders: These are not formally approved orders in the Church, but groups that have organized while the local bishop looks the other way. Father Rueda lists a number of these, including Agape Community, The Christian Community Association, and Augustinians of Charity. One group of "gay Roman Catholics" called Emmaus House claimed to "work closely with our Roman Catholic parishes", visiting the sick, shut-ins and those in need. "We bring the Blessed Sacrament to them," said the Brooklyn-based organization.(18)

The two most successful of these "orders" are: the influential New Ways Ministry,(19) an organization, complains Father Rueda, whose very existence is "more than passively tolerated" by the U.S. bishops; the other is Dignity International, whose purpose is "to unite all gay Catholics, to develop leadership, and to be an instrument through which the gay Catholics may be heard by the Church and society." Dignity makes no secret that its goal is to "promote the cause of the gay Community ... We move towards the time when a gay Catholic lifestyle is accepted."(20)

Father Rueda lamented that the United States bishops have taken no effective action against these organizations. New Ways Ministry and Dignity, he writes, are "more than passively tolerated" by the hierarchy. He further complained that in the case of these groups, "lack of action" from the U.S. hierarchy "can be legitimately construed to be ‘passive encouragement’."(21)

Father Doyle’s Warning

Making matters worse is the unwelcome testimony of Dominican Father Thomas Doyle, a Canon lawyer who formerly worked in the Vatican embassy in Washington.

Doyle co-authored a 1985 report sent to the U.S. bishops and the Vatican that warned of the vastness of the clerical scandals and predicted an "ungodly mess". The report urged tougher measures against priests who sexually abuse others.

This document proves that as far back as the mid 1980s, the hierarchy was aware of these continuing scandals, but took no effective action.(22) Another prize example of "grave pastoral negligence of the upper hierarchy".

On Fox News, April 23, Father Doyle further explained that even Pope John Paul II was made aware of the scandals "in ’84 and ’85. I know that". When asked how he knew, Father Doyle responded, "Because when I was at the embassy, I know the reports were sent over to the Vatican to inform him as to what was going on because of the media publicity that was being given to the situation in Louisiana as well as to other cases that were popping up around that same time frame."(23)

Father Doyle now appears as an expert witness for abuse victims, and complains of unscrupulous bishops who seem impervious to indictment. "I was involved in all the big cases," he said. "I saw the bishops lie on the stand. I saw the evidence, clear as a bell. But they survived. It’s like a Teflon hierarchy."(24)

Granted, no one has ever accused Father Doyle of being a traditional Catholic. His sympathies are with the progressivists. His main complaint seems to be not homosexuals in the clergy, but "pedophiles" and bishops’ cover-ups.(25)

Nonetheless, no one from the Vatican nor from the USCCB has challenged the truth of Father Doyle’s testimony. Even Monsignor Francis Maniscalco, spokesman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, admits knowing of the report but denies that it was ignored. "The bishops did learn from him, and from other sources" and took many actions then and later, he said.(26) The scandals surfacing nationwide indicate how effective were the bishops’ "actions".

Seminary or Feminary?



At the April 23-24, 2002 extraordinary meeting of the Cardinals in the Vatican, which I traveled to Rome to cover, Chris Ferrara asked a key question that the panel dodged. At the final press conference, Ferrara asked the panel, "In page 2 of the Memorandum, (the Cardinals’ final communiqué from the Vatican meeting) Item 3 acknowledges something that is important and long overdue: Nearly every single case has involved an adolescent and does not constitute a true case of pedophilia. So we’re dealing with the acts of homosexual males who could not control their predilection. To avoid what would be a perpetual bumper crop of this type of scandal, is the hierarchy in North America going to enforce the Vatican’s [1961] Instruction that homosexual males simply should not be ordained?"(27)

Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s answer was astounding. He said that "no bishop he knows" and "no seminary he knows" would accept an active homosexual.(28)

This is balderdash, and everyone knows it. It leads me to ask, what is Cardinal McCarrick’s game? Is it incompetence or collusion? I personally know two young men who left a major East Coast seminary because, in their words, "it was not a seminary, it was a feminary."

Cardinal McCarrick giving shallow reassurances to the Press during the April 23-24 meeting of U.S. Cardinals in Rome.

The homosexual stronghold in Catholic seminaries has been an ongoing scandal for decades (especially since the destabilization of the Church since Vatican II) and is now documented in a recently released book, Goodbye Good Men. The author, Michael Rose, catalogs cases in which a homosexual subculture of both students and faculty in numerous seminaries deters the heterosexual man from continuing to study for the priesthood. "How many heterosexual seminarians," Rose writes, "have decided to leave the seminary and abandon their vocations because of the ‘gay subculture’ they were forced to endure, because they had been propositioned, harassed or even molested?"(29)

According to former seminarians and recently ordained priests, "this ‘gay subculture’ is so prominent at certain seminaries that these institutions have earned nicknames such as Notre Flame (for Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans) and Theological Closet (for Theological College at the Catholic University in Washington, D.C.) [Cardinal McCarrick’s diocese]. St. Mary’s Seminary in Baltimore [under Cardinal Keeler] has earned the nickname, ‘The Pink Palace’."

Along with many ex-seminarians, Rose interviews priests who somehow made it through the living hell of pro-homosexual seminaries. Father Andre Walter, speaking of the seminary in the Patterson, New Jersey Diocese said the problem was so bad, "some of the students and the faculty used to get dressed up in leather to go to ‘the block’, Baltimore’s equivalent to 42nd Street in Manhattan."

Similar horrors are reported from the Chicago Archdiocese (Mundelein Seminary) where seminary professors "tell their students that they’re gay and take some of them to gay bars, and gay students sleep with each other."(30) This will have an influence far beyond Chicago. More than half of the seminarians at Mundelein are from other dioceses.

Rose’s chapter entitled "The Gay Subculture" relates numerous accounts of the pro-homosexual agenda of many seminaries, and the persecution and harassment of heterosexual seminarians, even to the point of expelling the "straight" men. Joseph Kellenyi, former seminarian of Chicago’s Mundelein Seminary, explained, "The issue was never one of my suitability for ordination. Rather it was the gay clique had been given veto power over who got ordained."(31)

Though I do not agree with the solutions proposed in Mr. Rose’s final chapter (to rally around "conservative" Novus Ordo Bishops such as Bishop Bruskewitz, who, Mr. Rose may not know, is pro-Charismatic),(32) the book serves a useful purpose in baring the plight of the heterosexual seminarian.

Rose explains, "Seminarians who accept the Church’s teaching on sexual morality have not only been dismissed from the seminary as ‘trouble-makers’, they have also been threatened by classmates and faculty, especially in religious houses, that if they did not submit to homosexuality — to espouse and defend homosexual acts, if not take part in them — their priestly careers would be in jeopardy."(33)

Many good priests are suffering this persecution today.

Saint Sebastian’s Angels

In light of Mr. Rose’s documentation, it is safe to say that over the past thirty years, these seminaries and their bishops are responsible for the ordination of active homosexuals who now lead double-lives in countless parishes.

Stephen Brady, founder of Roman Catholic Faithful (www.rcf.org) has fought heroically to expose these homosexual priests and bishops, and was instrumental in removing Bishop Daniel Ryan from the diocese of Springfield, Illinois.

One of the most disturbing of Mr. Brady’s exposés is an international Internet chat-line of homosexual priests called "Saint Sebastian’s Angels" comprising pornographic photographs and obscene language and conversations among homosexual Catholic clergymen.(34)

Particularly offensive is the foul-mouthed Bishop Reginald Cawcutt, the Auxiliary Bishop of Cape Town, South Africa, who expresses over this chat-line his homosexual fantasies. Brady exposed this network over two years ago, yet Cawcutt suffered no sanctions by the Vatican for his participation in St. Sebastian’s Angels. He remained South African Catholic Bishops Conference’s Episcopal Representative for AIDS and for Social Communications. Bishop Cawcutt resigned in disgrace only after The Washington Times ran stories that exposed his involvement with Saint Sebastian’s Angels.(35)

Neither has Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos, Prefect of the Vatican’s Sacred Congregation for the Clergy, taken any effective action against the multitude of homosexual clergy in the U.S. or elsewhere. Rather, Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos spends a great deal of time bullying Father Nicholas Gruner and his Fatima Apostolate, and riding roughshod over Tridentine seminaries.(36 )

We now see the results: Cardinals and bishops who allowed homosexuals nationally to get a death grip on the clergy, who masterminded the inexcusable cover-up of priest-abusers, and who shifted these priests from parish to parish, and diocese to diocese, so that they could rape an even greater number of unsuspecting youngsters. The "diabolic disorientation" of the upper hierarchy has never looked so diabolic.

The Callous Dallas Bishops Meeting

This disorientation continues despite the recent convergence of bishops in Dallas. The bishops, true to form, went into that meeting seemingly determined to make no link between the "pedophile" scandals and the vast homosexual subculture of clergy now rampant in the Church under their watch.

The word "homosexual" appears nowhere in the bishops’ final "Charter for the Protection of the Children". Thus, the gay network of clergy and religious can breathe a huge sigh of relief. The bishops, once again, have shielded and protected them.

But if the bishops have shown themselves savvy in protecting their gay subculture, they have also shown themselves inept at protecting children from perversion. This was brought home forcibly by Randy Engel who for the past 13 years has studied the problem of homosexuality in the priesthood. She was commenting on a statement at the April 2002 Vatican press conference.

"As for the claim" says Mrs. Engel, "that the American bishops would never do anything to harm children, I think upon the millions of Catholic children in the United States who have been subject to more than thirty years of premature sexual seduction and spiritual and mental rape in the Catholic classroom via so-called ‘sex education’. By casting children as ‘sexual beings’ the bishops have primed Catholic youth for NAMBLA’s ‘sexual tutors’. It is no coincidence that the rise in clerical sexual abuse has paralleled the removal of traditional doctrinal catechesis from Catholic parishes and schools, and the substitution of absolutely demonic ‘sexual catechesis’."(37)

In short, the problem of homosexuality in the clergy continues unimpeded. The bishops themselves still flout pro-homosexual sex-education in parochial schools.(38) The new "Charter for the Protection of Children" is nothing more than an insipid "gentleman’s agreement", with no higher authority holding the bishops accountable.

And as for the Vatican, it pretends the problem doesn’t exist. Crisis Magazine Editor Deal Hudson traveled to Rome in early June to speak with Curia officials about the U.S. clerical scandals and returned home thoroughly shaken. On June 4 he wrote, "Most of the high-level Curia officials think there really IS no scandal. They told me it’s just another case of media bias against the Church ... that secular news reporters are just blowing things out of proportion." As far as the Vatican taking any effective action against the present crisis, Hudson lamented, "After my meeting with the Curia, I’m not holding my breath".(39)

"Only I Can Help You"

In human terms, the situation appears hopeless. But Our Blessed Mother gave us the key to the reason for our current malaise. The scandals we now face are because Catholic laity and Catholic leaders have not fulfilled the requests of Our Lady of Fatima. We have ignored Our Lady, and as a result, we have been left without the protection She was willing to give us.

The "diabolic disorientation of the upper hierarchy", under which we now labor, cannot co-exist with the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart. This triumph will only be realized when the Pope finally consecrates Russia in union with the world’s bishops to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.

Let us beseech Heaven that the Pope and the upper hierarchy will finally orient themselves toward Our Lady of Fatima and do what She asked. Let us pray they will finally heed the words of the Mother of God who meant what She said when She warned, "Only I can help you".

Mass Puppets Beware!

So the Pope appointed conservative Archbishop Gomez to head the smoldering LA diocese. Retiring Cardinal Mahony and his progressive anti-Catholics must be in tears over this one. Are the Mass puppets above in trouble?

Good one, Pope!

Did he do as good a job here in Scranton?

We'll see.

Enough

Happy Easter!

Let's this over with.

I know I'm bound to piss someone off by saying this, so let's get it over with.

Gays! Out of the Church!

How can the molesting of boys being reported by the Church be staying at a steady level if there is so much going on to keep our youngsters "safe"?

Plus I'd like to ask people where is your outrage that this sort of perverted behavior continues to go on?

Here's something from The Catholic League

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on two news stories released today by the Associated Press:

One of the AP stories on priestly sexual abuse admits that "The overwhelming majority of the victims were adolescents. That means very few guilty priests were pedophiles, a term mental health professionals reserve for those who target pre-pubescent children." Fine. But then it says something which is positively remarkable: "Even though about 80 percent of victims were boys, the John Jay researchers and other experts on sex offenders say it does not mean the perpetrators were gay." So what would they be? Heterosexual?

The AP article relied on the extraordinary remark by Margaret Smith, a professor who worked on the John Jay study. She said that while Donohue "quoted the study's data correctly," I nonetheless "drew an unwarranted conclusion." What? That most of the molesters have been gay? Here is what she said: "The majority of the abusive acts were homosexual in nature. That participation in homosexual acts is not the same as sexual identity as a gay man." So if two men sodomize each other, no one really knows if this qualifies as gay sex. Now I must admit that when I was studying for my doctorate in sociology at NYU, they never taught me such logic.

Both AP stories say the reason why there were so many male victims is because the priests did not have access to girls as altar servers. Nonsense. There have been girl altar servers in some U.S. dioceses since 1983, and almost everywhere since 1994. The statistics actually show that the more priests have access to girls, the less likely it is for girls to be abused.

Here's the tally. As reported in 2004, between 1950 and 2002, 81 percent of the victims were male; in 2005, it stayed the same; in 2006, it dropped to 80 percent; in 2007, it climbed to 82 percent; in 2008, it jumped to 84 percent; and in 2009, it stayed at 84 percent.

In other words, even though priests have less access to males, homosexual priests are molesting them at a higher rate. It's time to end the gay cover-up once and for all.

Today Is Good Friday

God bless you all this Good Friday!

O My people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I afflicted thee? Answer Me. Because I led thee out of the land of Egypt, thou hast prepared a Cross for thy Savior.

Because I led thee out through the desert forty years: and fed thee with manna, and brought thee into a land exceeding good, thou has prepared a Cross for thy Savior.

What more ought I to have done for thee, that I have not done? I planted thee, indeed, My most beautiful vineyard: and thou has become exceeding bitter to Me: for in My thirst thou gavest Me vinegar to drink and with a lance thou hast pierced the side of thy Savior.

O holy God!
O holy God!
O holy strong One!
O holy strong One!
O holy immortal One, have mercy on us.
O holy immortal One, have mercy on us!

Thou Shalt Not Wash The Feet Of Women!

I re-post this article every year, and I will continue to do so until every priest in this diocese is able to comprehend this simple fact.

Every year the issue comes up, and every year at my Novus Ordo parish, and at countless Novus Ordo parishes, the feet of women are washed, despite what Rome has written on the subject in the past.

Here is what the Sacramentary says: The men [vir] who have been chosen are led by the ministers to chairs prepared in a suitable place. Then the priest (removing his chasuble if necessary) goes to each man. With the help of the ministers, he pours water over each one's feet and dries them.

This is what Paschale Solemnitatis (the circular letter on Holy Week issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments) says concerning this: 51. The washing of the feet of chosen men which, according to tradition, is performed on this day, represents the service and charity of Christ, who came "not to be served, but to serve." [58] This tradition should be maintained, and its proper significance explained.

Many people have decried that the USCCB has said it is alright to wash the feet of women.

And they have said that. Here: Because the gospel of the mandatum read on Holy Thursday also depicts Jesus as the "Teacher and Lord" who humbly serves his disciples by performing this extraordinary gesture which goes beyond the laws of hospitality,2 the element of humble service has accentuated the celebration of the foot washing rite in the United States over the last decade or more. In this regard, it has become customary in many places to invite both men and women to be participants in this rite in recognition of the service that should be given by all the faithful to the Church and to the world. Thus, in the United States, a variation in the rite developed in which not only charity is signified but also humble service. While this variation may differ from the rubric of the Sacramentary which mentions only men ("viri selecti"), it may nevertheless be said that the intention to emphasize service along with charity in the celebration of the rite is an understandable way of accentuating the evangelical command of the Lord, "who came to serve and not to be served," that all members of the Church must serve one another in love.

This is the ambiguous way of saying "...we know it's wrong, but we're going to do it anyway."

Let me remind all priests in the Scranton Diocese and abroad: The USCCB is NOT an American Vatican. Nothing the USCCB has written in regards to this customary washing of the feet carries a Recognitio from Rome, hence, it does not carry force of law. And since Rome HAS issued a statement, namely Paschale Solemnitatis which I quoted above, I certainly hope and pray that all priests will take the Vatican's word and prohibit women from the washing of the feet at the upcoming Maundy Thursday Masses.

Catholic Mass? Or Catholic Mess?

Judas Priest!

That's my new exclamation of surprise, it supplants the blasphemous one I used to use before returning to the Church a few years ago.

"Cardinal" Roger Mahony and his Archdiocese of Los Angeles holds a yearly heretical "Education Congress" where they try to indoctrinate Catholic educators into their modernist teaching.

This travesty you are about to watch is the closing "liturgy" from their "education congress".

If you can't stomach this video, at least wait for Deacon "Twinkle Toes" to emerge around 6 minutes in. He is worth the price of admission.

That last Bishop doesn't look real to me. I think he's a fake. His vestments look like they came from a high school play.



Does anyone else feel dirty?

Thanks to Saint Mary's of Dorrance Parishioner for causing me to lose my roast beef and taters....

Call AG Corbett Now!

Call Attorney General Tom Corbett and tell him you demand Pennsylvania file a lawsuit against the government take-over of healthcare. 1 717-787-3391. You can also voice your concerns at agcorbett@attorneygeneral.gov

They've been getting calls all morning over this. The girl I spoke to sounded exhausted! Don't let up. Let Corbett know if he wants to be our next governor, exhibit some testicular fortitude and file the lawsuit!