For God gave them up to a reprobate mind...

Protestants.

A Protestant Episcopal female "bishop" was found to have been a drunkard after hitting and killing a man in Maryland. My comments in red.

"An Episcopal bishop who was the driver in a hit-and-run crash that killed a bicyclist in Baltimore was charged four years ago with drunken driving and marijuana possession, court documents show.

[Drunkards and other morally inept people do not have a place in leadership.]

"Bishop" Suffragan Heather Cook, who is the No. 2 leader for the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland, was driving a car that hit Tom Palermo, 41, on a sunny Saturday afternoon, diocese spokeswoman Sharon Tillman said.

[God will abandon those who delve into insanity, such as this dyke that abandoned the True Faith for a den of thieves. She is not a bishop, not a priest, but someone in open rebellion against God. The laity are innocent, but I believe that being a bishop of a heretical sect is worse than a sodomite.]
Palermo died from head injuries, said Bruce Goldfarb, spokesman for the Maryland medical examiner's office.
Court records show that a sheriff's deputy stopped Cook on Sept. 10, 2010, in Caroline County on the Eastern Shore. The officer wrote in a report that Cook was driving on the shoulder at 29 mph in a 50 mph-zone with a shredded front tire. The deputy noted that a strong alcohol odor emanated from the vehicle and that Cook had vomit down the front of her shirt.
The officer wrote that Cook was so intoxicated that she couldn't finish a field sobriety test because she might fall and hurt herself.

[You drunkard. You idiot. You are a murderer who must be thrown in jail. In no way are you fit for the ministry.]
According to the report, Cook registered .27 percent blood alcohol content. The legal limit in Maryland is .08 percent.
The officer found two small bags of marijuana in the vehicle, along with paraphernalia, and a bottle of wine and a bottle of liquor.
Cook pleaded guilty to drunken driving, and the prosecution of marijuana possession charges was dropped. A judge sentenced her to a fine and probation before judgment on the DUI charge, meaning her record could be cleared if she stayed out of trouble.
Tillman said Cook disclosed the earlier charges when she was vetted and ultimately elected as the diocese's first female bishop.

[The religion that elected a faggot to lead their country elects a drunkard and now murderer. May the Lord have his vengeance. It is deserved for abandoning God. Pray for Palermo's family. He may have been a Catholic and the one to go to his Eternal Reward.]

THe reew gallery

[

I think John Paul I is a true pope.

I'm a sedevacantist. That's the best way I can put it.

A sedevacantist doesn't believe that there's been a valid, legitimate, Catholic pope since the death of Pius XII because of many things, usually that the Pope is a heretic and heretics are not Catholics, ergo Pope Willy-Wonka XXIX is not the pope.

There's been some antipopes in the Vatican II religion, also known as the Novus Ordo. These people just, as the Novus Ordo does, make me really damn sad. I wish I could go to a valid, Catholic Mass anywhere in the world without worrying that there's rampant heresy in every service. But I digress.

I don't know about the number of the Novus Ordo antipopes, but there's two I have some doubt with. And then, I will get to my main point.

John XXIII - OK. Yes, he instituted the 1962 missal that put St. Joseph in the Canon and did some stuff. He died before anything really happened in Vatican II. Fuck Paul VI, by the way. He might be worse than Luther in the damage he did to the Church by installing the Novus Ordo and driving Catholics out of the faith. It's not the faggot pederasty that bankrupted dioceses, it's not the liturgical dancing, it's Montini the fucking Roman Methodist who decided going after the supper table of Protestant Europe was a good idea, suppressing Catholicism in the process.

John Paul I. He was ordained a bishop in 1958. Despite his status as a pope of the Novus Ordo era, I have reason to suspect he was a true pope. It is this simple reasoning:

He was pope for a month and three days! Literally! He was elected in September 1978 and died October of that year.

He had no time at all to preach heresy in public. If we did, we don't know!

"Prince of the Church" denies the Divinity of Our Lord... the fruits of Vatican II.

"The new archbishop of Salzburg, the Franciscan Franz Lackner, reigning since January 12, 2014,  said, "The Future of the Church" will include fewer priests, but that "the laity can take on important and responsible positions in the Church." These tasks should not belittle you, Lackner said. "We have forgotten that Jesus was a layman." -from the article.

This is a very disconcerting thing to read. Very disconcerting, because it effectively means that this bishop does not believe in the Divinity of Our Blessed Lord. How can he shepherd souls in the disaster of non-religion that is Austria when he too has joined the ranks of the infidels?

We as Catholics must posit another question: If a bishop denies that Christ was ever High Priest, where does he think his authority come from? Apostolic succession, that is, the authority of priests and bishops to preach the words of Christ came from that same Lord, our God! If he denies Christ as High Priest, he may be no more than a layman himself like the Protestants of neighboring Germany. The Lutherans of Germany may indeed have clergy that can trace who gave them liturgical faculties back to pre-Luther Catholic German times in the same way that a priest of the Society of St. Pius X will be able to trace his lineage back to the society's namesake.

The German Lutherans have no apostolic succession, though. What becomes of a bishop who denies his episcopal faculties, essentially?

There Is No Such Thing as Christianity

In the earthly life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, He started a Church and ministry. This would later, through the proselytizing of the Apostles, spread throughout the Middle East, Europe and eventually the world - adopting bishops, priests, a Mass and Saints. It has survived various heresy scandals throughout the years and has made itself known to all men. This is what is known as the Catholic Church.

In the last 500 years, we've had people not recognize that and create denominations - people splitting from the Catholic Church. That's a problem.

Not only is that heresy, but it's created false hope. It's created false hope that heresy and schism unites the people under the guise of Christianity.

I say there is no such thing as Christianity because there is no such thing as Christianity. "Christianity" is a mangled, sordid amalgamation of 33,000 different, (radically different if you count some others) beliefs and creeds and positions over a vast spectrum, many of them being unable to reconcile more than a critical belief in the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and even then you will have some sects interpret THAT differently.

They disagree on everything - the Lord's Supper/Eucharist, how or if to give credence to the Mother of God as a sinner or someone without sin or what, how to interpret Scripture, the infallibility of Scripture and even the nature of baptism. Credobaptists, for example, baptize when the believer professes Christ as Lord. Paedobaptism professes this when the party is an infant.

That's just a smattering among thousands among THOUSANDS of differing beliefs and ways and ideas that have amalgamated into something convoluted. I say again, there is no such thing as Christianity. There IS a Christian faith if you so choose to identify yourself as that. That is to say, Lutherans, Catholics, Methodists, etc. are all part of the basic Christian fold - at least recognizing the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Trinity in Three Persons as a key belief. Someone who is a Christian professes the basic Christian idea that Jesus is Lord.

But for now, identify with a denomination. Do not call yourself Christian.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Shema Israel, You're the New Lovechild of American Politics.

When it comes to state elections, I vote Republican. Democrats are immoral and Minnesota's Independence Party is just a bunch of confused Democrats. Nationally, the one time I voted, I also voted Republican. I was a confused neo-conservative Evangelical Protestant in 2012.

Republicans are many things in opposition to Catholic morals, but one of them is Zionist. 

Zionism is the political movement that stems from the idea that there should be a Jewish state in the world. More than likely, it stems from the persecution of Jews by Catholic leaders in Europe and the Jews' desire to have a land of their own. Christian kings and heads of state accused the Jews of the sin of deicide, therefore putting them in a level of servitude to Catholics. Their lands were taken away, they were exiled, etc.'

There is a problem with how modern Zionism conducts itself and conducted itself in the beginning. They came to Palestine as immigrants from Russia and Germany, setting up farms and colonies. This could've been fine had it been relegated to a small iota of land along the sea, like modern-day Gaza City. Enter the late 40s and the atrocities of World War II. The UN saw what happened in the Holocaust and decided to divide the Palestinian territories to give Jews the state of Israel in 1948.

It baffles me beyond all comprehension how a man who professes the Christian faith - that is, most of the Republican Party - could support Zionism. 

Jews do not deserve the Holy Land.

I'll say it again. Jews do not deserve the Holy Land. Te lo voy a decir en español. Los judíos no merecen la Tierra Sagrada.

They are the nation that killed the Son of God and made a religion out of it. What if Mark David Chapman paraded around Manhattan establishing a cult around his murder of John Lennon?

Approving of Zionism is denying Christ, but today's GOP must do it to win the office. What a shame.

Gospodi, pomiluj.

Naming Protestant churches after saints?

You will drive around your average town in the United States, Canada or any part of the Anglophone world and see many church buildings - St. Mark, St. John, St. Anne, etc. There's a caveat - they're mostly Protestant. 

It is an enigma as to why Protestants use names of canonized saints because of the nature of Protestantism - a heresy, and the nature of canonized sainthood - those who lived the Catholic faith and are deservedly in heaven, promulgated as such by a valid pope - invalidate the other. 

There is no one alive today who would be canonized by a Pope if they promoted such fallacies like sola scriptura, faith by grace or the denial of critical Catholic dogmas like the Primacy of Peter or the Marian dogmas. To their credit, they believe in the Sacred Trinity - that is where the Catholic faith ends in the Protestant religion.

So, is it really correct for Protestants to use the name of holy, canonized saints in the names of their church buildings? In truth, no. I can't control, nor can anyone but Our Lord, control what Protestants do, but naming castles of heresy after canonized saints is an act of vituperation against the Church. 

Saints are in heaven because they promoted the Catholic faith or in the case of martyrs, died for It. 

No one is a saint for heresy and schism or a martyr for schism. If there were people who died for the newly-formed Anglican sect when it was beginning to form from distorted Catholic rites and sacraments, they died for nothing. If there were Catholics protecting the Catholic Church from the infiltration of Protestant thinking, they were martyrs.

God bless you.

The modernist world is inherently blind.

Example I: From /r/catholicism, the Catholic forum on reddit, where someone's son disgraced his parents by announcing his idea of being higher than Our Lord.

My son (25) told my wife and that he is a woman and that he is using hormones to get a more feminine appearance. He told us that he wants me to call him by a new name and use female pronouns. And he changed his profile to him crossdressing. Frankly, I'm sort of lost for words right now. Our son has been my son for 25 years, and hormones cannot change that.

What would be the appropriate way to handle my son's new "identity"? Should we use his new name and pronouns? Or should we insist that he is my son, not my daughter. Obviously we don't want to alienate our son, but at the same time I don't want to encourage him to go further into this perversion.

Also, I'm wondering how I should handle his relationships with his siblings. He is the oldest of 7, the other children being aged 23, 21, 19, 16, 12 and 10. Obviously I can't control what the adults do, but I'm wondering if I should limit his interactions with our youngest. Family ties are important and I don't want to cause more pain on top of an already painful situation. But at the same time I don't want him to be a bad example and give them strange ideas. None of the children know he thinks he is a woman yet so we still have some time.

This is a very stressful situation for all of us and I would appreciate your advice and prayers.

 This is indeed a stressful situation. In this case, the son has decided to directly defy God the Father and His infallible idea of gender, an immutable characteristic, by "becoming" a woman. You cannot switch genders. No matter what modern medicine can do - and modern medicine can be a venerable tool - a man is a man and a woman is a woman, simply self-mutilating and perverting the ideas of Our Lord and on a way to deserved Eternal Hell, barring repentance.

This is what I posted in regards to his son getting a "sex-change" operation.

How could it not be sinful? How could it not be sinful?

A "sex change operation" is man - in all his deviancy, fallen nature and sinfulness - thinking he knows more than Almighty God by attempting to augment the immutable gift and characteristic He has given us. It is an act of defiance against Our Lord.

It's sinful because it's directly insinuating God, in all His Almighty Infinity and Divinity, erred. It is openly and perversely denying God, like Judas did in the last days of Our Lord's earthly life.

 A response, however taken out of the reddit formatting to add my own comments. Comments in red.

God, of course, never errs. Unfortunately, due to the stain of original sin, our bodies very frequently do err. [This I will grant you. Basic doctrine.]

How many people do you know with developmental defects, from a cleft lip to Downs Syndrome? And, when they get that cleft lip corrected, do you tell them they are "openly and perversely denying God"? No, of course not. When a man's cells go haywire, he gets cancer, and he starts chemo therapy, do you accuse him of "attempting to augment the immutable gift and characteristic He has given us"? No. We're Catholics, not Christian Scientists. [But that is medically necessary. I don't think you get it. If a man, God and Mary be with him, gets cancer and needs chemotherapy, he needs it to save his life. You don't get it.]

Heck, if somebody proved transsexuality was caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, then came up with a cure for it, would you tell your transsexual friends that taking that drug was an act of defiance against God? No. Very likely you'd consider it not just licit but a moral duty for your friend to take that drug. (And I would agree.) [Wrong. It would be curing said disorder. Transgenderism is a sin. It is the mutilation of the body to pervert Our Lord's creation that is a sin. Reversing that and going back to a normal state is encouraged, along with confessing said sins from that time.]

So the question before us is not, "Is transsexuality the result of original sin?" It is obviously the result of original sin. The question is, "Where is the problem: in the mind, or in the body?" Although many people on both sides are convinced they know the answer because "it's just common sense," actual evidence, to say nothing of proofs, are very hard to come by.

And if the problem does turn out to be in the body, rather than the mind, then it would follow that sex reassignment surgery is morally licit -- and perhaps morally obligatory for those with the means. [For crying out loud. It is not morally licit or obligatory to encourage someone to mortally sin. You're basically telling someone to literally go to Hell. ]

His comment was more well-received than mine and unsurprisingly, as it's primarily Novus Ordo.

Example II: Pope Leo XIII's Apostolicae Curae deals with the idea of Protestant Orders in a short sentence, saying that Anglican (and by extension, all non-Catholic orders) orders are void. No valid priests, bishops, deacons whatever. Despite Anglicans' insistence of their belief in the Real Presence of the Body and Blood, [Protestants believe in God and that might be the only thing they agree on] they do not. They have no valid transubstantiation. Jesus is not in their "Eucharist."

One such invalid Protestant bishop goes by the name Tony Palmer. Tragically, Tony Palmer is deceased. He was killed in a motorcycle accident in England last month. Tony Palmer was not a Catholic. He was Anglican. Not a bishop, nor a Catholic. This makes him ineligible for ecclesiastical burial according to Canon 1240 which bars heretics and schismatics.

Now, answer this question.

• Would Justin Welby, the head of the Anglican sect, be buried in a Catholic Requiem Mass? No.
• Would a shopkeep in Crown Heights that dies a Hasidic Jew be buried in a Requiem Mass? No.
• Would a Catholic-born-but-now-heretic open sodomite be buried in a Requiem Mass? No.

All of those people are denied by Canon Law access to burial. Why would a non-bishop non-Catholic be granted something like this? By this, Bergoglio the Modernist shows that he has contempt for the writings of holy, sainted Popes [bowed at Theodore Herzl's grave in May - The Jews have not recognized our Lord, we cannot recognize the Jews. (Pope St. Pius X)] and the Church itself. We cannot judge the state of another man's soul - the duty of which belongs to the Lord alone, but if Tony Palmer were to stand before Jesus Christ, Eternal High Priest and True Judge at the hour of his death, is it likely that such a man who could've easily been a Catholic by way of his family and a conversion through Tradition would see the Eternal Bliss? I don't think so.

What a sad, sad, time we live in where deviancy is accepted and the Pope defies God so brazenly and openly. May God restore the True Catholic Church to its former glory worldwide that it rightfully deserves as the True Church of all men.

Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Spotless Virgin Mary, especially in these days nearing the Assumption, pray for us.

Clarification

I have to clarify something on those who've seen that "ecumenism of blood" thing around the internet, implying those of non-Catholic faith are rewarded for their "martyrdom""

If you did not die for the One True Church, your death was in vain for there is no salvation outside the Church. Period.

Enough is enough.

1000-year old Christian community expelled from Mosul ny ISIS

Before I make this blog post, I must say something:

May the demonic, mentally sick, sexually aberrant, violent, evil and influenced-by-Satan spirit of the "Prophet" Muhammad (the blood of a million pigs be upon him) be in the lowest, deserved, most sordid layer of Hell forever.

This is insane. This is insane. The people that worship that child-raping belligerent Arab faggot they call a "Prophet" are insane. They do not have the right to do this as the world belongs to Christ. This whole world belongs to Our Lord Jesus Christ and no one else. Islam has no place in this world and it shouldn't exist. If these belligerent retards with no sense of reason or logic can so easily expel a holy people from a holy land, they don't deserve to exist. No dignity. No respect. There is none deserved at all in the world OR this country.

Hello, Protestantism, my old friend..

I am not converting back to Protestantism, of course not. I was Protestant for about a year in high school of the evangelical type as I was coming into the Christian fold for the first time. [I was baptized, but cultural Catholics, man.] However, I did notice something striking among them, something that could even cause the irk of some Catholics.

The Anglican Church of England, the state religion of which the Queen is the head, has decided to make the female "episcopacy" a thing. Voting on it and making, for some clerics, their dreams come true. This should deeply worry all Catholics and shake them in their core. Is there a reason why? Yes.

Francis and his German heretic friend, "Cardinal" Walter Kasper are holding a Synod on Marriage and the Family in October of this year. Knowing the deep, deep heresies Francis holds that in no way represent religion, for that matter, we are in for a poisonous treat. They want to allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion. The non-Christians, feminists, heretics and sexual degenerates claiming to the Catholic moniker might cheer. Hell, they might even ask "What's so wrong with that?" You see, this outright breaks the Sixth Commandment. There's no bloody mincing words here, I mean, it's breaking the Sixth Commandment - Thou shalt not commit adultery. Those in valid Catholic marriages that civilly divorce are in adultery because the first marriage is still valid and was never dissolved. Legal verbiage has nothing on the laws of God and His Church.

That is why Catholics should be concerned that Britain recently allowed the female "episcopacy". It's a ticking time bomb. If one can so easily corrupt religion like that, it could happen with the Pope, especially a Pope like Francis. Such a thing will invariably lead to the loss of members, souls and even a schism. The Church of England has dug itself into a hole that its more conservative lot will find itself getting out of before it sinks, getting themselves into a Catholic parish - hopefully traditional, more than likely. They'll realize it defies the Holy Bible and get out. The same thing will happen with Catholicism, the Novus Ordo church.

God be with us in this troubled time...

Islam is a disease and a mental illness. 'Religion of peace'? Yeah, right.

http://shoebat.com/2014/07/03/muslims-declare-sexual-jihad-enter-home-christian-family-take-mother-daughter-three-muslims-gang-rape-front-husband/

Please pray for the persecuted Christians and the destruction of all false religion. Amen.

Why don't people care?

First, something of my personal life. This will (sadly) shock ye:

I still attend the Novus Ordo. :(

This is not because I like the Novus Ordo. Absolutely not. I think that for the sake of the souls of almost 2 billion Catholics that could otherwise possibly be saved not perishing because of a lack of options, the Novus Ordo is a valid rite. Defective, borderline-Protestant, but valid.

Essentially, I believe that if little Juan Gutierrez in Oaxaca lives a Catholic life, attends the sacraments and frequents confession for the remission of sins, he will not fall into eternal fire for a decision he has no say in. Most countries outside the US, Canada and Francophone Europe have poor, infrequent traditional Latin Mass options and even then, some will argue with you that because the Rite of Episcopal Consecration was used post-1968, even the FSSP/ICKSP some SSPX priests are not valid, which would cause difficulties in the sacraments and so on and so forth. It can and does get very convoluted.

I attend the Novus Ordo because one is 10 minutes from me and I believe with the Mind of the Church - that is, missing Mass on Sundays except for severe reasons is a sin. I do not have a car or driver's license because I never needed one until very recently, so I must get a ride. That is the only reason why. Oddly enough, it was actually a great parish last year. But now, I'm starting to realize the apathy in the people, even the pastor as I shift towards Traditional Catholicism.

Why do so many people receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord at Mass? The laity receiving Him in all his spotless glory is fine. If anything, it's joyous. The problem is...it's everyone, and I mean, everyone. Remember, brethren, we are Catholics and not Evangelicals. Evangelical Protestants, God bless them, are good people. I credit them with my finding of Our Lord and eventually His Church. The problem is their doctrine in "believe in Jesus Christ and be 'saved'." That does not work in Catholicism. We recognize the stain of original sin and realize that man is fallen. Man can and will sin, for the Lord gave us free will. When we sin mortally, we must go to Confession.
I am not judging those in the Communion lines. Not at all. It's just that when you consider the fallen nature of man and how often we sin mortally, you recognize the problem.

Another sign that they don't care is that Mass is being said irreverently. Is there some need to speed up the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as if we have to board a flight in the next hour? A quick Mass is sloppy, disrespectful to Christ the High Priest and absolutely not needed. Yes, the Low Mass of the EF can be said rather quickly - "30 minutes or less" like some ad for food, but that's simply because certain items of the Mass can be omitted: e.g., Credo, Homily, Gloria (except on I & II class days) In this, there is no need though. A regular Sunday Mass, a High Mass if you will, must take time - time to avow in Jesus the High Priest in birth, life, death, to avow the beauty of the Blessed Trinity

There is no need for quick Masses, or homilies with worldly references. I want to hear Sacred Scripture referenced in homilies. Church Doctors, the Popes, the Saints. I don't want to hear about the bloody movies or something.

Sigh. Maybe I'll be going parish shopping. There's an FSSP parish, All Saints, and several TLM places here in the Twin Cities:

• Sacred Heart, Robbinsdale
• St. Agnes - St. Paul
• Holy Trinity - St. Paul

I need the Traditional Mass. Not something worldly. I can't attend St. Stephen's anymore. I feel worn out when I come out of the Novus Ordo, like I don't want to be there anymore. It's really hurting me. Sigh.

Never in my life would I ever hear of a Pope denying scripture...but it happened!

Francis replied: "The fact is that woman was taken from a rib." Giansoldati wrote that he then laughed "heartily" before saying: "I'm joking. That was a joke."

...

You're bloody kidding me. This was a Pope that said this. A Vicar of Christ, someone elected to lead the Catholic Church. I really can't wrap my mind around this. I really just can't. The Pope. The Pope! The Pope denies Scripture and Catholic doctrine just like that!

Adam and Eve is Catholic doctrine as clear as day. There need not be discussion or refuting of how it is. Adam and Eve is the teaching of the Church as the two first parents. God made Adam and Eve from the rib of Adam. Then the apple, and then Original Sin. Just like that.

The heretical views of Pope Francis are too numerous for me to list without blowing a mental fuse, but they are numerous and they are seriously dangerous. This Pope is dangerous to be around and listen to because he will cause souls to be lost. Myself, at one point, included. I was so outraged with Francis and his heresy. I couldn't believe this man became Pope. I was so disillusioned with this man that if I hadn't discovered traditional Catholicism and their wonderful forums earlier this year, I would've considered going Orthodox. Pray that he resigns and that Christ triumphs.

Pope Francis prays to Satan, not the Trinity. He will deceive souls as long as he lives, but he can get away with it because he is the Pope. This is a man who, even in today's time, would have been defrocked for his statements as a priest.

Supreme Court rules in FAVOR of religion.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/30/politics/scotus-obamacare-contraception/

This is a good day. The Supreme Court has ruled that religious organizations cannot be forced to cover contraception and contraceptive services under the Affordable Care Act. This means that companies like Hobby Lobby or organizations like the Little Sisters of the Poor will not have their faith impugned because of what the government thinks.

Feminists right now are irate, but they must remember that religion also has rights - even in a secular state. Their own selfishness is not the law of the land, despite what they think. Blocking the conception of a child or wanting it to be killed is not the way to go in this country. We're not setting "women's rights" back 100 years, we're causing its' demise, thanks be to God. Its very idea is nefarious to the idea of a Catholic family. Women were not meant to kill babies, block kids and destroy marriage when it's convenient for them, and if the idea of "women's rights" is mostly that in today's society, then maybe there should be no such thing. 

Maybe it is time for a society that recognizes the Catholic model for family as the norm, where the man is the head of the household, the woman is subservient and recognizes the joy and beauty of motherhood, and the kids are raised to be well-off, godfearing people. We do not need women's rights anymore. We really don't. We can recognize the dignity of women but not submit to the feminist agenda.

You can recognize the beauty, dignity and honor of the Lord's creation without submitting to their false views. Some of the most aesthetically beautiful churches I've ever seen were Protestant, for example. I can admire their beauty when I pass by them on a drive somewhere (or looking on the Internet) but I don't go inside for worship. Secular events, like concerts, sure. 

Ignorance, thy name is Soulguard.

Denigrating the death of a holy priest is not the way to go.

Indult martyrs pray for us. 

Thinking that someone is not Catholic is the way to go.

It is hard to respect people for who they are when they reappear throughout other forums spreading more calumny.

Sigh. Pray for us, Sts. Peter & Paul.

Gasp! I thought Bergoglio was the pastor of First Matahombres Lutheran Church! He's not? Aww.

www.salon.com/2014/06/22/pope_franciss_liberal_reformer_image_is_all_smoke_and_mirrors_partner/

I was originally going to respond to the article, but then I remembered how much liberal, feminist bullshit gives me a rash.

All you need to know is that these types have a massive contempt for Christ and His Church.

Here's my response in a nutshell:

Dogma can't be changed, disciplines can. Other religions can and will uproot all auspices of doctrine to appease the masses. If it's started by Jesus, it can't change.

The end.

Breaking news: "Bishop" of the Episcopal Church comes out as devout atheist, possibly lunatic

i don't get it

What do I not get? Just this idea that you can somehow not believe in the salvific sacrifice of Jesus Christ but be the bishop of a Christian denomination.

Do I sound pissed off? Absolutely. As Catholics and Christians, are we supposed to be?

How someone can believe what she believes but get so high up in the episcopal - that is to mean "of a bishop" - hierarchy is truly beyond me. Really, it is. It truly is.

It is as if Nicolas Sarkozy forgot how to say Je m'appelle ______.

Heretic Tries to Censor Bishop, Instead of the Other Way Around

www.trunews.com/pelosi-warns-sf-bishop-march-traditional-mariage/

Well, wow...

Not only does a laywoman try to censor a bishop, but this time, it's a non-Christian!

Non-Christian congresswoman from San Francisco Nancy Pelosi thinks she knows more than the archbishop that actually is Catholic, Abp. Cordileone, in trying to stop him from marching for marriage. I just now remembered I wrote this last week and the event already happened, so here's all I will say:

I call Nancy Pelosi a "non-Christian" not as a personal attack. I've never met the woman or her family. I'm sure, her lack of Catholic values aside, she's a wonderful person.

I call her a non-Christian because that's what she is! She does not stand for the Catholic Church at all, and neither does any Catholic in the Democrat Party. She doesn't even stand for Christian values, because the liberal Protestants that corrupt Scripture to fit their own blasphemous happy-go-lucky agenda are not Christians. There is no support for abortion. There is no support for sodomite "rights". There is no support for the neo-pagan liberalism in Nancy Pelosi's world in Holy Scripture. 

Let's get real, she is as for Christian values as the *devout atheist wearing stolen vestments running the Episcopal **church, Kathleen Schori.

*No Christian - nay anyone that believes in God would deny the idea of that God saves them. For a later post.

**I use lower-c for church because honestly, I don't even think most of them are Christians. Nor do I think they have valid orders or a valid Eucharist as per Pope Leo XIII's Apostolicae Curae. Basically, my opinion of them is that they are going every Sunday to a person with a divinity degree that thinks they're clergy. They worship a cookie and grape juice. I can respect the more high-church type for trying to do something with actual Christianity. Those would be the Christians.

Could Minnesota be a swing state in 2016?

Minnesota.

For reasons unknown to me, myself and God, we're known for being some liberal bastion where there's college kids running around being college kids and vegans eating some French dirt on a plate. While some of that is true, the socially liberal is mostly just Minneapolis in the center of the state.

It is the bastard child of some homosexual Brooklyn neighborhood and Berkeley, CA baptized in a Lutheran church and left to die in the Midwestern winter. Au anglais? It's kind of a liberal stronghold, alone in the state.

I mean, sure, you have the inner-ring suburbs with their poverty and fifties houses that economically, would vote Democrat - hence why DC has carried the Democrat vote in astounding numbers each and every election. [Did any other place in the nation get almost 93% of ONE VOTE?] That's fine. Really, it is. Some aspects of economic liberalism that border on Keynesian are not that bad.

But Minneapolis shouldn't shape the state. People move out of the city, get married and have kids. All those wonderful things. Sometimes, these people will move out of the city into some postwar neighborhood. Some areas of St. Anthony and Brooklyn Center, both inner-ring suburbs are an example of this.

Other times, however, people look at new developments that pop up outside the Metro in places like Sherburne or Wright counties - cities like St. Michael, Elk River or Big Lake, and take their kids there because it's far from the city, you get lots of space and good schools. This phenomenon has been happening really frequently as the previous generation moves, making the suburbs more populous and swinging them to the right.

It's logical. I mean, people often combine incomes to afford houses like these and liberal economics would want that money in higher tax cuts, for starters. Second of all, moral/religious values. Your standard Minnesota Lutheran may admonish me and scold me in an email for this, but I'm coming out with it:

Religion naturally lends itself to conservatism. 

A lot of these people were raised Catholic, or Lutheran and naturally find themselves attracted to conservative social values.

With all that, I think it's possible that MN goes battleground in 2 years. It's very possible and maybe even inevitable. Could Minnesota join its neighbor to the Northwest in voting red? Yes, please.

Sigh.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/06/wisconsin-same-sex-marriage/10093565/

Isaiah 5:20 - "Woe to them who call good evil".

This is horrible. It is horrible because it's another example of our nation's judges exercising misinterpretation of the Constitution and tyranny in order to get their way and enshrine perversion - the sin of homosexual "marriage".

This needs to stop. The next bastard judge that does this again needs to be removed from his duties and disbarred, because judges are attorneys first and foremost. Such a defiling of the Constitution deserves this and I don't think anyone realizes that.

If you can so openly defy the Lord God, who through His only begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, made marriage a sacrament for a man and woman, to make what you believe, your errors (Error has no rights, since rights are a claim given ultimately by God. - Pope Leo XIII) and your destruction of the Natural Law a public stance through laws and insipid, diabolic, legal verbiage, then by the grace of God, you as a judge need to be fired and disbarred immediately.

You are a scandal, and if you cannot renounce your position - all federal "judges" in America, that is - on perversion of the Natural Law, disavow all legal practice and trying to invalidate what God has ordained - then may God grant your family a thousand years of plague and starvation. This is not personal, it's spiritual. There was a man named Judas Iscariot who betrayed Our Lord like you and he is in Hell.

Thoughts on this Memorial Day

America.

America.

America.

We are the only country on Earth to proclaim ourselves the greatest. We are the only country to proclaim ourselves the way Christ proclaimed Himself to the peoples of his time - magnanimous, a saving grace, liberation incarnate.

Why is this? All I know is that the American ideal of the New Jerusalem being manifested between Canada and Mexico, coming to the aid of all nations, is a complete lie. No, we are not the greatest nation on Earth. Absolutely not. There is no greatest nation on Earth.

They are not fighting for America's freedom in Afghanistan because the War on Terror is a complete lie. It's a waste of our time and money. Iraq, too. Both of these wars are a waste on the American people and did not nor will they contribute anything. We invaded two countries to try to find the men responsible for 9/11 (inc.Bin Laden) and weapons for mass destruction. No WMDs and the 9/11 perpetrators were Saudi. You've had a free country for 200 years, a systematic invasion of a country doesn't change that. Iraq is still in shambles.

And World War 2? The United States was fighting in the Pacific for the freedom to murder hundreds and thousands of people.

When they get home? The situation for veterans returning home is atrocious. We can 'honor' them, but once we get home, apparently it doesn't matter anymore.

And Memorial Day? "I am the Lord, your God. Thou shalt have no strange gods before me." -Exodus 20:3. We don't care about the troops any other day, but today they're like God. How sickening.

God bless.

There is no such thing as a positive abortion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLEgygq0t9Q

What on earth?

Seriously, what on earth? There IS no such thing as a positive abortion. Repeat that after me: "There is no such thing as a positive abortion." Repeat it in bloody Spanish if you have to, but as long as you people get the message into your head.

People must realize the gravity of an abortion, how much of a careless thing it is to do. It is not something you can openly walk into like the DMV. It is not some stupid thing you can do frequently.

If people like this vapid waste of human cells downplay what it truly means to kill a child, then humanity has no hope. If we can just openly get abortions left and right like this, humanity has no hope. I don't care what happens: Whatever circumstances it may be, abortion is wrong. You can't be so nonchalant when it comes to baby-murder. It's not possible, and the fact that this person seems to think otherwise and be so cavalier about such an immoral act is horrific. Because of it, I have to make this clear. Very clear. As clear as the light of day:

If this is how anyone views the sanctity of life, don't have sex.

I'm sorry. Really, I am. That's how I'm putting it because there ain't any other way. People like Emily Letts don't have any respect for the sanctity of life. Life is a gift, children are a gift from God. They are not your idle playthings to suck out every time a man forgets the condom. You are not ready to have kids. You're a monster, Miss Letts. If you can so cavalierly have what could be a gift from the Lord dismembered, you should not have kids. You're seriously a monster and our Lord has words for people like you.

Matthew 26:24  
But woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that one not to have been born.”

God bless.

Girl Gets Kicked Out of Prom for Having the Nerve to Wear Pants

Girl Gets Kicked Out of Prom for Having the Nerve to Wear Pants

There's something here that people should know, and that even as a Catholic, my position on this is going to sound rather liberal because of my age and experience. I'm only (gasp!) 19 years old. Really, I'm not that old. To put it in perspective, I was born the week OJ Simpson got acquitted.

Now, I was recently spotted at a high school prom, oh, about 2012. It'll actually be 2 years around this weekend, I think. Went with a lovely friend, too.

So, here's the thing about high school prom: it can get two things fairly quickly - expensive (heaven have mercy, can it get to that) and salacious. (oh, yes)

Good heavens on Earth, can it get absolutely salacious. Believe me. When I went, both men and women were grinding on each other and "dancing" to that shit list they call the Billboard Top 40. Prom dresses, too. I'm not sure if the money they're spending on those things - money that combined, probably puts a dent in the local GDP -  is going towards a dress or a piece of expensive material that covers the genitalia and breasts enough to not look like a bathing suit.

With what we have today, red jeans and a black shirt is probably better than anything. I mean, it's not traditionally what one would wear at prom - [but who am I to judge? I didn't wear a tux. I wore a suit I bought the previous summer and I'm convinced another guy showed up in flannel and jeans] but people should be, at least modest. That might be my sensus Catholicus speaking, but modesty is good. It shows respect, it shows decorum. Were I a priest, I'd want to see the a picture of the dress brides were wearing if they wanted a wedding in the Church. I wouldn't hesitate to refuse to marry that couple because of low-cut immodest dress that has no place in the Church or anywhere.

So kudos to this girl for having decency. At least she's being honest with herself.

...

Today, when I could've been going to Mass on the holiest of holiest days, Easter Sunday, I sat there in silence for about 10 minutes when I got out of the shower and got dressed, and ended up not going.

What's wrong with me?

Why did I refuse to go? Was it because of the rampant hypocrisy there? That Catholics who would only go to Mass and forget the Faith after would be there? Would it be that?

I don't know, I really don't.

I offended Our Lord & Savior in the most grievous way possible. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

I felt like Judas Iscariot when he betrayed Our Lord the day before Christ was to die. I wanted to die. This needs to never happen again, because now I feel lost.

Sigh.

Cor Jesu sanctissima, miserere nobis.

Sancta Maria, semper virginae, ora pro nobis nunc et in hora mortis nostrae.

I'm sorry. Also, sorry for ranting.

I'm sorry.

Very sorry.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Now, sorry for what, you might ask?

Sorry for ever supporting that disgusting, liberal, affront to Our Lord & Savior the world calls "same-sex 'marriage'". I mean, honestly. They've gone as far off the deep end as possible, they did. The liberal crowd knows no limits and claims equality. Believe me, they claim equality. They claim that marriage equality [bullshit] is a solution to something good. Really, it's not. The homosexual left has only ever known one thing and that's force. Force, force, force, force. There is no reason to enshrine sodomy in the laws of the nation, despite what legal verbiage will have you think. There's no reason to even think that two men or two women should ever be capable of marrying. It's an affront to religion and to morality to insinuate that it could be possible, because it isn't. Marriage is a man and a woman, and society has gravely erred against everyone for thinking something else.

Look, we are called to love the sin, but hate the sinner. Homosexual acts, as those outside of marriage, are a sin. Heterosexual acts outside of marriage are a sin. All sin displeases God, and when we Catholics or we Christians oppose marriage equality, we're doing people good. We're doing good by saying, "let's help you be a better person and sin no more".

Look at Brendan Eich to see what happens when the left gets their way. Too many people are oppressed by the lack of equality that sodomite marriage proponents push out in their legitimizing of sin and an unhealthy lifestyle. Maybe it's time we bring back the Federal Marriage Amendment, that would put in the Constitution that marriage is between one man and one woman. The time America's had to glorify sodomy & fornication is over, or at least it needs to end soon. God help us.

Mary wrote St. Luke's Gospel?

Well...

Mary in the Catholic Church is probably, if not the, most influential woman of the Church. She is the Mother of Our Lord & Savior, Jesus Christ, and conceived without the mark of Original Sin. In fact, both of the defined dogmas of the Catholic faith are about Her. There's more, but I'm talking about the ones defined under papal infallibility.

One of my favorite parts of the Gospels actually involves Mary, and is in the second chapter of the Gospel according to St. Luke. It's the Gospel reading at Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve, and one of the greatest events of history. The day Masses have the part after...what a travesty. Still the day of Our Lord's Nativity, nonetheless.

The Gospels, if one doesn't really know, are 4 accounts of the life of Jesus by four different people - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They have differing accounts of Our Lord's life, ministry, death and Resurrection, but some events are different than others.

Matthew's version includes the procession into Jerusalem, which was read on Palm Sunday.

Luke's version includes more, such as the good thief, "Father, forgive them, for they know what they do" and is read on the Celebration of the Lord's Passion.

St. Luke's version also has the virgin birth, and seems to be more concise, as if there were a presence recording every moment. A woman would certainly want to be near her dying Son. St. Luke's is the only one of the four to mention the Virgin Mary, really, at all. The first two chapters could easily be the Gospel of Mary, as they focus on her being filled with the Holy Ghost, to be born as Christ in Luke 2:1-14. Luke 1 has the Angel Gabriel announce to the Virgin of the incoming birth. It's where the Church gets the Hail Mary prayer from: The angel telling Mary She is full of grace, and of St. Elizabeth telling her "Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb".

With that being said, is it possible that Mary wrote St. Luke's Gospel? I mean, the first couple of chapters, yes. It's not entirely implausible that Luke 1-2 could have been written by Her. Really, it's not. Luke 1 includes the announcement, celebrated on Ascension Sunday.

(Angelus Domini nuntiavit Mariae, et concepit de Spiritu Sancto)

Luke 2 includes the birth and the child Jesus being brought into the temple. 

With all those events, does it make sense? Somewhat. I need more accounts and evidence before I'll take it as gospel, no pun intended.

Cor Iesu Sanctissima sit vobis,

Carlos.

Excuse me?

What on earth is this?

Now, look: I'm from Minnesota, OK? I've lived in this amalgamation of winter and road construction bordering on 16 years. Born in Jamaica, Queens, New York and moved when I was 4.

There's one thing I know for sure about this state and that's that there's a LOT of Lutherans. Every town, at least here in the metropolitan area, has at least one Lutheran church. The next town over, where my parish is, has three. Granted, one of them is the much more conservative Lutheran branch, but still.

They're good people. Knew a lot in high school, since the general rule of thumb is that if your last name was Scandinavian, Finnish included, you were probably Lutheran. There's just one problem...

The whole religion was started by an angry heretic German priest 500 years ago. Martin Luther saw inconsistencies with the Catholic doctrine and broke off, citing his ideas. None of them make any sense and include ideas like "Faith alone will save" or "The Bible alone is sufficient".

There is no point for the Catholic Church to reconcile with heresy. The Lutheran religion, simply put, is heresy. It contradicts with all the faith teaches. If individual Lutherans want to convert, then Deo gratias, good for them. But right now it makes zero sense for the religion Jesus founded to ever try to come to terms with its rebel. Sometimes, I think that if Martin Luther hadn't put himself into schism, there would be no John Calvin, Wesley, King Henry or any one of the 32,000 denominations that would erupt into chaos at the tip of a hat.

Oh, well.

Introduction

Greetings, friends.

I'm Carlos, a Catholic blogger out of the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis. I attend one of the St. Stephen's here in the Metro (named after the deacon in the Acts of the Apostles) and I'm looking into traditional Catholicism. This is a blog dedicated to Catholicism. That is all.

I am not, nor will ever be, one of those Catholics that espouses the type of borderline idolatrous ultramontanism that some Novus Ordites believe - where the Pope is not the Vicar of Christ, the Pope IS Christ. That is dangerous to the Catholic faith. I will admit that the Pope is capable of speaking heresy. Absolutely.