I thought this was a rather good response to what was a very simplistic (and quite honestly, misleading) homily from His Holiness on sin and God's judgment, or rather, His divine 'impotence' which could give some the impression that those who consider themselves 'untouchable' in terms of the long arm of Divine Justice are precisely that.

But I told you not these things from the beginning, because I was with you. And now I go to him that sent me, and none of you asketh me: Whither goest thou? But because I have spoken these things to you, sorrow hath filled your heart. But I tell you the truth: it is expedient to you that I go: for if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. And when he is come, he will convince the world of sin, and of justice, and of judgment. Of sin: because they believed not in me. And of justice: because I go to the Father; and you shall see me no longer. And of judgment: because the prince of this world is already judged. I have yet many things to say to you: but you cannot bear them now. (St John 16: 5-12)

New Directives Issued from Vatican for Pastoral Language

To be sent out to all dioceses soon!

Remember now, Fathers.

Use pastoral language, not phrases that some people could find offensive!

In summary, use language that is neither "archaic" nor "incomprehensible".

Jesus, Mercy and the Synod

Mercy.

I know we as Catholics are called by Christ to be merciful. I know that Pope Francis has spoken not a small deal about mercy and about God's mercy.

'Mercy' is central to the Kasper proposal, but his is a mercy that is not rooted in the Gospel. It is, rather, a new Gospel devoted to mercy, but it isn't Christ's Gospel.

My understanding of God's mercy is that His mercy - available to all who desire it - isn't there for no reason. It isn't there to make us feel 'accepted' in a community. God's mercy is His very, very, very loving response to the scandal, the detestable offense that is our sin. As others have noted, mercy is certainly there as a theme in the Gospel, but it isn't the central theme. The central theme is Jesus Himself.

I hope that, soon enough, the same prelates who are singing canticles to the Mercy of God while advocating distributing Jesus Himself to unrepentant mortal sinners will outline the following:

What is so special and wonderful about God's mercy?

It is God's great mercy that saves us.

What does God's mercy save us from? 

Sin and the consequences of our sin. 

What are the consequences of our sin? 

If mortal, that'll be eternal damnation. 

'Damnation, yeah? You still believe in that medieval hogwash?'

Of course, there are other consequences to our sins too, in this life. Family break-up, addictions, self-destructive behaviour, societal breakdown and others, but you would think that the prelates banging on about mercy 24/7 would have some inkling - and at least mention it - as to why, in Catholic understanding, God's mercy is so wonderful and treasurable, why it should be proclaimed.

Alas, it doesn't seem to sink in. Many bishops can say the word 'mercy' a thousand times and never - for a moment - consider what the spiritual effects of God's mercy are - the bringing of the soul from death - eternal death, to life - Eternal Life.

Unfortunately, that would involve talking about sin and that's just not the kind of language that is fitting for modern man, so modern man and woman can go to Hell in a handcart as far as they are concerned. Instead we got things like 'pastoral accompaniment', whatever that means? If that means spiritual direction from a trusted priest when you're in a sinful state that you want to change, then that's great, but its so ambiguous that it could be interpreted as...

'I see there that you are in mortal sin and have zero desire to return to the practise of the Faith. Mind if I just walk with you a while and give you Jesus Christ so you can eat and drink your own condemnation, would that be okay? Save you? No, I don't want to save you, I'm here to assist your journey to Hell because I am merciful.' 

Yes, that's what happens when 'Pastors' think they are more 'merciful' than Christ. The Church's teaching is REAL mercy because it reminds all who attend the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that reception of the Body and Blood of Jesus is neither a 'reward for the just' or 'medicine for the weak' but essentially the embracing of Communion with Jesus Christ. If we are not in Communion with Him, we should not receive Him because He is Holy. To receive Him in mortal sin is sacrilege.

Yes, we should be merciful. Priests and Bishops should be merciful, but when we are taught by Christ to be merciful in the Beatitudes it is with some purpose in mind.

'Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy'.

Why do we want to 'obtain mercy'?

 In a nutshell, so that we may avoid the eternal punishments of Hell and gain admittance into Heaven.

Our Lord in the Gospel tells us that the unmerciful will not be shown mercy because that would insult His Justice, but there is zero evidence that within His definition of the 'unmerciful' are those pastors who follow the Church's discipline of not giving unrepentant mortal sinners the impression that their sin no longer matters, for the sake of their eternal salvation.

So to sum up...

If Pope Francis could do this with 'Kasperism' and/or 'regionalism'...

...that would be just great!

If the authority is there to be 'given away', then the authority is there to stamp out
dissent to the Magisterium and crush the evils within the Church.

Pray.

I see some protesters have already arrived outside Synod Hall, fearing the worst.

Regional Churches, Regional Faiths, Regional 'Gods'

The Sensible Bond today has a 'calm down, dear' post concerning this, on which I blogged yesterday...

Not only would it be impossible to see how the Church is One, Holy and Universal, but it would cast great doubt whether God is One and Holy, as if God would say, "No, no, do whatever you like. I'm liberal when I'm in Munich, but much more intolerant of sin in Warsaw."

What the Synod decides, obviously, has no effect on the Reality of God. There are obviously no theological implications for Almighty God. The Church cannot change God.

I didn't consider I was saying anything controversial, but was thinking about what impacts are at stake for the Catholicity of the Church. I was saying that if doctrinal authority were devolved that would give, say, the Germans, an entirely different presentation of God to the Poles, so that in Germany God would be presented as an affable uncle who overlooks sin entirely, whereas in Poland God would be presented in a different light, because it all depends on the quality of the Bishops country to country and their personal beliefs. The teaching on and the perception of God in Warsaw would be different to that of Munich. Perhaps it already is. It would, inevitably, create different Faiths, rather than sustain the oneness of the Catholic Faith, more than simply regional 'Churches'.

'We're not a subsidiary of Rome you know!"

I would have thought that the creation of a different Faith in Germany to that of Poland was, actually, already well under way. Polish Churches are full. German Churches are empty. Just look at what their respective Bishops say at the Synod. It would only be more official if the Pope devolved 'doctrinal authority'.

Two different presentations of the One True God would, I'm afraid, make the Church's faith in the One True God look a bit silly, if it varies from country to country. It seriously undermines the credibility of the One True Church and One True Faith because somehow, despite having abandoned a vital tenet of Catholic Faith, the German Church would still maintain some kind of communion (Shall we call it a financial communion?) with the Church of Rome.

It is true that at this stage we do not know what will happen. However, it is not true that we do not know what the Germans want. Alas, we can no longer say, after the Pope's speech, in which he once again referred to a 'conversion of the papacy' and talked of a 'healthy decentralisation' that the Pope does not want to give the Germans exactly what they want. They, as we know from Cardinal Marx's statements on precisely where Rome can shove its authority, do not care if the Church's Faith is no longer One, Holy or Universal. Let's be clear about this:

The Germans say, quite clearly, 'We do not recognise your authority over us.'
The Pope, in a speech, indicates, 'Yeah, come to think of it, me neither.'

Decentralisation in terms of doctrine would be saying, "It's not schism because...er...Pope says so!" Regional Churches and national churches mean regional 'Gods' (in terms of presentation) and national 'Gods' (in terms of the presentation of Faith). Not the Faith, but the Faiths. Of course, we'd all still sing or recite the same Creed, but like the Our Father, it would be made into something of a lie because...er...Pope says its okay! So...

That's all I was really trying to say. Of course, all of the above might be nonsense. I'm no theologian and the future is unknown but 'structural changes' of the kind muted by Pope Francis in the Church will have some serious ramifications. The most serious, I would suggest, is the possible effect as described below...

Catholic means 'Universal'

'Scheming and Fraud Fill Its Squares...'

Failing 'the Our Father test': The Pope and the Church cannot permit the overturning of Christ's teachings

Do read Fr Ray Blake's excellent piece on the Synod of Mess today.

The Pope and his advisers simply cannot do what is being suggested that is their intention in the Rorate piece today without violating - doing a great violence - to Christ's mission on Earth, to His Church, to souls and to Marriage and the Family.

The Kasper proposal - in fact - what is threatened as being the pre-determined 'end game' of the Synod, cannot be squared with the prayer taught to us by Our Lord, let alone His explicit teaching on marriage itself.

As Fr Hunwicke makes quite plain, you really do need a new definition of papal infallibility in order to justify a Pope 'twisting God's hand' in order to overturn God's own verdict on sin, marriage, repentance, the Divine Law, etc.

Quite a long time ago I mused on the possible prospect of Catholics being faced with an unsavory decision concerning whether to obey the Pope or obey Christ. 

One would have thought that if what is being proposed at the Synod does not meet the 'Our Father' test, then it would be thrown out as garbage pronto yet there it is, still rotting away at the Synod like month old onion skins.

This isn't the proclamation or prayer for Christ's Kingdom being discussed. I'm not sure God's holy will is being seriously considered by anyone but those who bravely stand up for Christ. This isn't about 'forgiveness' but toleration and blessing of sin. It isn't about being led away or out of temptation and it certainly isn't about being delivered from evil.

We can - we can dare - to say 'Our Father' because Jesus Christ taught us to. If our Heavenly Father has a different view on marriage, adultery, sin and repentance in Germany and Switzerland and overlooks it, and tolerates it there, but not in Poland and Africa, not only would it be impossible to see how the Church is One, Holy and Universal, but it would cast great doubt whether God is One and Holy, as if God would say, 

"No, no, do whatever you like. I'm liberal when I'm in Munich, but much more intolerant of sin in Warsaw."

It doesn't just mock the oneness of the Church. Even Almighty isn't given the honour and the Catholic belief in God falls apart.

So actually, I should have done a line through 'Hallowed be Thy Name'.

Do these people even believe in Heaven?

Here is a Conundrum...

Ah, what a riddle we have in our Pope.

Now that we understand that the 'Kasper proposal' will, in fact, be Bergoglio Boomerang, perhaps you can help me figure this one out...or have I figured it out?

Let's see now...

While touting 'doctrinal (let's throw in liturgical...pastoral...etc...) authority devolution' to create a loose federation of faith-in-humanity-so-come-and-do-as-you-please enclaves, which will be barely recognised as 'Catholic', pray tell why is Pope Francis, at the same time courting the Evangelicals and other denominations? I even wonder if some of them may know of what is afoot.

Remember that to Evangelicals unlike to those Traddies, Francis has been on video calling for union, a 'unity' for which he prays, even alluding to a possible future 'miracle' that will create unity. He has actually used that word. Is doctrinal devolution that miracle? Quite possibly! There's something of a stealth package going on under the surface of 'devolution' that observers haven't yet picked up on.

Remember me?: Hans Kung leaping like a yearling sheep at the potentials of 'Synodal' Churches

'Devolution' or 'synodality' in the sense proposed by Pope Francis is, in fact, not just a way to 'break the power of a future Successor of St Peter' by collapsing the Church at its centre, since how does a future Pope recover the authority which has been 'devolved' in terms of binding the Church as One and Universal, in faith and morals? It is also a way of creating new 'avenues' or rather a 'scorched earth' from which can be brought about ecumenical (or perhaps even inter-faith) unions.

What has stood in the way of, for example Anglican, Methodist, Baptist and Catholic 'union'? The primacy of Peter? The issues of Holy Communion and who can receive it? The nature of the Sacraments? Women priests? Lay 'participation' as ministers of the Sacraments. The Roman Rite of the Church?

All these things - once devolution gets really going - are up for grabs and we all know that the 'stumbling blocks to unity' are varied but have until now been 'insurmoutable'. Devolution could very well destroy the Catholicity of the Church BUT, here's the clever part. 

Bergoglio Boomerang: Reaches out to the peripheries but comes back to the centre

It doesn't just mean 'national churches'. No, if you can imagine, its even more serious than that.   If the Catholic Faith doesn't hold at its centre, in its core, that will be the green light for its abandonment the world over.

Yet this move devolves the Church in such a way that it opens up the Catholic Church to such pastoral and doctrinal ambiguity that there could be, in the near future perhaps, no reason why the Catholic Church shouldn't 'unite' with other Christian denominations, thus creating a pan-religious masonic wet dream to the likes of Hans Kung.

How many Bishops would be prepared to drop this whole Catholicism thing and form a united religion with say, Anglicans? How many would be prepared, now that the whole Catholic 'charismatic' movement is so up and running, to stand in the way of 'God's dream' of uniting the Catholic Church with the Evangelicals who do not hold the Perennial Faith of the Church? Or perhaps the animists and Buddhists can come in too. After all, don't we want a world of peace, harmony and fraternity? Isn't the Catholic Church the vehicle God would choose to unite all humanity in one big rendition of 'Imagine'?

Wouldn't that just be mean and heartless to stand in the way of this dream? Wouldn't that just stand in the way of unity? What 'conservative' or 'traditional' bishop would stand in the way of a United World Religion that brought peace to all of humanity in common solidarity and fraternal sharing of joy?

That Bishop would be cruel and disobedient. We can all see where the 'Holy Spirit' is moving us from a plan formed long ago by Freemasons.

What Catholic would dare stand in the way of this 'devolution' dream, destroying the very concept of securing and defending the deposit of faith, reducing Peter to a mere celebrity figure and all round nice guy, while tilling the Catholic soil for the great pan-religious love nest of the end times dreamt of by so many of Pope Francis's cheerleaders?

Right now Catholics are grappling with the Pope's Synodal hand-grenade and we think it's all about 'many Catholic churches'. My guess is there is more to this pre-determined strategy than merely that. The ecumenical and inter-faith dream is a big project with BIG backers. It is essentially masonic and could go some way to explaining why the mainstream media have given Francis a free pass.

My guess is the destructive work of destroying the Church's centre and foundations, as well as collapsing the 'oneness' of the Church is not so simple as to create national conference differences for doctrine and pastoral care, because these people don't simply want to destroy and leave it there. There is a greater project in mind. Think of what Cardinal Martini, Karl Rahner and Hans Kung had/have in mind. Think of their sweeping "ambition".

This is the levelling of the Church that the 'reformers' see as the stepping stone to the pan-religious utopia. Peter's authority, with doctrinal clarity, must go, end of, in order to establish the foundations of the new religion.

If that's the motive, and its quite a plausible one given the shady characters the Pope has adopted as advisers, if the Pope gets his way, he'll have prepared both the Church and the world for the Antichrist quite well and, likely, quite soon.

You will say I am mad of course, but perhaps not as mad as you would have said three weeks ago.

I smell a rat. Something truly wicked is afoot.

UPDATE: Michael Voris cites the masonic principles at work at the Synod.

Without drawing out the conclusions of just where a 'Masonic Synod' ends up, in advocating a One World Religion, Michael Voris, I see, has noticed the same pattern emerging. Worth remembering, too, that the 'dialogue' that Masons establish within the Church - and within society - is entirely artificial. They hatch their plans and carry out their plans. 

Resistance is crushed, entirely.

Sunday Evening Must Read for Every Synod Father

Courtesy of CF News

By John Vennari

During the 2015 Ordinary Synod, we've heard discussion of the possiblity of "regionalism," that is, allowing national bishops conferences to decide diverse "pastoral policies" regarding the Eucharist for the divorced and civiliy remarried, cohabitation and even homosexuality. In an October 15 interview, Raymond Cardinal Burke rightly said that the proposed "regional diversity" is " simply contrary to Catholic Faith and life. "

Yet Pope Francis himself in an October 17 speech brandished his resolve to "decentralize" the Church, even if he has to impose this decentralization from the top down, which would be a perfiduous abuse of authority.[1]

This un-Catholic "regionalism" and de-centralization did not appear suddently at the Synod, it has a history.

"Decentralization" and Church Restructure

A destructive new program now in the works, which had been flying under the radar of most concerned Catholics, but is now coming to light by means of the Synod now undersay. It is the proposed radical restructure of the Church based on the modernist thinking of Cardinal Martini, Cardinal Lehmann, Cardinal Danneels, Cardinal Kasper, Archbishop John Quinn, and yes, even Jorge Bergoglio. This new program is the basis for the “regionalism” now being voiced at the 2015 Synod on the Family.
Anyone who is familiar with the St. Gallen group will know what I'm talking about.
This group was quietly formed in 1999 during the administration of John Paul II.

In order to prevent what they consider to be meddlesome interference from the Vatican, the St. Gallen group worked for a fuller development of Vatican II's teaching on collegiality and synodality, with the ultimate aim of giving Bishops’ conferences more autonomy from Rome...

Read the rest at CF News.

More Buenos Aires Madness

See story here.

Bishops Selling Out Jesus in a "Protected Space"

Let's face it. 

They have form.

Synod of Insanity

Reports are circulating that Pope Francis could - or might be contemplating defining in an infallible manner - the 'end result' of the Synod. For some reason, that doesn't fill me with confidence.

There's something rather mentally unstable about the nature of the papacy post-2013, swinging wildly, as if in bi-polarity, between the:

'What me? Oh don't mind me. I'm only the Bishop of Rome, first among equals, humble prelate operating in a spirit of collegiality, interested only in fostering debate among other equals, my brother Bishops...'

...while doing this...

...on the one hand, and 'I'm the Successor of St Peter, so...

...on the other.

This is, rather scarily, a neat combo of 'excessive' Rome Reports generated humility bound up with cosmetic collegiality and the arbitrary use of extraordinary power which has been picked up on by those he has hand-picked to gather round him to hold 'mini-Synods' in his residence. Most of these figures want to redefine the word 'Catholic'.

Put frankly, the Synod itself has taken on the element of theatrical farce. If so much were not at stake it would be comic. You can say what you like in this 'protected space' for the Holy Spirit to speak, as long as you are uttering heresy, trampling on Christ's teachings and leading your flock into oblivion.

Anyway, this Synod is, I am certain, by now roasting your brains and draining your soul and as the Bishops 'walk together' on a journey of fraternal mutually assured destruction because the Pope, oh so mysteriously, refuses to step down and side with those who stand up for Jesus Christ we all need some 'time out'.

"Come to me all ye who are in mortal sin and I will give you Holy Communion!"

Those Bishops who are not of the mind of the scandalous Archbishop Cupich currently going 'down in a Blaise of glory' must be starting to wonder whether the 'infallible statement' will be delivered by a complete fantasist. Not only that, but the Synod Fathers by now know they're being undeniably and outrageously manipulated by the King. 

After all, if the Pope is intending to redefine Almighty God, the Moral Law, the Gospel, the family and redefine REALITY ITSELF, then I'd rather believe Francis was mad than think this snap was a huge PR disaster for Dr Evil...

There's reams of evidence online in assorted homilies in which His Holiness denounces things he quickly does, or says things he completely contradicts the next day. Is it time for the Synod Fathers to question, if not yet the validity of this Pope (because that's what they'll most likely have to deal with after his "special infallible pronouncement", but his sanity?

So why not take a break from this Synodal skull-duggery and mad-cappery and curl up in front of the TV and watch a classic biopic of the life of King George III and his personal descent into madness. This line seems particularly appropriate:

"I'm the King of England."

"No, Sir. You are THE PATIENT!"

or, you could watch it... 

...in Spanish...

Exceptional Annulments

Springs to mind.

Fast-track annulment cases will only be 'exceptional'.

"Your case is unique, just like everyone else's."

"Oh, thank you! It's so nice of you to consider my case to be exceptional."

(Chokes back tears of joy!)

Just another day...

Crown Him with many thorns, why not?

Scourge Him with many whips, why not?

Crucify Him again, why not?

As long as you can take time out to talk about aliens and stuff, that's the main thing.

Lord, save Your Church!

One Faith

Thank you, Cardinal Burke!

Polish Battle Cry

This is not a bad choice of battle cry. 

Let us also pray it for the Polish Bishops.

Borurodzica

Bogurodzica ("Mother of God") is a Polish Catholic hymn dating back to between the 10th and 13th centuries which has since then been sung in battle or facing an oppressor.

It is sung in times of peace, too, to commemorate those times when the Blessed Virgin Mary has protected the country of which she remains the only Queen.

Virgin, Mother of God, God-famed Mary!

Ask Thy Son, our Lord, God-named Mary,

To have mercy upon us and hand it over to us!

Kyrie eleison!

Son of God, for Thy Baptist's sake,

Hear the voices, fulfill the pleas we make!

Listen to the prayer we say,

For what we ask, give us today:

Life on earth free of vice;

After life: paradise!

Kyrie eleison!

Bogurodzica dziewica, Bogiem sławiena Maryja,

U twego syna Gospodzina Matko zwolena, Maryja!

Zyszczy nam, spuści nam.

Kyrie elison!

Twego dziela Krzciciela, bożycze,

Usłysz głosy, napełń myśli człowiecze.

Słysz modlitwę, jąż nosimy,

A dać raczy, jegoż prosimy:

A na świecie zbożny pobyt,

Po żywocie rajski przebyt.

Kyrie elison!

The Synod Walk-Out Petition

I have deeply mixed feelings about signing what I have just signed.

But I have signed and here is why:

This Synod has been convened ostensibly on 'the Family' but this has been shown to be a smokescreen. In truth, it has been evidently shown to be about nothing but power, the exercise of power and its misuse. It is not at the service of Christ, nor of His Church. It is not in service to the mission of the Church and it has not been and is not in service to the Family, unless, of course, you want to redefine 'the Family'.

Things are being discussed at the Synod that Bishops would not have dared to utter 50 years ago. Even the modernists of the 1960s and 1970s wouldn't have dreamed to give credibility to the ideas that liberal Bishops are discussing openly at the Synod and who are being encouraged to do so.

Pope Francis and those who he has appointed to work closely with him during this time of intense attack on the Church established by our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ are launching an astonishing and brazen attack on both Faith and Morals. This attack would seem to be a dynamic duo, but I am sure readers can think of more...

1. Calls for acceptance of the possibility of altering the Church's language on sexual morality.

Language Conveys Meaning. If you change the Church's language on sexual morality, you change not only the 'reaction' of your hearers to your message, which you hope will become more palatable, but the very meaning of the Church's teachings - the message itself. If you can really find a way of saying that homosexual acts are wrong without saying they are wrong, by a new and more palatable set of language, you are probably, almost certainly no longer saying that they are wrong, but are, rather, approving them. On the issue of sexual morality, as well as everything else of which He spoke, Jesus Christ Himself was 100% clear, and His words were less 'polite' than the Catechism.

If one single Bishop in the room should challenge those suggesting this it should be the Bishop of Rome, who guards and should proclaim the Deposit of Faith. If he is silent, silence implies consent. Acceptance of these calls to adapt the language of the Church to our age in order to imply the toleration of sin has real consequences, just one of which would entail a radical re-writing of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

In truth, Bishops can already use whatever language they choose to describe the Church's teachings on human sexuality and already they rarely dare to say that which the Church says. What this means for the future of the family, for the future of marriage, the future of the formation of Catholics in the Catholic Faith is unspeakably evil. It would entail a total failure and abnegation of every Catholic's duty to communicate clearly right and wrong on morality, generating anew, generations of Catholics who did not know the Faith, nor how to live it, let alone love it. It goes without saying that in such a new vision of Catholic linguistics, any Bishop or Priest would be isolated and could quickly find himself censured for speaking clearly as Christ and His Apostles did according to the Word of God.

2. Devolution of Pastoral Practise on the issue of Holy Communion to the civilly divorced and remarried.

Aside from the heinous promotion of Eucharistic sacrilege and further endangering the souls within the Church's care, this is nothing other than a direct assault on the Catholicity of the Church Herself. The Church cannot be One, Holy and Catholic if from country to country Bishops' Conferences, because of the Pope's acceptance of it, abrogate to themselves, in complete defiance of their Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, a manufactured 'right' to break - and publicly so - the bonds of Universal communion with their brethren, the Successors of the Apostles, around the World, or, even, in a neighbouring Diocese.

How could the Church preserve Unity, for which Jesus Christ prayed to His Eternal Father, if they are not of one mind and one heart on such an important matter. Unity is found in fidelity to Jesus Christ, Our Lord Who taught openly of the adulterous nature of such unions. It goes without saying that acrimony and isolation await those Bishops who, should such a move be accepted, refused to be carried away with the wind of the false mercy cherished and supported by their brethren, a false mercy which is tacitly approved, in word and action, by Pope Francis.

But back to power and back to service...

What an opportunity this Synod on the Family was for the Catholic Church and what an insult to Jesus Christ it has become, but for those faithful Bishops and Cardinals who are standing up in order to defend Him and His Teachings as well as His Bride. Yet from the outset, the opportunity for the Pope and the Bishops to proclaim anew the beauty of the Catholic Church's teachings on marriage and the family has been crushed and discarded, always being re-diverted back to issues that it is not within the Church's power to solve.

For 2,000 years, of persecution and of temporal ascendancy, the Catholic Church has taught that man's primary need, his deepest desire, even, yes, his duty, is to know, love and serve Almighty God. The happiness that we seek as creatures does not revolve around the fulfillment of temporal pleasures. The Church has taught always that God, alone, can satisfy the human heart. Our deepest yearning is communion and Union with God. That the Catholic Church should seek to promote or encourage, even a little bit, the notion that our relationship with Almighty God is of lesser importance than questions on earthly satisfaction that can never satisfy us is scandalous in the extreme. 'What would it profit a man," said Our Blessed Lord, "if he gained the whole world, but suffered the loss of his immortal soul?"

What would it profit any Pope, any Bishop, any Priest, and what would it profit the Catholic Church to gain the acceptance of the whole world, but by bending to its ear to its demands for the toleration or acceptance of sin, losing not only its very soul, but the souls of those it comforted with mercy that was anything but, teachings on the family and marriage, that were anything but, language that was emptied of Catholic truth?

Yes, the Catholic Church serves mankind, but it serves God first. It cannot take the place of God, and woe to those who would place themselves in between man and his Creator and Redeemer. In 2001, I became a Catholic. In 2003, I discovered I was homosexual. In 2014, I married a wonderful woman and in 2015, I am happier than I have ever been in my whole life. Through His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, Jesus Christ took a man who was completely and utterly lost in life, quite broken by that life and damaged by this world and its abundance of evils. If you want to look for a great sinner, look at me and see one, but I have discovered the riches and glory of the Church established by the Son of God and look forward, with hope, to the Eternal Life that He has promised to His followers. I have cohabited. I have committed homosexual acts. I have had homosexual relationships. I have fornicated. I have, looking back, quite likely received Jesus Christ unworthily in a state of mortal sin. But that is not the end of the story because I believe in Jesus Christ!

Through good and holy priests and the the teachings of some holy prelates, through the teachings of Popes, through the teachings of the Church, in all their clarity and truth, through attending Holy Mass, through receiving Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist and frequenting the Sacraments of Confession, through reading Holy Scripture and holy books, through holy friendship, through a community of faith, through holy liturgy and prayer, through the Sacrament of Marriage, even though until my dying breath, I will be a poor sinner in the eyes of God, I am living in the grace of God and I can hope for mercy, if I am merciful. What good is in me, what good I do, belongs entirely to God and if I but let Him, God will, in time, refashion me His own image. In having nourished me with the truth and all the above, in serving God, the Church has served me. Please, do not consider, for one moment, of depriving a single soul from all that the Catholic Church has given me. because She, like Her Lord, has loved me with love beyond all telling, so that I can say that nothing - nothing - is more important to a man than God and the Salvation He has to offer.

But will anyone in the new, shining vision of 'Church' envisaged by the reformers manipulating the Synod find his way to the Truth if the Church does everything it can to deprive him of the truth? Will a man be able to find Jesus Christ's teachings without the Church offering them to him in language that is clear and challenging, that calls him to repentance? Will a man be able to find the Truth anywhere? Why would a man wish to put God first if the Church encourages him not to bother? Why would a man reform his life with God's grace, if the Church says his life is fine as it is? How will a man or woman dedicate themselves daily to overcome sin if the Church tells them not to bother, its all fine really?

That power which has been given to the Church in the name of Her Lord belongs to Him. The power that the Church has to offer is the power of love, the power of grace.

The power that the Church has to offer is truth, to reveal to mankind He Who is full of grace and truth and to reveal to mankind who he is. It is not for man to tell God what He is, or for man to tell God what he himself is. It does not have the power to redesign reality. It does not have the power to transmit falsehood and to deceive. It does not have the power to alter Jesus Christ's Teachings by, in principle, simply agreeing to the World's terms, by adopting the World's own language - a language which is itself duplicitous and deceptive. Such powers as this are simply the fantasies of sinful men in positions of power who forget God. Men can abuse their positions of authority to do these things, but such things can never come from God. To manipulate, to deceive, to intimidate and to abuse authority, these are not virtues.

Faithful Bishops and faithful Cardinals who refuse to adopt, into their ministry and into their Dioceses the terrible errors beings promoted and encouraged (even by the Pope) within the walls of Synod Hall will say everything they possibly can - in the now feint hope of being heard, to persuade the orchestrators of this Synod that the Church must remain in total fidelity to Jesus Christ, but if they are not listened to, before the Synod ends, it does no harm to the fabric of the Church to walk out of the Synod Hall in refusal to be present at an event that encourages, defends or even, at times, glamourises sin. Why? Because, in truth, if they are not listened to, if they are derided, if they are ignored, if they are defamed, if they are bullied, if they are muzzled, if they walk out of that Hall, the Church walks with them. If then they are listened to, if then they are taken seriously, then it is the Church which welcomes them back in.

If Bishops are all equal and the Pope first among equals, then those who reiterate that which has always been believed should get a fair hearing, but if, in preaching the Gospel, you are not received and not listened to, but find yourselves rejected or ignored, Our Lord gave His Apostles some advice...

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet. (St Matthew 10:14)

It wouldn't be a schismatic act. It would be an act that said,

'Most Holy Father, we will follow you and be obedient to you in everything, everything but offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.'

In saying that, they would do be doing a service to Almighty God and to His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

"Abstract Moral Principles"

People understood the moral principles at work in the abuse crisis in Ireland

"People struggle to understand abstract moral principles."

So said Archbishop Diamuid Martin today in the Synod Hall. His Grace also said other things that can be read his intervention here.

Taking up further the post by Fr Ray Blake today, there are a couple of things worth unpacking here.

For instance, do we really believe that people "struggle to understand" the Church's teaching on, for example, the sinfulness of homosexual acts?

I ask this because I think that ultimately, people are not morally illiterate. They may not share your morality - they might reject it, but not 'understanding'?

Oh no, they understand alright.

The Irish people didn't "struggle to understand" the immorality of the abuse and cover up of abuse within the Irish Church, nor did they consider it to be an 'abstract moral principle'. The Irish were angry, very angry, indignant at the betrayal (and sensed some hypocrisy) that the Irish Church had committed.

Like all peoples, and every person, the Irish are interested in morality. It is knitted into everyday existence for all people, from our selfishness to our pride, to our neglect of others, to our habitual vices. The Irish may have succumbed to the spirit of our age on homosexuality - the acceptance of which, as a lifestyle, has cruised the Western world over. Yet, even then, in Ireland,  a majority have accepted it but I think 40% have not, at least, accepted 'same-sex marriage'. Reading the Archbishop's intervention, however, you could be forgiven for thinking those who voted against it were backward types who held intolerant views.

This poor individual does not 'understand' our 'abstract moral principles'...

Some of the comments made in the Synod Hall today from various prelates on the Church's language which were, basically saying, 'Let's rewrite/burn/bury the Catechism' are infuriating and do a serious disservice to the Church and the World. For me, personally, they are infuriating because the Catechism of the Catholic Church was an inestimable guide in leading me to accept the Church's position on sexual morality and all the Teachings that the Catholic Church upholds, at least, when you open a book.

"People struggle to understand abstract moral principles."

The more I read that statement, the more crass it becomes, to me. Perhaps they do but that is not what the Church teaches. The Church teaches the commandments of God and repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Does His Grace think the Irish are stupid people, so stupid that they could never "understand" that sodomy is wrong, a sin against God and nature or that fornication, sorry, sex outside of marriage, or that masturbation, or pornography use, is wrong? Does a single militant homosexualist ever say, "I hate the Catholic position on what it deems to be my "sin" because I simply cannot understand it?" It is precisely because the teaching is understood that it is widely despised. Do we really have to be a Catholic intellectual to understand the Penny Catechism which, I think, fell out of favour among the Irish and English Hierarchy moons ago?

And what is 'abstract' about the Church's language and position on homosexuality? Nothing! The very opposite is true. The vociferous gay lobby, for instance, despise the Church's position on homosexuality - no matter how you say it - because the Church opposes what homosexuals do. It isn't abstract. It's something very 'close to home'. In opposing homosexual behaviour the Church does the homosexual a favour the World is no longer prepared to do for him and that is to tell him the truth and, in my honest opinion, with great tact and courtesy.

Can the Catholic Church really teach right and wrong and the difference between the two without using the words 'sin', 'wrong', 'morally wrong', morally disordered, intrinsically disordered or even 'grave depravity' because, I see that the world gets on just fine and dandy using these terms, for example, when a priest rapes a child or a nun beats up an orphan, a masked gunman holds up a post office, or a banker defrauds his investment company to the tune of a million pounds, or when a judge sentences someone who goes around getting his kicks from killing prostitutes and storing their bodies in deep freeze, or when a man gets it on with a goat.

"People struggle to understand abstract moral principles."

No. That is an insult to Our Lord and His Church and also to mankind. The Church's teachings are not abstract moral principles. Not now, not ever. Not everyone is going to accept the Church's message of Salvation. Christ told us that many, in fact, will not. That's a deeply unfortunate and sad fact of this life, but here's the thing: In order to convince people of the message of Salvation, Bishops have to first be convinced that it is the Truth. They have to accept that they, we, all people, are sinners in need of repentance. Christ can save us, Jesus wants to save us, but we have to want His Salvation, on His terms, not on ours. If Bishops and Cardinals, Archbishops and Popes are not for teaching unpopular truths that - far from being 'abstract' moral principles - are in fact the "lived reality" of habitually sinning against God, then they are depriving people of the Salvation that Christ wishes to give mankind. The Devil need not work so very hard against Christ, indeed, if Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals and Popes are doing it all for him. The Archbishop goes on:

"But simply repeating doctrinal formulations alone will not bring the Gospel and the Good News of the Family into an antagonistic society."

Readers, you can finish off this blogpost for me. As for my opinion...

"Doctrinal formulations..." 

"Doctrinal formulations??????" 

Is that all they are?!

...ditto all the above. Just repeat.

Ann Barnhardt explains rather well how by the way they speak about the Commandments of God, you can tell what they really think of them.

This Synod is showing us, really quite embarrassingly, for the whole Church to see, which prelates are for Christ and which prelates are against Him. Even the most saccharine of interventions cannot hide their real opinions. 

The most shameful thing about this blogpost is that I shouldn't focus on the Irish Archbishop, really, because could have chosen any number of prelates speaking today. 

Can the great irony really be lost on these Bishops that the very method of teaching about family - about God today that they think 'alienates' people is the very method that they never try or, even, never tried?

What Happened to the Westminster Cathedral's Homeless?

Cardinal Vincent Nichols receives his red hat from the 'Pope for the poor'.

I was outside Westminster Cathedral today and talked with two guys from Victoria BID, that's (Business Improvement District) Board. They wore purple t-shirts and arrived in a white van to take away some tables and chairs outside in the piazza.

I was wondering why there were so few homeless people around the Cathedral as there used to be. Suddenly, I put two and two together and made four. So I asked the guys from Victoria BID whether they were responsible for ensuring homeless people were 'moved on'.

"Yes," they said, "we are like security for the area. We clean the streets around the piazza and make sure homeless people aren't around. These houses around here are worth millions, you know. There's a lot of money around here."

I asked...

"So, is it the Council doing this?"

The answer comes back...

"No, well they are a player, but mostly the business and residents around the area fund this enterprise. We put these nice tables and chairs out in the square and make sure the area is clean and presentable..."

So I get back from my day out in London - went to Mass at a Polish Catholic Mission Church who could be placed in a very awkward position should the Holy Father pronounce the words of absolute destruction after the Synod - and, lo and behold, I discover that key members on the board of the Business Improvement District Board Observers include, wait for it:

Joelle Bailey, Network Rail

Fr Alexander Master, Westminster Cathedral

CI Sean McDermid, Metropolitan Police Service

Mick Clarke, The Passage

Steve Carr, Westminster City Council
Insp. Andrew Kermack, British Transport Police
Insp. Ian Rawlins, Metropolitan Police Service

Yes, the Cathedral are actually in on this cleansing of the poor from their doors! They know about it and are 'observing it' happen. How is that for 'poor Church for the poor'? With Cardinal Vincent Nichols's blessing, I presume?

And the wealthy consortium funding this business of 'cleansing' the streets around the Cathedral are not poor either. Between them, they could probably house all the previous residents sleeping in the piazza. Who knows, maybe they have? There is so much money floating around in this district of London that it really is amazing that such a draconian enterprise targeted against the poor and homeless can be so easily funded. I assume all the homeless have been found suitable accommodation courtesy of The Goring Hotel.

They include:

Ruth Duston (Chief Executive). Victoria BID
Nigel Hughes (Interim Chairman), Grosvenor Britain & Ireland
Claudia Binkert (Vice Chair), EDF Trading
Amanda Cheston (Retail), House of Fraser
Gary Merrick (Interim Vice Chair), John Lewis Partnership
David Morgan-Hewitt (Hospitality), The Goring Hotel
Caroline Hanson (Leisure), Victoria Palace Theatre
Robert Flinter (Hospitality), Park Plaza Victoria
Ben Ridgwell (Property owner), Land Securities
Lady Lucy French (Leisure), St. James Theatre
Lorrie Dannecker (Corporate), Telegraph Media Group
Justine Brown (Corporate), DP World
Ruth Hart-Leverton (Energy), DONG Energy
Ian Fletcher (Hospitality), Guoman Hotels

Interesting how many of these members are into 'hospitality'. So much for Cardinal Vincent Nichols's credentials as a man after Pope Francis's heart! His 'selective hearing' during the reign of Benedict XVI doesn't seem to have improved in the reign of Francis. Yes, The Passage does great work, I'll never doubt that, but there is a fundamental issue here to do with what Catholicism traditionally understands about how we treat the poor.

Of course, now you can't find Him in the piazza, thanks to Victoria BID...

We're not, traditionally speaking, into 'cleansing Cathedral piazzas' of them. We are into feeding them and doing what Christ told us to do for them, for Him, not selling them down the river to the wiles of big business and wealthy residents because they 'bring down the whole area'.

"Move along now, Lord Jesus Christ. You're not welcome here! After all, this is a Cathedral - and there are some expensive houses here!"

I met this man pictured above in 2011 who was standing around campaigning against the Council's plans for the 'cleansing' of the piazza outside the Cathedral. Looks like that was a campaigned that thoroughly failed. How heartening it is that the Cathedral are doing their bit to make sure the area is 'nice' for rich residents and big, wealthy businesses.

Here is their video about the work of the Victoria BID.

Shame they forgot to mention...

"...and we told the homeless to sling their hooks with full knowledge and consent of the Cathedral."

Undoubtedly, it is not easy for the Cathedral to maintain its 'social status' with homeless people dotted around the piazza, and I understand - from first hand experience - that there are significant issues around why people are living on the streets, but, for some reason, I just can't see St Ambrose of Milan going along with the corporations and very rich residents who just want 'rid of the problem'. It's really not very Catholic!

Perhaps you've dropped into the Cathedral at times and asked yourself the question in this blogpost's headline.

Well now you know!

Dare I say it, not an article Telegraph Media Group will be terribly interested in...

...part of the consortium, you see!

Happy Feast of Our Lady of Victories

Today is the Feast of Our Lady of Victories, otherwise known as Our Lady of the Rosary.

It's my birthday.

It's also Vladimir Putin's birthday.

"It's only a birthday cake candle. I'll blow it out in a moment."

Vatican Teams Up With Children's Storybook Company for Synod Tale

The Vatican has teamed up with Mr. Men children's books to help Catholic parents tell the story of the Synod on the Family to their children. Now your children can follow, and relive, those key moments of the Synod with Mr. Men characters. The book has been written but not yet been released. However, the characters have been published so you can tell your little lambs the full official story. Naturally, parents will be astonished that the 'story of the Synod' is to be released before the Synod ends, but Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri has made it clear that the pre-written story of the Synod is completely trustworthy and will reflect reality retrospectively.

Pope Francis (Supreme Pontiff)

Cardinal Walter Kasper (everybody loves Mr. Tickle!)

Fr Thomas Rosica of Salt and Light TV

Cardinal Godfreed Daneels (keep quiet about the conclave, and you won't be so nervous!)

Archbishop Bruno Forte (our lovable little rogue and naughty relatio expert)

Cardinal Peter Erdo (keep talking Mr Noisy!)

Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga ("Come on, people!")

Bishop Peter Doyle of Northampton

Cardinal Vincent Nichols (nice man, but only interested in his red hat really...)

Archbishop Stanislaw Gadecki of Poznan (Always thinks things are impossible, wants to thwart God's dream!)

Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri (our expert in promoting topsy turvy theology)

Cardinal Wilfrid Napier (always on Twitter)

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin (Crisis? What crisis?)

Archbishop Blaise Cupich (prepared to think 'outside the box')

Fr Antonio Spadaro S.J (all journalists are like this, especially that evil Edward Pentin!)

Cardinal Reinhard Marx (outspoken, brazen, controversial, rich but still our good friend in Germany)

Cardinal George Pell (always moaning)

Fr Frederico Lombardi, S.J (has a difficult job)

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Muller (Calm down, it will all be okay!)

Bishop Athanasius Schneider (not invited to the Synod, because bravery is not for Christians)

Cardinal Raymond Burke (not invited because nobody likes a 'Mr. Perfect'!)

Cardinal Robert Sarah

Pope Emeritus Benedict (not invited because ex-Popes who are 'specialists of the logos' don't have anything to say to modern man)

Monsignor Pio Pinto (listen to the Holy Spirit talking through Mr Messy, or else!)

Cardinal Angelo Sodano (always fussing around, trying to control Vatican life)

Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle (Slow down, Mr. Rush!)

Cardinal Christoph Schonborn (Means well...)

Fr Adolfo Nicolas Pachon, Superior General of the Jesuit Order (If looks could kill...)

Cardinal Timothy Dolan (Guffaw! Chortle!)

Monsignor Krzystof Charamsa (not invited, but still made a huge impression on the whole thing)

Update: Not all readers will be familiar with these characters. This video will help you acquaint yourself with Mr Tickle.