If you’re the Pope and you don’t want to be the obvious bad guy in the most massive clerical sex scandal debacle in history, there are certain obvious things you just have to say, such as:
“I’m so sorry.”
“This is a mortal sin that violates the laws of both God and nature, to say nothing of the laws of the Church, and I will have it out!”
“I’m doing my best to eradicate this pox from the Church.”
“Please join me in public reparation for the sins of my priests.”
“Lord Jesus Christ, I beg forgiveness for all that we've done to violate Your most pure and spotless bride."
Here’s the closest Francis has come so far, excerpted from a new book-interview with Claretian Father Fernando Prado, The Strength of Vocation: Consecrated Life Today:
“The Church urges that persons with this rooted [homosexual] tendency not be accepted into (priestly) ministry or consecrated life… We have to urge homosexual priests, and men and women religious, to live with celibacy, with integrity, and above all, that they be impeccably responsible, trying to never scandalize either their communities or the faithful holy people of God. It is better that they leave the priesthood or the consecrated life rather than live a double life.”
But, Holiness, who are you to judge? Remember?
Although this is positively Piusthetenthian by Francis Church standards, it still seems like we may have a bit of cherry picking going on here--the question is, cherry picking by whom? Because there's no doubt that Francis' words will not be well-received by the pro-LGBT activists in the Church, such as Jimmy Martin, who are hell-bent on creating the illusion that the Church has changed her teaching against homosexual acts. Clearly, Francis can't have it both ways, as is evidenced by his #1 cheerleader's hissy fit over even just this slight papal walk back of the grand deception:
Isn't that a doodle! Catholic teaching can be pretty gauche, girlfriend!
It is unlikely that we will hear words even like these from Pope Francis again any time soon, keeping in mind that this August 2018 book-interview took place before Francis had engaged in the Vigano smackdown, culminating in the hijacking of the USCCB's meeting in Baltimore when the bishops were ordered to not take action against Cardinal McCarrick. In other words, in the aftermath of the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report the Pope was saying some nice words, but those words ring a little hallow in the wake of Hurricane Vigano, especially given the fact that Francis has been promoting homosexual priests for years, covering for homosexual bishops and cardinals, and tends to surround himself with those who aren't exactly the, well, marrying type.
And, evidently, out "homosexual priests" are a thing now, according to the Pope who famously said of gay priests: Who am I to judge? But what about the other truth of the Church: that they were never allowed to be priests in the first place? What about the terrifying prospect that, objectively speaking and according to the Catechisms of the Catholic Church, such priests will damn themselves forever unless they reform their lives? Yes, of course they need to go, but what about their souls, Francis? It's not enough to say: “Go do your stuff somewhere else, or at the very least try harder not to partake in this sin that cries to heaven for vengeance while serving as a priest.”
Huh? This is the Pope talking here, and in the midst of the most horrific clerical sex scandal in history. I'm sorry, but this is insufficient!
Contrast this with the words of the late Bishop Morlino, who said:
The Church’s teaching is clear that the homosexual inclination is not in itself sinful, but it is intrinsically disordered in a way that renders any man stably afflicted by it unfit to be a priest.
On the bright side: Fr. Jimmy Martin? You heard His Holiness, right? Time for you to catch the peace train right on out of here. Maybe you can build your bridge to hell from somebody else’s “faith community.”
Russia’s making headlines again for being just too darn family-oriented and Christian-valued for the NWO:
PARIS (AP) — The European Court of Human Rights issued a fresh rebuke to the Kremlin on Tuesday, ruling that Russia’s continued ban on LGBT rallies is discriminatory and represents a violation of human rights.
Judges at the court based in the eastern French city of Strasbourg called on Moscow to introduce “systemic measures” to remedy the breaches to the European Convention of Human Rights that the Russian Federation became a signatory to in 1996.
It’s unlikely Russia will implement the court’s recommendation of the need for “a sustained and long-term effort to adopt general measures” to ease the freedom to march and counter LGBT discrimination.
Russia in 2011 adopted a vaguely worded legislation on “gay propaganda” that outlaws LGBT gatherings anywhere near where children might be.
REMNANT COMMENT: Stop the hate, for sure! This is outrageous! I’m shocked. Totally shocked. Probably more shocked than you are, in fact, because I’m super evolved!
(Thanks, Facebook censors, for all you do to keep us safe!)
Now for what we really think: Maybe if the Alphabet Soup Gang would refrain from running around naked in the streets of Moscow, turning Main Street Russia into a S&M freakshow, Mother Russia wouldn't be so worried about little Olga and Dmitry losing their innocence forever on their way to grab a Baykal after school.
Is it really so unreasonable for a parent—any parent—to prefer her little daughter not be forced to witness two men in leather thongs flogging each other on her way to ballet class? I mean, really! Who's being the insensitive boob here -- the parent minding her own business, or the doofus in the leather diaper?
Just a thought.
I know, we Godly Americans know FOR SURE that President Putin is just trying to fool us with all this, by playing the part of the prodigal. But what if Putin’s presidential playacting is beginning to take a toll on the former KGB guy? What if his public bearing witness to the Light—no matter how politically motivated it may be—is actually scoring a few points with the “Man upstairs”. You never know. Right?
A politician “pretending” to be a Christian at a time when just about every country in the West is preparing to outlaw Christianity has got to stand for something. And why pretend to be Christian if on some level you’re not convinced that a Christian people is far preferable to an atheist/secularist mob?
God's ways are not ours and, let's face it, even Putin’s charade—if that’s all it is—is more Godly than what ninety percent of politicians running around loose in the world today are doing.
Here’s an old RTV Short that I think drives this point home quite nicely:
Since 2016, Christian and pro-life families in Taiwan, with the aid of MassResistance, have been organizing massive demonstrations across the country to raise awareness of the cultural consequences of legalizing same sex “marriage”.
"Christian groups decided to put the issue up for a nationwide vote. Even though Christians make up only 5% of the population in Taiwan, they were able to get the signatures necessary to do put forth three ballot questions: (1) marriage is only between one man and one woman (2) have a “different process” other than the legal system for dealing with same-sex unions; and (3) ban the teaching of homosexuality in public schools.
The LGBT movement also put up two ballot questions: (1) Should the civil code guarantee the rights of same-sex couples to get married? (2) Should “gender equality education covering LGBTI rights” be compulsory in the public schools?
Last Saturday, November 24, 2018, the country voted. All three of the Christian groups’ ballot questions passed. The two LGBT movement’s ballot questions failed. The pro-family movement had won. The mainstream media around the world reacted with shock and anger. At this writing the Taiwan election authorities have not released the exact vote totals – except to say that they percentages were quite substantial.
The Parliament is now going to have to deal with conflicting mandates – the Court’s ruling versus the peoples’ vote. It may force the issue back to the Supreme Court." Read the rest HERE.
REMNANT COMMENT: God's still in His heaven, and it ain't over til the fat lady sings.
The Archdiocese of Chicago will experience a dramatic loss of priests, and therefore parishes, in the next 13 years. It's estimated that 180 priests will have retired by then, but only 10 will have taken their place. Fr. Thomas Belanger, the pastor of St. Philip Neri Catholic Church in Chicago, was interviewed on this grim prospect. He expects his own parish will become stronger, because:
“Enlightenment, and also not judging as quickly as we used to, but accepting people where they’re at, but also help them become stronger in their own self-identity and their lives.”
…Um? Well, anyway, sit back and have a look at the Springtime of Vatican II, which is just bustin' out all over the Windy City:
Thank you, Father, for illustrating the exact reason we’ve run out of priests to shepherd the “faith communities” of Chicago.
Enlightenment fills closed churches, not so much with people, but with light!
Isn't that enlightening?
Dear Friends in Christ the King:
Some good news! As part of our ongoing effort to keep the print edition of The Remnant going to press every two weeks, I’m happy to announce that The Remnant is teaming up with Professor Roberto de Mattei—the highly esteemed historian and President of the Lepanto Foundation in Rome.
You can read Professor de Mattei’s excellent “Church in Crisis: The Final Act of Vatican II” in the new print/e-edition of The Remnant. By the way, the Professor’s work will be available in our print and e-edition only, as an incentive to visitors to our website to also take out a subscription to the newspaper—the financial lifeblood of this apostolate.
Everything truly Catholic but Internet-based will, in the months and years ahead, be subject to more and more governmental regulation. And I have no intention of turning the entire traditional Catholic press over to the Christophobic Gods of Cyberspace.
The Remnant’s print edition must survive!
Because the Vatican apparently couldn’t care any less about victims of abuse, and would evidently like to enable its criminal priests and bishops to keep right on committing that abuse, Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Blase "Francis Is Latino" Cupich to the organizational committee of the February meeting.
According to Edward Pentin of NCRegister:
Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago and Archbishop Charles Scicluna of Malta are among those Pope Francis appointed today to the organizing committee for next February’s meeting of presidents of bishops’ conferences to discuss the protection of minors in the Church.
...Cardinal Cupich said Nov. 20 he believed the meeting will be a “watershed moment in the life of the Church” and that “time and again” the Pope “has shown his resolve to comprehensively address this scourge.”
The archbishop of Chicago, who, like the Holy Father, has frequently blamed the crisis primarily on “clericalism,” said Francis is “calling for radical reform in the life of the Church, for he understands that this crisis is about the abuse of power and a culture of protection and privilege, which have created a climate of secrecy, without accountability for misdeeds.”
“All of that has to end, not only in terms of how it risks the safety of children, but also how the abuse of power by certain leaders undermines the Gospel and injures the faith lives of the people the ordained have been sent to serve,” Cardinal Cupich said.
The appointment is raising concerns because Cardinal Cupich has notably dismissed Archbishop Viganò’s testimony on the McCarrick abuse cover-up as a mere “rabbit hole” distracting the Church, believes that homosexuality is not a significant contributing factor in the abuse of minors (despite statistics showing otherwise), and has defended the Vatican postponing U.S. bishops from voting on measures to prevent abuse cover-up.
REMNANT COMMENT: As we said the last time. . .
While most countries in Europe seem to be giving in to a slow demographic decline, Hungary is fighting back with some of the world's most generous pronatalism policies—mostly thanks to pro-family PM, Viktor Orbán.
From Russian Insider:
The basis of Hungarian government today, says:
Hungary shall protect the institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman… and the family as the basis of the nation’s survival. Hungary shall encourage the commitment to have children. The protection of families shall be regulated by a cardinal Act.
Since 2010, when Prime Minister Orbán’s government took office, Hungary’s demographic policy has shown real results: by 2017, abortion numbers had dropped by more than a third, from 40,449 to 28,500, divorces saw a marked decline (from 23,873 in 2010 to 18,600 in 2017), and the number of marriages had risen by some 42 percent.
The government is seeking to find out, inter alia, whether the people agree that the problem of Hungary’s declining population should not be remedied with immigration, but with more intensive family support measures; whether the people agree that the new family support programmes will continue to remain tied to employment; and whether young married couples should be given support with the initial phases of their independent married lives.
Alarmingly fertility remains below replacement level but perhaps -- most likely in fact -- the full effect of the reform will take more time and full benefits will be reaped only after years or decades more.
REMNANT COMMENT: The pro-family winds of change are certainly blowing across Europe, now that the nation-killing consequences of International Planned Parenthood's agenda have been fully realized.
Now, wouldn't it be great if the neo-Catholic establishment would experience a similar awakening and begin to reexamine its long-standing fixation on natural planned parenthood—so-called NFP?
Yes, I realize that Natural Family Planning isn't intrinsically evil as is, say, artificial contraception. But, nevertheless, when you have the entire Church of Accompaniment orchestrating a world-wide push to curb fertility in Catholic families that are otherwise open to life, you’ve got to wonder whose side they're really on, especially now with Pope Francis teaming up with Jeffrey Sachs and the whole "sustainable development" crowd.
If we’re brutally honest with ourselves, we've got to admit that diocesan training programs mandating every young Catholic couple be thoroughly indoctrinated in the art of preventing conception with machine-like precision is, at the end of the day, a bit suspicious. At the very least we've got to admit that it runs the risk of encouraging our own little Catholic contraceptive mentality. Right? I mean, how could it not?
If I can get personal for a moment, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only man who is grateful no NFP experts got into his head back when he was young, foolish and newlywed. If someone had told me to wait until I was ready, mature and financially stable before becoming a "responsible parent", I’d likely still be coming up with excuses.
As it was, when my wife and I were married in 1996 our first child showed up nine months later. A couple years after that, we had three under three. And, by the way, we didn’t have two pennies to rub together at the time. Somehow, God provided.
And we weren’t heroes. That’s just the way it was. When I was a kid, every family in our neighborhood had 9, 10, 12 children. Catholic couples were literally wide open to life, with the mentality being "however many children God sends us is how many children we'll have." I had eight siblings. Growing up was so much fun that it never even occurred to me to deprive my own kids of that truly awesome childhood.
Not so much anymore, right?
So, what happened? Somewhere along the line Catholics got it into their heads that less is more, that “responsible parenthood” means a larger house, more reliable cars and much smaller families.
In most dioceses in America today, for example, the mandatory pre-Cana classes include expert instruction on how to delay conception i.e., how to take advantage of the pleasure of the marital act without necessarily dealing with the drooling, pooping, crying little consequences. Having already equalized the ends of marriage, they've come pretty close to inverting them, arguing that the unitive (and concupiscence-controlling) ends of marriage trump procreation and the education of children.
In fairness, it must also be said that many couples use NFP to conceive when there is some difficulty in that regard. And for this reason, a blanket condemnation of NFP is absurd. It certainly has its place.
The trouble is, many Catholic couples use NFP, not out of some necessity but, rather, indefinitely and merely to ensure they have only a couple of kids. And the real heartbreak of this is that we're talking about the "good guys" here. These are the cream-of-the-crop Catholics who've kept the Faith enough to want to live in compliance with the Church's moral laws that, if rarely stressed from the pulpits, are nevertheless still in the books. They’re conscientious Catholics, in other words, who've been sort of brainwashed by the Church of Accompaniment into embracing a de facto contraceptive mentality.
If the over-zealous champions of NFP were to instead encourage Catholic couples to have "as many children as God sends" once again, we'd no doubt see a significant increase in the pre-conciliar large Catholic family about which Pope Pius XII wrote so beautifully and which once made up the backbone of the Catholic Church as self-reliant, self-sufficient, enemies of the nanny state.
I know, mine is a pipe dream. Too much water has gone under the bridge to walk this one back. Still, it's true that most Latin Mass-going traditional Catholics haven’t paid much attention to NFP over the past twenty-five years, preferring instead to just have a bunch of kids and live their lives without the "romance" of charts, graphs and thermometers.
Maybe now that Francis has ripped the mask of innocence off the Revolution of Vatican II as a whole--and more and more neo-Catholics are coming to realize they've been had (liturgically and doctrinally)—maybe now is a good time to charitably and gently put the topic of "Catholic contraception" back on the table.
Long live the large pre-conciliar Catholic family!
Proving once again that many good men are sick and tired of being incarcerated in Gulag Novus Ordo, diocesan priest-writer for NCRegister, Msgr. Charles Pope, sounds like something right out of the pages of The Remnant in his report on the USCCB meeting. Here’s a chance for us to see the scandal through the eyes of a loyal priest and a good man, and one who’s obviously had enough of Pope Francis:
Lamentably, the vote to encourage the Holy See to release all documents related to former Cardinal McCarrick’s alleged misconduct did not pass. The debate seemed to center on canonical issues and even wordsmithing. Nonetheless, the fact that more than 80 bishops were willing to issue even a mild-mannered insistence to Rome shows that many are finding a voice that is willing to confront when and where necessary.
The greatest disappointment was Pope Francis’ decision to suppress any vote or action on the abuse scandals by the U.S. bishops. Some bishops remarked that this decision indicates that Rome is serious about reform—a gratuitous claim.
To most Catholics, the Pope’s actions and seeming resistance place the ownership of the scandal squarely in his court; he has increasingly become the face of the scandal.
Every faithful Catholic—and certainly every priest—has an instinct to support the Pope and our bishops, but this worldwide scandal has forced many of us to speak out.
I pray that the bishops who spoke out so courageously at the USCCB meeting will continue to do so and will also direct clear and forceful appeals to Rome and to the Holy Father. Demands for a full and credible investigation and a canonical trial of former Cardinal McCarrick are not out of place or unreasonable. Bishops are not acolytes of the Pope and their dioceses are not mere franchises of the Diocese of Rome.
I know of no one from any sector of the Church who is not heartbroken about this, while also angry and insistent upon reform. This is not a storm created in the “blogosphere.” Every day I am approached by parishioners and contacted by people from all over: young adults in our Bible study and pre-Cana programs, older Catholics in our Sodality and Knights of Columbus, catechists, staff members, long-time Catholics, recent converts, attendees at Sunday Mass, daily communicants, and those frequenting Eucharistic Adoration. They are all concerned; they are on the receiving end of questions themselves from family and friends: “What’s wrong with your Church?” They are dismayed; they are deeply concerned for the Church they still love. These are the people still in our pews, who did not leave during the cultural downslide and have supported the Church through thick and thin. These are the people who look to us. No clergyman should demonize them; they have been too good to us for us to write them off as some fringe element. They are good Catholics and are looking to us for clear teaching, for some return of the love and loyalty they have shown us through the most difficult decades of the cultural and sexual revolutions. They have been exceedingly patient with us. This is no time to be dismissive; this is a time to listen and work together with God’s good people for reform and a new springtime of faith in the Church and in the world. Somebody say, “Amen!”
REMNANT COMMENT: It's over. Pope Francis's legacy is papal mud.
So, what now?
As men such as Msgr. Pope begin to see straight through the Francis agenda, the entire Modernist revolution in the Church skates further out onto thin ice. Why? Because Francis is all about that revolution; he’s its poster boy, in fact—and the more people become weary of Francis the more they're actually becoming weary of it.
Singlehandedly, this ambitious and arrogant man is waking the Church to the real fruits of the Second Vatican Council which, essentially, are what Msgr. Pope is talking about here. He's not saying it in so many words, of course, but what Msgr. Pope is anathematizing is essentially the great big demonic spirit of Vatican II, which happens to animate just about every waking thought and action of the current pontiff.
Francis has jumped the shark. He's said too much, moved too fast and lacks the personality and imagination to keep the DCV2 airborne. He certainly doesn't have the charisma of Pope John Paul and, let’s face it, he was not blessed with the intellect of Benedict XVI. He can’t even count on the cover of novelty that was afforded to Paul VI, poor guy. He’s alone in his corner, in other words, having alienated most Catholics who still bother with it all.
There's nothing new and fresh about Pope Francis; so naturally, the Revolution he represents is growing old, moldy and stale. Even the neo-Catholics realize that Francis's toupee is slipping, along with the Council's fig leaf of orthodoxy.
Where does it go from here? God only knows. The Council and its legion will surely not go gently into the night.
But at the very least we can thank God for Francis, the main impetus for Neo-Catholics everywhere becoming what Traditional Catholics have always been: folks who want their Church back, their Mass back and their identity back. Catholics, in other words, who want to be Catholic again.
God bless Msgr. Pope. I hope he is pope someday.
Among the many highlights of this new Print/E-edition of The Remnant--including Chorbishop Anthony Spinosa's blockbuster CIC2019 address, "Putting On The Armor of God"--we're pleased to present Theresa Moreau's "They Kept the Faith: The Yann Billot Story."
When Pope Francis’s Vatican “regularized” the schismatic ‘Catholic’ Church in China last month, Cardinal Joseph Zen—bishop emeritus of Hong Kong who spent his life resisting the totalitarian Communist regime in China—called the deal a “surrender” and “an incredible betrayal.” Cardinal Zen said of the Vatican’s Chinese initiative: “They’re giving the flock to the wolves.”
As part of The Remnant’s decades-long attempt to stand in solidarity with our persecuted brothers and sisters in the Catholic underground Church in China, we’re pleased to present yet another look back at the heroes who kept the Faith in China—and whose heroic stand Pope Francis has now betrayed.
Here's what some of them looked like:
I hope you'll take a look at the rest of our new preview HERE.
Vincent Chiarello's review of Father John O'Malley's book, by the way, "Trent: What Went on at the Council" is itself worth the price of admission. It's one of the most intriguing behind-the-scenes snapshots, if you will, of the great Council of Trent I've ever read.
Lots of good stuff, rounded out by a most amusing The Last Word, wherein Father Celatus fantasizes about what he'd do if he were pope for a day. Here's a pictorial hint:
God bless, and thanks for your continued support of The Remnant.
In Christo Rege,
Michael J. Matt
Editor, The Remnant
Even before the close of the Synod on Young Interpretive Dancers and the utterly inexplicable Vatican co-opting of the USCCB meeting, Monsignor Bux, a Vatican theologian and a former consultor to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was already calling foul. Ed Pentin, on his own website, highlights a recent interview:
In a forceful interview with Italian Vaticanist Aldo Maria Valli, Msgr. Nicola Bux has warned that the current pontificate is issuing statements that are generating “heresies, schisms, and controversies of various kinds” and that the Holy Father should issue a profession of faith to restore unity in the Church.
In the interview, published Oct. 13 but overlooked due to the Youth Synod taking place in Rome last month, the theologian consultor to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints said “heretical statements” on marriage, the moral life and reception of the sacraments are now “at the center of a vast debate which is becoming more and more passionate by the day.”
“If this [Papal profession of Faith] doesn’t happen,” he warned, “the apostasy will deepen and the de facto schism will widen.”
Msgr. Bux feels the situation has become especially urgent after the Pope changed the Catechism in August to declare the death penalty “inadmissible.” The change contradicts the Tridentine and St. Pius X Catechisms, the theologian asserted, the latter of which taught that the legitimacy of capital punishment was in “full conformity with Divine Revelation.”
He also pointed out that the tendency of this pontificate to be silent in the face of criticism, or refuse to engage the charges of heresy or apostasy, bring to mind St. Pius X’s warning in his 1907 encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis: That never “clearly confessing one’s own heresy” is “typical behaviour of the modernists, because in this way they can hide themselves within the Church.”
REMNANT COMMENT: Gee, I wonder why this man seems to have such a keen and priestly sensus catholicus. . . . Maybe this has something to do with it...