Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 01

From the Editor’s Desk…

By Michael J. Matt

Catholic Identity Conference 2017: A Major Victory for Tradition

The 2017 Catholic Identity Conference (CIC) concluded on the Feast of Christ the King. This was not intentional.

The dates were selected by my friend and CIC organizer, Eric Frankovitch, last year and in accordance with hotel availability. It was, in other words, a "coincidence." But there’s no such thing as coincidence and, given the CIC’s strong emphasis on the Kingship of Christ, I’m disposed to conclude that this most fortuitous closing feast day was absolutely providential.

Good things happened at this year’s CIC—many good things!

The Conference was not only a huge success numerically speaking—with standing room only and nearly triple the attendance of last year—but it was, by all accounts, a source of hope and inspiration for all in attendance, including all of us here at The Remnant.

Indeed, the positive side of the so-called ‘Francis Effect’ was made evident immediately, as traditional Catholics from many different camps came together for a 3-day event in order to see if a more unified front against the enemies of holy Tradition could be established.

To that end, the CIC was blessed with the presence of two bishops and over 30 priests from the Society of St. Pius X, the Fraternity of St. Peter, the Institute of Christ the King and many dioceses all over the country, with well over 300 plus participants traveling from as far as Guam, Vietnam, Australia and Argentina.

~ See Editor's Desk/ Page 2

Continued...

Speakers included most of The Remnant stable, strong allies in the holy priesthood (such as our old friend and Remnant Tours chaplain, Father Gregory Pendergraft, FSSP), Father Jonathan Loop (SSPX), Canon Aaron Huberfeld and Father Celatus (via video sermon). Vatican journalist, Edward Pentin’s sobering expose of life in Rome under Pope Francis gave way to a minute-long standing ovation, while Bishops Athanasius Schneider and Anthony Spinosa rounded out the roster with spectacular words from shepherds encouraging sheep to keep the faith even during the worst crisis in history.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s opening address Friday night beautifully confirmed why so many of us believe this holy bishop—a survivor of the Soviet gulag and an outspoken defender of the Traditional Latin Mass and the Kingship of Christ—is in many ways this generation’s Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. His Excellency’s words brought tears to the eyes of not a few in attendance (including this writer) as he set the tone for one of the most hopeful and yet militantly Catholic conferences I’ve ever attended. So many friends, so many allies, so many brothers in arms— coming together for one reason: to promise to keep the old Faith regardless of the most destructive pontificate in the history of the Church.

A few moments were also set aside to remember our fallen friend and ally, the incomparable John Vennari. I think he appreciated when the entire gathering took to their feet to pray a Hail Mary for the repose of his soul.

A highpoint of the conference certainly had to be when all the priests, bishops and sisters agreed to stand together for a photograph that now speaks to the spirit of this extraordinary event. Thirty priests, two bishops and a handful of sisters sent the message to the little remnant all around the world: God has not left us orphans, the old Faith will survive:

Next Year

We’ve begun making plans for next year’s CIC and, to that end, we’re asking for feedback from those who attended— feedback that we hope will help us make the CIC 2018 bigger and better than ever. Some of that feedback appears on Page 4 of this edition of The Remnant.

The Remnant's 50th Anniversary

This year’s CIC also set aside some time to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of The Remnant. We managed to locate some 40-year-old video footage of the early days of The Remnant, showing plenty of the pioneers of the movement in action. Walter Matt, Michael Davies, Hamish Fraser, Father Marchosky and many others, including priests offering the TLM in the basement (catacomb) chapel of my childhood home. The video brought back sobering memories, as it sparked lively conversation about who we are, where we came from and where we need to go. That fading and flickering video, as well as other moments from the CIC’s celebration of The Remnant’s 50th, are now available as part of the CIC On-Demand Video subscription.

CIC Video Available NOW

Speaking of the On-Demand CIC, I’m happy to announce that the CIC was served by a staff of young traditional Catholics this year, who offered so much hope for the future of this growing Catholic counterrevolution. Eric Frankovitch and I are not getting any younger, and it was encouraging for us to see the next generation step up to the plate in such an enthusiastic way at this conference.

With the assistance of my son, Walter, for example, the entire CIC was video recorded and set up as a Video Conference on the Internet. Within about one hour of the conclusion of each speaker’s talk, the Remnant TV team was able to edit it and make it available to subscribers all over the world.

In addition, my eldest daughter Cecelia, John Rao’s daughter, Olivia, Sophia Stuckey and our right-hand "man", Miss Tess Mullins, expertly ran the CIC registration and customer service throughout the weekend, leaving Eric Frankovitch, Todd Wilson and myself with no excuse not to announce that, God willing, the CIC will take place again next year.

How to Order Your CIC Video Subscription The entire CIC 2017 is available from The Remnant website. Printedition subscribers can go directly to RemnantNewspaper.com and sign up for the Catholic Identity Conference On-Demand in the upper left-hand corner of the homepage.

E-Edition subscribers can click the following link to subscribe: https:// remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/ membership/view-membership-details/1video-on-demand-catholic-identityconference- 2017 Any technical questions or problems can be directed to our team at: Support@RemnantNewspaper.com

On-Demand Proceeds to Support The Remnant All proceeds from the CIC On-Demand go directly to support The Remnant newspaper. So for a onetime fee of just $25, readers will have access to all of the CIC talks and at the same time, support The Remnant at a pivotal moment in the history of this apostolate.

Pope Francis has inadvertently ripped the mask off of the Revolution of Vatican II. The war for the soul of the old Faith, in other words, is out in the open now.

I hope you’ll sign up for the CIC On-Demand right away, and help The Remnant prepare for the next offensive, which is going to be big, God help us all.

Long Live Christ the King!

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Benighted New Knights

(For a benighted New Church)

By Susan Claire Potts, Ph.D.

It’s not always the big things—fires, tornadoes, floods—that destroy a house. Sometimes it’s something really small, like termites. It might take longer, but there’s something even worse about it.

The destruction, the eating away of the structure goes unnoticed until it’s too late. For fifty years, those of us who love our traditions, cherish our rituals, revel in our heritage, have been reeling from one ecclesiastical disaster after another. It’s a mercy anything is left.

But the termites are going to finish the job if we don’t smoke them out.

They’re everywhere, boring into the wood, weakening the rafters, turning the walls to mush. They’re at work now in the Knights of Columbus. They’ve chosen the Color Corps of the Fourth Degree as a most delectable meal.

Soon the Color Corps will be finished, ravaged from within by the Supreme Council.

All they had to do was change the "uniform." Have you heard about it?

Without notifying the membership, without a vote or a consensus, without warning, they eliminated the Corps’ splendid regalia. It was an insidious move, the kind that throws people off guard, makes them question their own common sense. The Supreme Knight said that, for the good of the Order, they had to make the change, modernize the "uniform," update the look.

So why bother to call them Knights anymore? Maybe they’ll need to change the name to Troops of Columbus—if they’re still allowed to keep the name Columbus, in view of our ridiculous ever-expanding "cultural awareness."

Subtle Change of Language

It was a disingenuous sleight of hand that masked a malicious deceit, a deceit of language and purpose, a binding

- See Knights/ Page 5

New Mass, New Catechism, New Evangelization...and now New Knights

Benighted New Knights

S. Potts/ Continued from Page 1 command hidden beneath a plastic veneer of concern and stewardship.

The news reports called the elimination of the regalia a "change of uniform."

Should anyone object, people say, Don’t get all uptight about it. It’s just a minor change, they soothe, an updating. Styles change; uniforms evolve. After all, we have to get with the times. The young people aren’t joining. We have to appeal to them. Sound familiar?

Revolutionaries never change their tactics. It’s the same vapid explanation, the same words even, that were used to justify the horrendous changes in our liturgy and, ultimately, in our faith.

Those in authority have the right to do it, the members are told. The Knights of Columbus is not a democracy, and, finally, there is the mandate, confirmed by oath and promise: We must obey.

So get in lockstep, Sir Knights, and don your new duds.

Pack your plumed chapeau and flowing cape in a trunk in the attic and wear the silly black beret. You can show your solidarity now with a band of brigands—Che Guevara, the IRA, the ETA guerrillas, or the Black Panthers.

If you never served in the military, you can pretend to be a warrior like the Army Rangers or the Green Berets.

Perhaps you have a more artistic bent— you could dress up like bohemian poet.

The good thing for the revisionists is, it’s not gender-specific. Although there are no women knights (yet), it’s something they could wear. There’s no sartorial exclusiveness, so it’s a correct, and very au courant, repudiation of sexism and discrimination. After all, no woman in her right mind would wear a nautical chapeau. That’s for men, everybody knows that. It’s all about being inclusive.

Ah, the glory of unity in diversity.

It was a necessary updating of the uniform, they say. The faithful Knights nod; they have no choice. After all, the order came from above. Who can resist? But, men, look! You’ve been deceived. There’s something behind this, there has to be, but no one knows what it is. Yet one thing is clear: They’ve twisted the language to force their agenda. And that is the perennial modus operandi of change agents. It bears the mark of dishonesty and subterfuge. Oh, it was sly—the duplicity, the calculated misuse of words!

Background and Analysis

In early August, the Knights of Columbus Board of Directors voted to "adopt a new uniform for the Fourth Degree. Neither the general membership nor the Knights of the Fourth Degree were surveyed, consulted, canvassed, or allowed a voice, much less a vote. Consequently, and not surprisingly, the vote was unanimous. The will of the Board prevailed—ignoring almost two million voiceless, voteless members. The change was explained on the website of the Knights of Columbus, August 14, 2017, in a lengthy article entitled: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions About the New Fourth Degree Uniform.

Let’s look at their own words and analyze the rationale:

Earlier this month, the Knights of Columbus Board of Directors unanimously voted to adopt a new uniform for the Fourth Degree.

There’s a twist here, a falsification, and all other erroneous explanations follow. First of all, there are two divisions of the Fourth Degree: the regular Fourth Degree and the Color Corps. This is very important because the dress codes differ.

- The official dress of the Fourth Degree (now called the "uniform") is a black tuxedo, plain white tuxedo shirt, black cummerbund, black shoes, and a social baldric worn under the coat from the right should to the left hip. There was no headwear. - The cape, chapeau, gloves, service baldric, and sword are only required of the Color Corps. Other Fourth Degree knights do not wear them So, can you see? They didn’t "adopt a new uniform." They eliminated the Color Corps. Was that the intention all along? Had they only wished to change the general Fourth Degree dress, they could have substituted a blazer, baldric, and patch (but, please, not a beret!) and left the regalia alone.

The next point is that "uniform" and "regalia" are not synonymous— no matter what some new online Thesaurus says. The beautiful, colorful dress of the Color Corps was a link to a Catholic past—capes and swords and chapeaux that were not worn like feathers of a peacock. They were worn as vestments of honor—honor of someone or something else. They were worn at funerals, processions, and, most laudable of all, before the Blessed Sacrament, giving due honor, respect, and allegiance.

The important distinction is, as my husband has pointed out to his brother knights: Regalia is ceremonial; a uniform is not. A uniform is adopted to make someone look just like everyone else. That’s why members of the military and the police force, waitresses and fast food clerks, airline pilots and Catholic school children wear uniforms. A uniform is a badge of belonging. It may have its own honor, but it is not ceremonial.

- Secondly,

the decision was made with the good of the entire Order in mind. While we understand that some members may prefer the old regalia, the supreme master and vice supreme masters urge all Fourth Degree members to put the good of the Order before any personal preference.

And just what is the "good of the order?" They want to attract new members. Do they really think this androgynous new uniform—probably polyester—is going to appeal to anyone? This outfit is rooted in a particular time and place; it will be dated in six months. The Regalia transcends time. It hearkens back to the Age of Chivalry, of distinction, of honor.

Personal preference! What a crock!

It’s like those who say our attachment to the Mass of All Ages is a "personal preference', a matter of style. It follows, doesn’t it? Change the majesty and dignity of the Most Important Things and all the little lesser things fall in place.

Make it pedestrian, make it ordinary, make in inconsequential. Make it so it doesn’t matter, so that nothing really matters in the end.

The Board decided to make this move based on the following factors: - The aging of our Fourth Degree membership.

Comment: Come on! This excuse is ridiculous. Of course, the Fourth Degree membership is aging. It always is. It is the natural order of things. It takes time, commitment, and fidelity to achieve the Fourth Degree. The younger members will get older—they always do. And with age perhaps will come wisdom and an appreciation for what has been handed down by their elders—with the expectation that they’ll keep what they’ve been given.

- The slow growth of the Fourth Degree (fewer than 20% of Knights are fourth Degree members, and only a fraction of that number even serves as honor guards.)

Comment: So shall we not just get rid of then? No one will notice. Also, did the Fourth Degree grow faster in the past? I doubt it. If a membership has four categories, doesn’t it make sense that the lower levels have a greater percentage? All hierarchical structures have fewer at the top and a wide base at the bottom. Otherwise, you’ve bunched everybody together in an egalitarianism reminiscent of the French Revolution or, worse, the Bolsheviks.

- Consistent reports that the old regalia presented a barrier to Fourth Degree membership, especially among younger men.

Comment: And they’d rather wear a sport coat and beret? And look like someone who just left the VFW Hall?

If you think a younger mode of dress is necessary to attract younger men, maybe you should consider shorts and flipflops.

And Now?

I said earlier that there is something behind this. I think it is this: The regalia evokes the past, the Time Before the Changes. It must be eradicated.

I understand some priests don’t like it, won’t allow it at their Masses. Is that the problem? Was there pressure from above? From the clergy? Or the bishops? What do the Knights of Columbus chaplains say? Surely, they, of all people, should understand the meaning of the regalia. Did they have any input? What was it? The new uniform is a betrayal; acquiescence to it is cowardly. Stand up, Sir Knights!

Fight for the Honor of the Order!

Refuse the latitudinarianism of an apostate age. Remind the world of dignity, of respect, and the wear noble sign of masculine strength.

I’m remembering now the day this summer when the statue of Our Lady of Fatima was brought to Detroit. After Mass at Old St. Mary’s, there was a procession of the faithful through the downtown streets. All sorts of the faithful were there—a motley group, I admit, but all children of Mary. Behind the pilgrim statue—reminding us of Our Lady’s love—was the Archbishop himself. And then the Knights of the Color Corps in full regalia, swords at the ready, capes flowing, processing in honor of their Queen. So beautiful!

But will that beauty, too, soon fade into the past?

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Vatican Theologian Sacked for Questioning 'Merciful' Pope's Pontificate

By Christopher A. Ferrara

By now the whole Catholic world has heard of the publication of a devastating letter to Pope Francis from Father Thomas G. Weinandy. The former head of the theological secretariat of the U.S. Bishop’s conference, Fr. Weinandy has taught at both Oxford and the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. None other than Francis appointed Fr. Weinandy to the International Theological Commission and awarded him the Pro Pontifice et Ecclesiae medal, the ecclesial equivalent of the Congressional Medal of Honor, for his work on behalf of the Pope and the Church. One of the world’s most renowned theologians, Fr. Weinandy is a "man of the Council" and a prominent figure of the post-conciliar mainstream.

Yet Fr. Weinandy’s letter, sent to Francis privately last summer but predictably ignored by him—along with every other private entreaty concerning his destructive activity—is a withering indictment of a papacy that constitutes nothing less than a menace to the

~ See Theologian Sacked/ Page 6

Father Thomas G. Weinandy

Vatican Theologian Sacked for Questioning 'Merciful' Pope's Pontificate

C. Ferrara/ Continued from Page 1

Church. The key passages (paragraph breaks added) rebuke Francis for his recklessness, his deliberate ambiguity, his fomenting of error, his sowing of disunity, his unheard-of calumnies of the faithful, and even his reduction of the faith to an ideology—precisely the wrong of which he accuses orthodox Catholics:

• Your Holiness, a chronic confusion seems to mark your pontificate…. This fosters within the faithful a growing unease ….

• In "Amoris Laetitia," your guidance at times seems intentionally ambiguous, thus inviting both a traditional interpretation of Catholic teaching on marriage and divorce as well as one that might imply a change in that teaching….

• To teach with such a seemingly intentional lack of clarity inevitably risks sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth. The Holy Spirit is given to the Church, and particularly to yourself, to dispel error, not to foster it.

• [Y]ou seem to censor and even mock those who interpret Chapter 8 of "Amoris Laetitia" in accord with Church tradition as Pharisaic stone-throwers who embody a merciless rigorism. This kind of calumny is alien to the nature of the Petrine ministry….

• Such behavior gives the impression that your views cannot survive theological scrutiny, and so must be sustained by "ad hominem" arguments.

• [T]oo often your manner seems to demean the importance of Church doctrine. Again and again you portray doctrine as dead and bookish, and far from the pastoral concerns of everyday life.

• Your critics have been accused, in your own words, of making doctrine an ideology. But it is precisely Christian doctrine… that frees people from worldly ideologies and assures that they are actually preaching and teaching the authentic, life-giving Gospel.

• Those who devalue the doctrines of the Church [i.e., Francis!] separate themselves from Jesus, the author of truth… What they [i.e., Francis] then possess, and can only possess, is an ideology – one that conforms to the world of sin and death.

• [F]aithful Catholics can only be disconcerted by your choice of some bishops, men who seem not merely open to those who hold views counter to Christian belief but who support and even defend them.

• What scandalizes believers, and even some fellow bishops, is not only your having appointed such men to be shepherds of the Church, but that you also seem silent in the face of their teaching and pastoral practice….

• As a result, many of the faithful, who embody the "sensus fidelium," are losing confidence in their supreme shepherd.

• [T]he Church is one body, the Mystical Body of Christ, and you are commissioned by the Lord himself to promote and strengthen her unity. But your actions and words too often seem intent on doing the opposite….

• You have often spoken about the need for transparency within the Church. You have frequently encouraged… all persons, especially bishops, to speak their mind and not be fearful of what the pope may think. But… what many [bishops] have learned from your pontificate is not that you are open to criticism, but that you resent it… Many fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worse.

• I have often asked myself: "Why has Jesus let all of this happen?" The only answer that comes to mind is that Jesus wants to manifest just how weak is the faith of many within the Church, even among too many of her bishops.

Ironically, your pontificate has given those who hold harmful theological and pastoral views the license and confidence to come into the light and expose their previously hidden darkness….

Father Weinandy reveals that he decided to publicize this historic missive only after receiving an unmistakable sign from heaven. As he recounts

here, after repeatedly "beseeching Jesus and Mary, St. Peter and all of the saintly popes who are buried there to do something to rectify the confusion and turmoil within the Church today, a chaos and an uncertainty that I felt Pope Francis had himself caused," he asked for a minutely specific sign from heaven on whether he should write the letter: that the next day he would meet someone he had not seen in a very long time, would never expect to see in Rome, and was not from the United States, Canada or Great Britain, which person would utter the particular phrase: "Keep up the good writing."

At lunch the next day, the sign was given. An old friend he had not seen in more than twenty years and would never have expected to meet in Rome, who is now an archbishop, appeared suddenly from between two parked cars, renewed acquaintances and, referring to one of Father Weinandy’s books, said: "Keep up the good writing."

Writes Fr. Weinandy: "I could hardly believe that this just happened in a matter of a few minutes. But there was no longer any doubt in my mind that Jesus wanted me to write something. I also think it significant that it was an Archbishop that Jesus used. I considered it an apostolic mandate." Can we doubt that it was indeed an apostolic mandate? Can we not see in Fr. Weinandy a voice raised up by heaven itself to say, from deep within the postconciliar ecclesial establishment, things that exceed in their candor what even certain traditionalist commentators have ventured to state?

As if to confirm the validity of his own indictment of this pontificate, only a day after this letter was published, the USCCB demanded that Fr. Weinandy resign his current position as a consultant to the U.S. bishops. He has done so. Fr. Fessio’s Catholic World Report, another voice of the rising mainstream opposition to Francis, notes that "In making such a request, the USCCB, it would appear, reinforces Fr.

Weinandy’s very point about fearfulness and lack of transparency."

Fr. Weinandy’s intervention gives us hope that the plan to remake the Church according to the mind of Bergoglio will ultimately encounter a resistance that will bring an end to the Latin Americanstyle dictatorship Francis has imposed upon the Church, even as he speaks of dialogue, collegiality, decentralization and parreshia (but only for those who agree with him). The plan that ultimately must fail may well fail even while Francis is attempting to carry it out.

May Our Lady of Fatima intercede soon to thwart the designs of Francis and to rectify the grave harm he has already caused.

Me and my Lutheran friends don't like you rigid Catholics!

Pope Francis meets with Lutheran leader Bishop Munib Younan in Sweden

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 04

The Remnant Speaks

Letters to the Editor: The Remnant Speaks P.O. Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025 ~

Editor@RemnantNewspaper.com

Reactions to Catholic Identity Conference 2017

Editor, The Remnant: For 15 years I have been learning the traditional Catholic Faith from FSSP priests and from the excellent writers at The Remnant. This conference was the high point of my maturation as a traditional Catholic. I have never felt so connected to a movement as I now feel after the conclusion of the 2017 CIC. I am looking forward to attending in 2018 and every year thereafter.

Jeffrey Smith Tulsa, OK Editor, The Remnant: I was one of the attendees at the conference—actually, I was the person from Argentina and I want to say that I really loved it. It gave me so much hope to hear the speakers, so many priests, and to see so many other lay persons and religious at the conference was really uplifting. I was so down before getting there that I see how necessary these events are, they are not only a good thing to do but necessary for our spiritual and moral wellbeing. Just want you to know that not all Argentina is or thinks like Pope Francis. There are so many good souls and traditional Catholics but they are the unknown, just like the young men that formed a barrier around a cathedral in Argentina to defend it from the vicious feminist attack, and they kept praying and resisting. That video made me cry because I could see how many good soldiers of Christ still are in my country.

God bless!

Sandra Dettori Argentina Editor, The Remnant: It was wonderful and exceeded all expectations! Thank you for such a quality program and God bless you.

Debbie Victory Editor, The Remnant: Viva Cristo Rey!

It was great. My favorite speakers were Michael Matt, Edward Pentin and Chris Ferrara. The hotel was great. I loved the standing room only aspect of the conference, as I think crowded venues are better from a social perspective helps everyone connect better.

Roseanne Rodriguez Editor, The Remnant: The best thing you did was reach out to other groups.

That is the way to go. And it gives you a lot more "street cred". Have you ever noticed (I have) how lots of people don’t want to address Michael Matt’s (and others) arguments head-on? They deflect and curse and generally intellectually vanish. And they call you names (ad hominem, anyone?) and call you divisive. Well the alliances sure as h...

help defeat that baloney. Excuse me for this rant...where did I hear that before?

Good luck, gentleman. I’ll be back.

Richard J Zablocki Editor, The Remnant: Thank you too, for the tremendous job you did in organizing this so necessary event! It could not have been any better. The good will of participants and attendees reflected the serious concerns Catholics have about the direction of Holy Mother Church.

God bless your plans for next year.

Christus regnat!

Audrey Amberg Editor, The Remnant: The conference was VERY helpful. My husband ran across the conference on your site, probably while pursuing some footnote.

We attended primarily because we had been reading The Great Façade, Noble Beauty, and The Political Pope. And we really wanted to attend a Traditional Latin Mass, which is not available anywhere in our area. We are converts since 2011. When our local church had a discussion class a few years ago on the 50th anniversary of Vatican II, we really had no idea what had been changed, what was lost, and what is at stake. We are catching up. We enjoyed each and every speaker. The people you chose, and even the order in which they presented (including the last-minute switch of speakers), was just inspired.

It was a great encouragement to hear the young priests and the bishops. And the more seasoned activist speakers were a complete treat. Edward Pentin made me cry, but that’s not his fault; he just had very bad news to share.

The overcrowding, which you already acknowledged, was a bit of a problem the first night. We were in the back section in a very cramped table. People were eating and squishing themselves into chairs. Other than that, the food was delicious, we made friends at our table, and we had a very fine stay.

Joy E. Daniels Editor, The Remnant: I was most struck by the strength of intellect and depth of conviction of the lay speakers. They are our hope.

Elizabeth Cummins Dean Flint, MI Editor, The Remnant: CIC was so inspirational! The speakers were exceptional. It was glorious to see so many good priests and to hear their interesting presentations. I definitely left with hope and plans to assist in the spreading and support of our Catholic Identity. It saddened me to meet 2 priests who are suffering for their conservative beliefs right now. They are struggling and they remain faithful. We need to pray for them and others who will be subjected to the same sufferings.

Thank you for what you are doing!

Peggy Connelly

A Letter from Father Harrison

Editor, The Remnant: I read with interest in The Remnant’s online version Chris Ferrara’s rebuttal of a certain Emmet O’Regan, who in an article posted on the Vatican Insider website raised horrified hands at the recent Correctio Filialis in which over 60 Catholic scholars courteously but firmly rebuked Pope Francis for various heresies being spread abroad as a result of his exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

O’Regan’s piece was a classic instance of Neo-Catholic papal positivism the view that faithful Catholics may never (at least in public) criticize a currently reigning pontiff’s words or actions, regardless of their harmony or otherwise with his predecessors’ teachings, simply because He’s The Pope. Mr. Ferrara rightly rebukes the absurdity of O’Regan’s claim that the Roman Pontiff "is granted Divine assistance which prevents him from erring in matters of faith and morals, even when teaching non-infallibly" (emphasis added). For this claim never made by the Magisterium itself!

- amounts to the self-contradictory claim that even non-infallible teaching is infallible.

However, Mr. Ferrara himself hasn’t got it quite right. He concedes too much to his opponent when he says, "O’Regan has it half right: The Magisterium is infallible." Mr. Ferrara is claiming that when popes sometimes err in their non-infallible pronouncements on faith and morals (something O’Regan absurdly says can never happen), such errors are simply not magisterial in character, because the Magisterium, as such, is infallible. I’m sorry, but that’s not what the Church teaches. Can Mr. Ferrara cite even one theologian, ancient or modern, who agrees with him on this point? The church’s authentic position is that some magisterial teachings are infallible while other magisterial teachings are noninfallible.

That is certainly what then-Cardinal Ratzinger and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith teach in the Church’s current (1989) official Profession of Faith and the CDF’s explanatory Doctrinal Note of 1998. In the Profession of Faith (which all those who teach the sacred sciences in pontifical universities are required to profess), three categories of magisterial teaching are set forth, only the first two of which are infallible. Teachings in the third category require only a "religious assent of mind and will", which means we’re to regard them as almost certainly true, so that they can be safely taught and preached to the faithful. But that stands in contrast to the absolute, irrevocable assent due to infallible teachings, which include both revealed truths, i.e., de fide dogmas (first category), and truths "to be held definitively" because they’re inseparably linked to revelation (second category).

And these third-category teachings are explicitly called " Magisterium authenticum" in the profession itself (cf. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1998, top of p. 543, and #8, p. 547) Their non-infallible, but nonetheless magisterial, character is confirmed in the 1990 CDF document Donum Veritatis, as it was on the floor of Vatican II, where the Church, in her ‘fine print’, as it were, has conceded that if a qualified theologian has serious difficulties in accepting a magisterial teaching in the third category, he actually doesn’t have to force his mind into an assent to it, but can respectfully explain his objections in the appropriate forum. (In normal times that would be just a discreet submission to the CDF, but we now live in very abnormal times.) Chris Ferrara justifies his own view as follows: "There is no ‘fallible Ordinary Magisterium,’ for if there were, then everything the Church has taught for centuries, short of few formal dogmatic definitions, would be open to question."

But that drastic conclusion doesn’t follow at all. The ordinary magisterium can be either fallible or infallible depending on the strength, consistency and frequency with which a particular doctrinal thesis is taught by the popes and/or bishops in the exercise of his/ their ordinary magisterium. Figuring out whether such a thesis has been proposed fallibly or infallibly is a task for theologians to undertake, with popes or ecumenical councils having the right to pronounce the final word by exercising their extraordinary, infallible magisterium.

Fr. Brian W. Harrison, O.S. St. Louis, Missouri

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 07

Heroic Catholic Women...

Margaret More Roper:

St. Thomas More’s "Dearest Meg"

There are not many father/daughter bonds as powerful as that between Thomas and Margaret More. They were a pair of brilliant minds who understood and appreciated one another profoundly.

As one of the most learned women of the sixteenth century (by age eighteen her work earned praise from Erasmus), Margaret became her father’s favorite confidante. She remained devoted to him after her marriage, even went to great lengths to be near him during his imprisonment in the Tower of London.

Margaret collaborated with him on his most famous letters from prison, smuggled them out at great personal risk, even rescued his head after his execution. She also played a critical role in safeguarding the great saint’s legacy. Sir Thomas More’s life is well known: his opposition to Henry VIII’s marriage to Anne Boleyn, his arrest for treason, his execution and martyrdom.

Yet Margaret has been largely airbrushed out of the story in which she played an important role.

Margaret, or Meg, as her father affectionately called her, was born between August and October of 1505, the eldest child of Thomas and his first wife, Joanna Colt. Margaret was only six when her mother died and her father married a widow so that his children would still have a maternal influence in their lives and a woman to run the household. The widow was a loyal and true woman, and the grieving family grew to love her deeply.

In the early days before he went to work for King Henry VIII, More homeschooled his own children. He believed strongly in education for everyone, including women, and Margaret excelled. Her education consisted of languages, history, philosophy and rhetoric. She was fascinated by geography and astronomy and was a genius in Latin. More relied on her to keep him updated about family news when he was abroad on business for the King.

Eventually he became too busy in the King’s service to continue his children’s education himself, and hired William Gonnell as full-time tutor. Gonnell was a skilled teacher from Landbeach, near Cambridge, and a close friend of Erasmus of Rotterdam (a famous Dutch humanist and great friend of her father’s), who himself considered More’s daughters to have "outstanding talents". Gonnell arrived in the More household when Margaret was twelve years old.

A year after Gonnell became the family’s tutor, he wrote a letter to More which suggested that Margaret had progressed so rapidly that she might eventually publish a book. Although her father advocated education for his daughters, certain boundaries had to be maintained.

More replied sternly that Margaret’s "lofty and exalted character of mind [should not be] debased [by pandering to] what is vain and low." He prized moral virtue above literary fame, even though he had absolute admiration for his daughter’s devastating intelligence: "Since erudition in women is [viewed as] a reproach to the sloth of men," he continued, "Women should maintain appropriate modesty." If a woman strove to become a published author in her lifetime, it was subjected to the harshest scrutiny and could adversely affect the general advancement of women’s education. Because this was the prevailing attitude at the time, More was required to take care in highlighting his daughter’s achievements. When a friend expressed disbelief in her authorship after reading an example of Margaret’s work, More explained to his daughter the constant difficulty she would encounter:

Something I once said to you in a joke came back to my mind, and I realized how true it was. It was to the effect that you were to be pitied, because the incredulity of men would rob you of the praise you so richly deserved for your laborious vigils, as they would never believe, when they read what you had written, that you had not often availed yourself of another’s help: whereas of all the writers you least deserved to be thus suspected.

Despite his reluctance to make a spectacle of her achievements, Margaret had no greater champion of her education than her father, and by her twenties her mind had grown so self-sufficient and preoccupied with scholarly pursuits that she had little interest in marriage. However, by 1521, the senior members of the More and Roper families had decided that Margaret should wed the eldest Roper son.

Margaret was twenty-four when she married William Roper, more to please her father than herself. But the marriage was a happy one, fortified by love and respect, for Will was a good husband, studied hard, and helped Thomas More in much of his work. Their first child was born in 1523, and they went on to have four more children. In 1524, Thomas More moved his family from Bucklersbury to a new manor house in Chelsea. Margaret and Will moved with him. Margaret always lived in her father’s home or very nearby until his martyrdom in 1535.

Also in 1524, Margaret finished one of her greatest projects as a scholar and an intellectual. She translated the soliloquy on the Lord’s Prayer called Precatio dominica, by Erasmus. Her aim was to write vivid and readable English prose. The work isn’t a word-for-word translation, but an attempt to represent Erasmus’s "sense and meaning". Her book was published, despite earlier hesitations, in October 1524. Margaret became the first woman (not counting those of royal blood) to publish a work of translation in the English language.

In 1529, Henry VIII asked Thomas More to take the place of the disgraced Cardinal Wolsey as Lord Chancellor of England.

He reluctantly accepted and Margaret supported her father in his decision. More was subsequently drawn into "The King’s Great Matter" of divorcing Katharine of Aragon in order to marry Anne Boleyn.

Thomas More knew that regarding this matter he had to be extremely careful.

In 1531, after attempting to use the influence of their mutual friendship to persuade Henry not divorce Katharine or break with the Catholic Church, More decided he needed to resign. Henry was demanding that everyone swear an oath to give succession to his children by Anne Boleyn and acknowledge him as Supreme Head of the Church in England. Thomas More relented on the decree of succession, but simply could not accept the heretical ridiculousness of lecherous Henry VIII as Head of the Catholic Church.

In 1534, after years of cleverly evading the oath, Thomas More had tried the King’s patience for too long, and was arrested and imprisoned in the Tower of London. It was a huge blow to the More family, but Margaret rose to the occasion, becoming his main channel of communication with the outside world. Her scholarship had always been extraordinary, but here she demonstrated remarkable street-smarts as well. She tricked Thomas Cromwell, the King’s new secretary, into thinking she would persuade her father to swear the oath and to this purpose was given unrestricted access to him. His cell door was unlocked except at night, Margaret could come and go as she pleased and More was allowed to walk in the precincts of the Tower and have books, paper and pens. This way Margaret was able to smuggle her father’s letters out of the Tower unmolested.

In November of 1534, Parliament was convened to pass a final break with the Catholic Church. Now More was put in solitary confinement and Margaret’s privilege of visiting her father was lost.

Though More and Margaret could no longer meet easily, she found a way to resume a clandestine correspondence. As death loomed for More, Margaret could sense his anxiety. She did her best to lift his spirits and reassure him. She wrote her father a prayer, which comforted him greatly, and was granted one last visit with him on May 4.

On July 1, 1535, Thomas More was tried for his refusal to take the oath. He argued valiantly and brilliantly, but to no avail.

He was sentenced to death for treason and escorted back to the Tower. As the somber procession reached Tower Wharf and turned right towards a small drawbridge, Thomas spotted Margaret. She slammed through the soldiers and threw herself into his arms, kissing him frantically.

Heartbreak silenced her voice, but her father held her for that brief moment and told her to have courage and patience, it was God’s will. The soldiers shoved her aside and More took a step toward the drawbridge, but Margaret lunged back through the guards and kissed him one last time. He released her and walked on, not looking back. Margaret, utterly broken, never saw him again.

More was executed on Tower Hill by decapitation on July 6, 1535. His head, by order of the king, was hoisted on a pike and displayed on Tower Bridge for a month, until it had to be taken down to make room for other heads. Thomas More’s head would have been thrown into the Thames had not Margaret Roper, who had been watching carefully and waiting for the opportunity, bribed the executioner and obtained possession of the sacred relic. After Margaret retrieved her father’s head, she was summoned before the King’s Council and charged with crimes against the state for keeping her father’s head as a relic, as well as retaining possession of his books and writings. Margaret was detained by Thomas Cromwell overnight, but released the next day, since no one could summon up sufficient corruption to punish a daughter for loving her father.

Margaret’s hope was to publish all her father’s works, but she ran into many obstacles. She died of unknown causes unexpectedly in 1544, at age thirty-nine, and left the task unfinished. She was buried in the Roper family tomb, with her father’s skull beside her. Margaret’s daughter, Mary, managed to have the collected works of Sir Thomas More printed in April of 1557, in order to honor the wishes of her mother. Margaret’s husband wrote a biography of his father-inlaw, which serves as the principle source of information we have on More’s life.

Thomas More was canonized on May 19, 1935. Catholics can hope and pray that his Dearest Meg, his pride and joy, his equal in wit and integrity, is with him forever in heaven. ■

Sources: mainlesson.com/display.php?author=synge& book=englishwom en& story=roper thefreelancehistorywriter.com/2012/07/19/margaret-roperdaughter- of-sir-thomas-more/

Margaret says goodbye to her father on the way to his execution

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 08

The Remnant's Catholic Action...

Murdered: Bishop Jean-Marie Benoit Bala

By Michael J. Matt

Bishop Bala was known for his wisdom and gentleness. He also upheld the teachings of the Church concerning same-sex attraction, especially with regard to the priests in his diocese.

His body was found by fishermen in the Sanaga River, near Monatele, on June 2. What was at first assumed to be suicide, is gradually coming to light as a brutal murder that reportedly may have been presided over by a coup of homosexual Catholic priests:

Investigators found signs of torture on his body.

Catholic bishops in Cameroon said this bishop, whose body was pulled from a river in early June, did not commit suicide, but was murdered: "In view of the initial findings, we bishops of Cameroon affirm that Bishop Jean-Marie Benoit Bala did not commit suicide; he was brutally murdered. This is one more murder, and one too many," the bishops said in a statement after meeting in a general assembly June 13. Read the full report HERE

According to an article at Cruxnow.com, Bishop Bala’s murder was allegedly carried out by gay priests in retaliation for his holding the line on the Church’s teaching on homosexuality:

In response, the current apostolic administrator of Bala’s diocese, Monsignor Joseph Akonga Essomba, delivered a blunt answer on Thursday during a homily at a memorial Mass: The bishop was killed, he said, because he stood up against homosexuals in the Church and the priesthood.

Pointing to the front rows of the Church where most government ministers and other important personalities sat, and casting a sweeping look at fellow priests and bishops, Essomba charged: "Shame to all those people in black suits and black spectacles always sitting in the front rows of the Church," he said.

"Shame to all those priests who have come here, pretending to sympathize. These are the people who killed our bishop, because he said ‘no’ to the homosexuality perpetrated by those priests," Akonga said.

The Cruxnow.com article is here.

REMNANT COMMENT: Take a look at the future. If Catholics do not stand with the few bishops left in the world who are upholding Catholic teaching, one of two things is going to happen: 1) Said teachings will be watered down to such a drastic extent that they cease to exist or at least cease to matter, or 2) any bishop or priest daring to defend those teachings will end up "swimming with the fishes." Either way, moral chaos and anarchy will follow close on the heels of this apostasy.

Please pray for the repose of the soul of Bishop Bala. May he rest in peace.

Please stand with the bishops in this country who have the faith and courage of Bishop Bala. A good place to start is to defend Bishop Robert Morlino of the diocese of Madison, WI, who at this moment is under fire by homosexual activists for upholding the Church’s very same teaching on public sin, homosexual acts, and the reception of the sacraments.

Please sign the Remnant’s petition at Change.org defending this good Bishop.

Bishop Morlino’s critics still have many more signatures calling for his removal as we have calling for his defense. I realize it’s rather annoying to sign these petitions, but this one literally takes ten seconds of your time, and is an effective means of sending a message to the media that faithful Catholics will stand with faithful shepherds.

We have sent The Remnant’s petition to the Associated Press and many other news outlets in order to make this point.

But it only works if we have enough signatures to make it newsworthy. At this point, we need 2000 more signatures in order to surpass the homosexual activists’ petition calling for Morlino’s removal.

Please Note: We have paraphrased the language of Bishop Morlino’s critics’ petition in our petition, only in the inverse. And since they addressed their petition to Pope Francis, we followed suit by also addressing ours to Pope Francis, though we’re convinced the Pope will pay little attention to either one.

Our objective is to send a message to all bishops who hold the Catholic ground: We will stand with you! ■

Sign Petition at:

CHANGE.ORG

(Search: 'Defend and Support Bishop Robert C. Morlino')

Bishop Beniot Bala, RIP

Defend Bishop Robert Morlino

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 08

Open Letter to the USCCB

November 2, 2017 The Feast of All Souls Catholic Bishops of the United States Your Excellency: By now you will have read of the letter addressed to Pope Francis by Fr.

Thomas Weinandy, O.F.M.Cap., his explanation of how he came to write it, and the immediate response from the USCCB in asking for his resignation as a consultant. Fr. Weinandy served as Executive Director of the Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices from 2005 to 2013.

It is too obvious that the action by the USCCB perfectly exemplifies the vengeful environment about which Fr.

Weinandy complained in his letter. Is this really worthy behavior in the Church of Jesus Christ? Is this how St. Peter responded to correction by St. Paul? Is this how the saints, including St. Thomas Aquinas, have taught that superiors and prelates should behave?

To make matters worse, Cardinal DiNardo excused the USCCB action by complaining that recent public comments about events in the Church "are often expressed in terms of opposition, as political – conservative vs. liberal, left vs. right, pre-Vatican II vs Vatican II." But these words in no way describe Fr. Weinandy’s respectful letter and to imply that they do adds calumny to cowardice on the part of the USCCB.

Your Excellency, you are a member of the USCCB. Are you going to allow its leaders, representing you, to persecute this good and faithful son of the Church for doing what is his right and duty as a theologian and, at the very least, a member of Christ’s faithful (cf. Canon 212)? On this Feast of All Souls, on which the Church calls on us to pray for those who have died in the Faith and to contemplate our own judgement, I ask you to act expeditiously with justice and wisdom to correct the wrong done to Fr. Weinandy and redeem the honor of the Bishops of the United States.

With every prayer for your faithful service, I am Sincerely yours,

Donna F. Bethell cc: Apostolic Nuncio to the United States Congregation for Bishops Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 09

Meanwhile, Don’t Forget

Laudato...

by Helen M. Weir, MI

It is not without significance that the latest casualty in the Mercy Wars is a Franciscan--namely, Thomas Weinandy, OFM Cap. In addressing our wayward Holy Father as he did and in subsequently taking it on the chin, this intrepid Capuchin who (until very recently) served as a theological consultant to the USCCB has demonstrated that the authentic spirit of the stigmatized saint from Assisi is not dead. It is not even confined to the realm of the kitschy birdbath.

Why is it instructive that one of the Poverello’s sons has found himself required by Providence to stand in the breach? Because Jorge Bergoglio has, among other things, attempted to wrest even the name of the stigmatized saint from Assisi away from its rightful place in the heart of the Church, in order to enslave it to his own wretched purposes instead; that’s why. That it should be a Franciscan to raise his voice against the theological and other perversions of a pontiff self-christened Francis is a matter of no little satisfaction. Still, the outworkings of the God who gave Father Weinandy precisely the "sign" he was waiting for would, no doubt, like us to consider the meaning of these events for the wider Body of Christ as well. And what might that wider meaning be?

The Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ has been largely forgotten in all the (fully justified; please don’t misunderstand) kerfuffle over Footnote 351. The title of that Letter was torn from the "Canticle of the Sun" by the original Francis himself--an attempt on the part of Jorge Bergoglio which modern-day liberals, if they were either consistent or paying attention, would decry as "cultural appropriation" in any other context. Nevertheless, the Teflon Pope has been able to represent not only his own person, but also his entire weltanschauung, as an authentic adumbration of the Franciscan founding event. No wonder Father Weinandy needed to be gotten rid of in record time! What Providence is pointing out (among other things, no doubt) by pulling a Franciscan into the Amoris spotlight is that Laudato Si’ constitutes a much greater threat to the Faith and to the human community than has previously been recognized. At the time of its release, commentators justifiably faulted the Holy Father for making pronouncements above--or, in a certain more precise sense, below--his pay grade; popes, after all, have no particular competence in the area of climatology.

Poor Rex Mottram and his philosophical vacuity concerning spiritual rainshowers we are all "too sinful to see" got skewered without respite, while concessions to the reasonable aspects of the environmentalist viewpoint clogged the conservative sector of the blogosphere like piles of refuse at the Fresh Kills Landfill. And that, more or less, was that. With Amoris laetitia following so closely on its heels, Laudato Si’ got off pretty easy in the long run.

Too easy, in point of fact. Thanks to the courage of Father Thomas Weinandy, who was by his own admission more concerned with "the good that (his letter to the Holy Father) might do" than with the possibility of his own dismissal, let’s take a closer look at Laudato, now that the rose-colored glasses through which many of us were still attempting to view this pontificate way back in May of 2015 have been not only dropped to the ground and stamped upon, but shattered beyond all hope of recovery as well.

Laudato’s View of "Nature," Prima Facie

The Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ is all about nature, along with the purported, pressing need to preserve it. During the course of what Pope Francis himself terms (with touching understatement) a "lengthy reflection" (no. 246), the word nature is employed--along with its virtual synonym, the environment-- next to constantly. One would think that the author might treat us to some sort of definition up front, given that nature can mean a variety of things. But he doesn’t. Intimations and qualifications abound, to which we will occasionally refer, but in the main left the reader to muse with Inigo Montoya, "You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

By nature, is the Holy Father simply referring to the Great Outdoors? In places, that seems to be the case. His rhapsodizing about beauty ( e.g., no. 215) would tend to support such a reading.

And indeed, there is no need to exclude this overt or primary sense of the word nature from the Bergoglian usage. If Laudato was simply advocating for keeping the National Parks in good condition, or refraining from littering, there would be little additional cause for contention. The problem is that Pope Francis’ invocation of the term nature goes far beyond the associations most people have with it. A comparison comes to mind between this situation, and that of the earlier feminists, who used to make the case for equal wages for equal work. If that is all they were talking about, well and good! But in fact, as we have seen, that insistence proved to be only the smokescreen for a far more pernicious ideology indeed.

For if our responsibility to care for nature extends to things like buildings, monuments, fountains, and town squares (no. 232)--not to mention the poor (no.

237, among many other citations)--we are dealing with an entirely foreign and previously unguessed-at invocation of the term entirely.

Does Jorge Bergoglio mean by nature something more like what St. Thomas might mean? There is, after all, the question of human nature, or the natural law. In Catholic theology, these words point to concepts which are quite precise. Yet as we have seen him do in other contexts, quite shamelessly, Pope Francis is not at all hesitant about piggybacking on traditional understandings while simultaneously hijacking them for his own, utterly unrelated agenda. Anyone who glances over his quotations from St.

Bonaventure, for example (nos. 11, 66, etc.), or from St. John of the Cross (no.

234) might be tempted to conclude that the theology presented by Laudato is organically rooted in authentic Christian mysticism. Which conclusion would be not only premature, but most pernicious as well.

What Laudato Si’ and, by extension, the rest of the Bergoglian outlook intends by the designation nature can only be guessed at by sorting through the odd collection of references strewn almost haphazardly throughout the document itself, buttressed by external allusions equally opaque. The document does distinguish between the commonplace notion of nature and the allegedly Christian idea of creation,

1 but this only serves to plunge us into the utterly convoluted Bergoglian take on the Book of Genesis itself. We’d better go ahead and take a look at all of that right now.

In Laudato Si’, we read the following (no. 66):

The creation accounts in the book of Genesis contain, in their own symbolic and narrative language, profound teachings about human existence and its historical reality.

They suggest that human life is grounded in three fundamental and closely intertwined relationships: with God, with our neighbour and with the earth itself. According to the Bible, these three vital relationships have been broken, both outwardly and within us. This rupture is sin.

Sounds good, right? It would to most readers, who would trustingly be taking it for granted that any document written by a pope would get the basics straight.

People are scanning ahead for the part about carbon credits, in any case. But look again. "According to the Bible, these three relationships have been broken, both outwardly and within us.

This rupture is sin."

In short: no, it’s not.

They say that the human mind will fill in, or fix, what is missing or mixed up in a given pericope, without taking note of the fact that it is doing so. For instance,

1 " Nature is usually seen as a system which can be studied, understood and controlled, whereas creation can only be understood as a gift from the outstretched hand of the Father of all, and as a reality illuminated by the love which calls us together into universal communion" (no. 76).

most people grasp the sense of:

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteers be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. 2

In the same way, Jorge Bergoglio frames his argumentation in ways that sound remotely theological, and counts on his readership to ignore the fact that he has made absolute hash of the middle.

Without supplying what you assume any pope simply must be saying, read over the Bergoglian account of man’s beginnings once again. Analyzing what he actually arguing, rather than what any sane Catholic might project onto what is being argued, provides our first clue as to where the problem really lies.

For sin is not a "rupture in relationship" between humanity, God, and the earth.

That sin results in such undesirable consequences, among others, remains undisputed; still, what Laudato has described is not what essentially constitutes sin. In skipping over the whole tree--commandment-apple--snake

episode, Pope Francis conveniently omits portraying God as all holy; an authority who must be obeyed, even "before" being a loving Father who fixes and forgives.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, sin is "an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law . . . it is an offense against God" (no. 1871). Yet Bergoglianism draws no essential distinction between offending God and offending anybody else, not excluding even "the earth."

Sin as disobedience is reduced to sin as lack of harmony; the outcome rises to the level of the offense, while the offense itself is consigned to quaint obscurity. Where, in Laudato’s account of things, is any reference to eternal law at all? It simply isn’t there! This omission, and the implied substitution of unselfish, fraternal collaboration3 in

2 Fox News, March 31, 2009. "If You Can Raed This, You Msut Be Raelly Smrat." (www.foxnews.com/ story/2009/03/31/if-you-can-raed-tihs-msut-be-raelly-smrat.

html; accessed 11.4.2017) 3 Number 25, perhaps, captures this contention the most precisely, asserting that civil society is and must be founded upon a "sense of responsibility for our fellow men and women." Really? What "sense," exactly, and why? Almighty

Continued Next Page

H. Weir/

Continued...

Laudato Si’,

mastery over it--

"Not from above"?

Laudato

Laudato’s

Laudato

we actually read that human beings (n. 81):

I AM

Laudato Si’

is full of references

4

Laudato Si’,

his

subjective feelings, nor is he indicating that

God

5

And because God does, we must

too--which is where

relativism

famously turns into

tyranny.

6

is

(To be continued Next Issue)

its place, is the sleight of hand by which Bergoglianism places its cuckoo’s egg of ersatz "mercy" in Catholicism’s nest in the first place. If you are tempted to brush this observation aside as mere Biblical quibbling, let us consider how the deformation of original sin filters throughout, and insidiously informs, the rest of the Bergoglian analysis as well.

Throughout

the reader runs up against curious anomalies which one is inclined simply to set aside, but shouldn’t, because placing them one next to the other begins to present an altogether different (if disturbing) picture. What are we to make, for example, of the observation that (no.

98):

Jesus lived in full harmony with creation, and others were amazed: "What sort of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him?"

(Mt 8:27).

One might be tempted to reflect that the vaunted "amazement of others" in this case--so pointedly directed not toward Our Lord’s "harmony with creation," but precisely His

scores what has come to be called an own-goal both by and against Bergoglianism itself. Then there is the altogether objectionable--because it is unqualified-assertion that "human beings, too, are creatures of this world" (no. 43), which wouldn’t be so bad if not accompanied by the notion that (no. 236):

{I}t is in the Eucharist that all that has been created finds its greatest exaltation. Grace, which tends to manifest itself tangibly, found unsurpassable expression when God himself became man and gave himself as food for his creatures. The Lord, in the culmination of the mystery of the Incarnation, chose to reach our intimate depths through a fragment of matter. He comes not from above, but from within, he comes that we might find him in this world of ours.

As with all expressions of the heresy called Modernism, objectionable assertions can frequently be balanced off by congenial ones. This is methodological. It would be quite possible to counterbalance each and every tendentious assertion found in

with Catholic-sounding ones; yet that does not make the problematic points any less poisonous. In Bergoglian "Biblical" theology, then, we are dealing with a deity who is called by the name of "Father," "God," and "Lord," yet who answers to little else that corresponds to the traditional description. When Pope Francis reminds us, in other words, that "we are not God" (no. 67) it is well to recall that, according to the Bergoglian imagination, neither is He.

Perhaps the most telling expression of this unpardonable departure is found in

description of God as but another member--albeit the most prestigious member--of the "open and intercommunicating system" which the document posits the cosmos as being (no. 79). In

even if we postulate a process of evolution, also possess a uniqueness which cannot be fully explained by

God and His plan for all of creation, expressed through the Ten Commandments and their explication in the Sermon on the Mount, are nowhere invoked.

the evolution of other open systems.

Each of us has his or her own personal identity and is capable of entering into dialogue with others and with God himself. Our capacity to reason, to develop arguments, to be inventive, to interpret reality and to create art, along with other not yet discovered capacities, are signs of a uniqueness which transcends the spheres of physics and biology. The sheer novelty involved in the emergence of a personal being within a material universe presupposes a direct action of God and a particular call to life and to relationship on the part of a "Thou" who addresses himself to another "thou". The biblical accounts of creation invite us to see each human being as a subject who can never be reduced to the status of an object.

But it is utter blasphemy to suggest that Almighty God is but a capital-T "Thou" participating, as merely one part of it, in some other unspecified "system," along with a whole host of small-T "thous."

The God of the Bible and of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church identifies Himself, in contrast, as

(Ex. 3:14). He does not "address," on approximately equal footing, to the rest of us; it is we who must remove our sandals, as Moses did, in His holy and unutterable presence. In the same way, the people of the Old Covenant didn’t take up stones against the carpenter from Nazareth because He wanted to engage in a friendly dialogue with them, thou-to-thou, but because He took to Himself the divine name (Jn. 8:58).

Bergoglianism therefore extends--to the extent that its contours can be detected and rationally appraised--Arianism’s essential error, originally directed to the Son alone, all the way to the Father Himself.

Is it any wonder, therefore, that we find ourselves left with an entirely problematic pneumatology to deal with as well?

to Pope Francis’ cringeworthy "Holy Spirit of Suprises," to which Father Weinandy also objected in no uncertain terms.

When we read, for example (no.

245), that "his love" (meaning the Holy Spirit, probably) "constantly impels us to find new ways forward," we recognize stock Bergoglian buzzwords, but are treated to no Scriptural, philosophical, or theological basis for them whatsoever.

The Third Person of the Trinity infuses into our hearts His great gifts, among them "the fear of the Lord," recognized Scripturally as the origin of all wisdom (Prov. 9:10). But according to the insidious

"true wisdom" is only "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue, and generous encounter between" all the various "thous" (no.

47).

Which all leaves us with a fundamental difficulty. If God isn’t God, then who is? Now, Pope Bergoglio isn’t beyond invoking the divine omnipotence-when it serves his purposes, that is. "A spirituality which forgets God as allpowerful and Creator is not acceptable," we are duly lectured (no. 75). What turns out to be so unacceptable is, of course--as we have had ample opportunity to observe in other contexts-any opinion held even by the Godhead which happens to conflict with Jorge’s own. When he reminds us that "our subjective feelings (do not) define what is right and what is wrong" (no. 224), he isn’t referring to

so defines; he means that God, as our primary dialogue partner, also recognizes the absolute ascendancy of the "common good."

4 "To teach with such a seemingly intentional lack of clarity risks sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth.

The Holy Spirit is given to the Church, and particularly to yourself, to dispel error, not to foster it." (Weinandy, Thomas OFM Cap., Letter to Pope Francis dated July 31, 2017; reprinted in "Full Text of Father Weinandy’s Letter to Pope Francis" by Edward Pentin, posted online at ncregister.com Nov. 1, 2017; accessed Nov. 4, 2017).

5 The heart of Laudato Si’ is Section IV (nos. 156-158, entitled "The Principle of the Common Good") situates the

Bergoglio agrees with situation ethicist Joseph Fletcher, in other words, in asserting that:

any God worth believing in intends the highest possible well-being for human beings, or what the Bible calls love. In short, we should assume that there can be no practical difference in the ethical judgments of humanistically and theologically oriented moral agents. Our guideline, then, would be what is humane and rational, not what is revealed and authoritarian.

The unacknowledged difficulty is, of course: if there is no difference between what is humane and rational and what is revealed and authoritarian, why is it always what is revealed and authoritarian that ultimately gets jettisoned? Suddenly, we find that there

such a thing as an "ethical imperative" (no. 158) after all; and that "{g}lobal regulatory norms" may be "needed to impose obligations and prevent unacceptable actions" (no.

173) whether certain harmonious and fraternal dialogue partners like it, or not.

Remove the commandments of Almighty God, evidently, and the dictates of liberal consensus stand ready to rush into the vacuum more quickly than any chocolate-coated miracle pill can put a black-masked hero back on his booted feet. ■

concept in the context of Gaudium et Spes (no. 26). No one is arguing, of course, that there is no such thing as a "common good," or that it isn’t salutary to promote it. But the unquestioned equation of the "common good" with "a preferential option for the poorest of our brothers and sisters" is something Pope Francis tries to slide on through.

To untangle what the Second Vatican Council means by the "common good," and what Laudato Si’ means by it, is a project beyond the scope of the present analysis, but well worth undertaking.

6 Fletcher, Joseph. Humanhood: Essays in Bioethical Ethics (New York: Prometheus, 1979), p. 9.

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 11

The People’s Church

By Timothy J Cullen

" Nec audiendi qui solent dicere, Vox populi, vox Dei, quum tumultuositas vulgi semper insaniae proxima sit."

1 (St.

Alcuin of York) We are informed by the results of a recent (Sept. 2017) poll conducted among a thousand persons by Saint Leo University Polling Institute that Pope Francis has an "overall approval among Americans Catholics… at 87.9 percentup from 82.6 this past March",

2 calling to mind—albeit on a smaller scale—the now-infamous cliché "Fifty million Frenchmen can’t be wrong".

3 France, it may be worth noting, named the recently deceased (20 Aug 2017) US comedian Jerry Lewis a Chevalier, Ordre national de la Légion d’honneur in 1984.4 Pope Francis is often called by the sobriquet "The People’s Pope", a designation bestowed upon him by Time magazine when it named him "Person of the Year" in 2013, joining Pope John XXIII and Pope John Paul II as the only popes to be so designated.

Other designees have been primarily politicians, among whom were twotime winners Joseph Stalin, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Barack Obama. The designation is applied to those who have greatly influenced the course of world events in a given year.

5

Among The People’s Pope’s newest initiatives is the late-September "twoyear global campaign, ‘Share the Journey,’ meant to promote a great welcome of migrants and refugees."

6

While there may be those who have no interest in "sharing the journey", welcoming migrants or indeed wondering just why exactly the Catholic Church should be "promoting" a divisive political agenda within the scope of Catholicism, it would appear that the polled professed Catholics do not: "The pope also managed to lose a bit of support for his work on immigration, dipping from a 54.4 percent approval in March to 53.8 percent in the September poll. However, the poll also showed a 19.7 percent disapproval of his work on immigration, a decrease from 21.1 in March."

7 One wonders what the percentages are among Catholics as a whole. One has little difficulty in seeing Francis as the "People’s Pope", given his predilection for pontificating on presently popular "social" causes such as environmentalism, migrants, economic inequality, "gender rights" and so on; it is a bit more difficult to see him as the Vicar of Christ as previous

1. ‘And do not listen to those who keep saying, ‘The voice of the people is the voice of God.’ because the tumult of the crowd is always close to madness.’ 2. https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2017/09/29/newpoll- finds-pope-francis-still-enjoys-widespread-popularityu- s/ 3. https://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/4/ messages/1199.html 4. https://infogalactic.com/info/Jerry_Lewis 5. https://infogalactic.com/info/Time_Person_of_the_Year 6. https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2017/09/29/newpoll- finds-pope-francis-still-enjoys-widespread-popularityu- s/ 7. Ibid.

popes were seen, given that things Catholic concerned with the Faith are seldom addressed by the praxis8 pope as opposed to the previously-active papacy of the penitent contemplative pope tucked away in the Monastery of Mater Ecclesiae within Vatican City.

Perhaps I do the Holy Father a disservice by thinking of him as the "praxis pope", but this description from a Marxist study institute seemed to characterize the Francis approach to the papacy: "Praxis, in its simplest construal, means ‘theory plus action.’ It indicates life practice formed from both reflection and action. The self, striving to transform the world creatively according to an emerging vision based on its own values, actualizes itself as it actualizes its vision. Because individuals’ actions always affect other people, praxis is inherently political… In the Marxist sense, then, praxis is both practical and revolutionary…".

9

Antonio Gramsci, with whom the term "philosophy of praxis" is most closely associated, had this to say about it: "The position of the philosophy of praxis is the antithesis of the Catholic."

10 Gramsci also had this to say about Catholicism:

The relation between common sense and the upper level of philosophy is assured by "politics", just as it is politics that assures the relationship between the Catholicism of the intellectuals and that of the simple.

There are, however, fundamental differences between the two cases.

That the Church has to face up to a problem of the "simple" means precisely that there has been a split in the community of the faithful.

This split cannot be healed by raising the simple to the level of the intellectuals (the Church does not even envisage such a task, which is

8. "The process by which a theory, lesson, or skill is enacted, embodied, or realized. "Praxis" may also refer to the act of engaging, applying, exercising, realizing, or practicing ideas"; The 19th century socialist Antonio Labriola called Marxism the "philosophy of praxis". This description of Marxism would appear again in Antonio Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks and the writings of the members of the Frankfurt School.": (https://infogalactic.com/info/Praxis_(process).

9. http://www.markfoster.net/struc/praxis.html (emphasis added).

10. Gramsci, Antonio, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, edited and translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey N.

Smith, International Publishers, NY, 1971, p. 332.

both ideologically and economically beyond its present capacities), but only by imposing an iron discipline on the intellectuals so that they do not exceed certain limits of differentiation and so render the split catastrophic and irreparable. In the past such divisions in the community of the faithful were healed by strong mass movements which led to, or were absorbed in, the creation of new religious orders centered on strong personalities (St. Dominic, St. Francis).

11

This astonishingly presumptuous assertion—granted, made by an atheist and communist—fails to take into account that in the Faith, there are only the faithful and they are all equal in the eyes of God and His Church. The above-referred "antithesis" is precisely that. In the Marxist worldview, all are supposedly equal, but some are more equal than others, as George Orwell so keenly observed in Animal Farm, a thinly disguised satirical allegory of the Soviet police state that arose from the revolutionary praxis as conceived by Karl Marx. This some-are-moreequal- than-others-egalitarianism has characterized communist thought ever since: it is the communist "intellectuals" who cannot reconcile with the "simple", not those who are faithful, authentic Catholics. Compare the condescending and in many ways incoherent writings of the "intellectuals" of the Frankfurt School, the "theologians" of "liberation" and their fellow traveler the late Paulo Freire, all of whom assume a priori that it is they and only they who can presume to know what is right and just for the "people" they intend to enlist in their secular materialist alwaysjust- over-the-horizon-heaven-on-earth with authentic Catholic intellectuals who labor on behalf of all the faithful, "simple" and sophisticated alike. The Catholic intellectual takes no notice of the educational accomplishments of whomever may be seated alongside him in the pew; the commissar, however, will not be found seated alongside the simple on the bus that transports the latter to the factory. The "people" are

11. Ibid, p. 331.

not the amorphous mass that secular materialists perceive them to be, but rather individual souls as correctly perceived by the Church; a so-called "People’s Church" may be "catholic" but it is not Catholic. Contempt, veiled or otherwise, has no place in Catholicism, as Gramsci in his prison ramblings failed to understand: "This split [supposedly existing between Catholic intellectuals and the "simple"] cannot be healed by raising the simple to the level of the intellectuals… but only by imposing an iron discipline on the intellectuals so that they do not exceed certain limits of differentiation and so render the split catastrophic and irreparable." Gramsci forgets a simple truism: ignorance can be remedied, but lack of intellectual capacity cannot; this error persists today in the debased educational systems of the West. There can be no "differentiation".

The "People’s Pope" is an oxymoron: the pope is the Holy Father of the faithful, the Vicar of Christ and the Patriarch of the Roman Catholic Church, not the demagogic dictator of a formless mob known to Marxists as the lumpen-proletariat, aka the "simple".

One hopes and prays that Francis knows that, but one has serious grounds for doubt; the papacy of Francis has a "high approval rating" after all, and the temptation to play to the crowd is one from which few leaders are exempt. The pope, however, is not a political leader, nor should he attempt to act as one, outside his pastoral duty to promote what is in the best interests of his flock, which is the Catholic faithful, not "humanity" as a whole.

The "People’s Pope" makes declarations and exhibits behavior that arouse confusion, concern and perhaps call into doubt the very validity of his papacy; the papal office, in a sense, is "shared" with the "Pope Emeritus" Benedict XVI, given that the latter has not renounced the nomenclature of "Your Holiness", not doffed the white papal vestments, not removed his person from the precincts of the Vatican. Perhaps there is more to that conundrum than meets the eye. Pope Francis is the pope both de jure and de facto, but it is not difficult to understand why some— perhaps the "simple"—might have some difficulty with de facto and prefer to believe that Benedict is the true Vicar of Christ in a figurative sense.

Given a situation in which the "People’s Pope" apparently has no interest in things Catholic other than changing them to concur with his particular vision of "Doctrine", a "duopoly papacy" is less farfetched than it would first appear: God protects His Church. The "People’s Pope" seems more pied piper than pastor, while the "Pope Emeritus" holds fast to authentic Catholicism in his role as penitent and contemplative.

This, however, is fantasy. To whose words and deeds should be paid greater attention?

Continued Next Page

The People's Pope

The People's Church,

Concluded

There is Pope Francis, systematically but non-dogmatically seeking to change nearly everything that makes the Catholic Church unique. Then there is Pope Benedict XVI, alive and well but playing a role that makes it all too easy to forget that he too is a legitimately elected pope, his abdication or renunciation or whatever one chooses to call it notwithstanding. The active papacy of pastoralist Francis is an unmitigated disaster for the Faith, the Church and the faithful, although there are tragically few who would agree if polls are to be believed. What could be called the "passive papacy" of Benedict XVI, consisting mostly of prayer, it would appear, provides a very useful example for those who believe the situation in the Church is beyond human repair.

The "People’s Church" is after all a proposition, not a revelation. The Catholic Church is not a propositional church; She is revelational and therefore not open to question or debate as to Her purpose; everything that needed to be settled was settled long ago; that’s what we call Dogma and Tradition. The effort made since Vatican II to undo all that the Church has been for nearly two millennia and continue to do it in an increasingly revolutionary manner, using the strategy and tactics of revolution: a strategy of patient infiltration, corruption and intellectual pettifoggery until dogma can be circumvented and tradition cast off; tactics include deliberate verbal ambiguity, ecumenical excess, personal public papal appearances with persons previously considered persona non grata by the Church, the introduction of one novel "idea for reform" after another… It all adds up to treachery and betrayal and it will not stop until the institutional Catholic Church has been melded into a globalized "People’s Church" that is also a "People’s Mosque," "People’s Synagogue", "People’s Temple" and "People’s Coven" for the Satanists.

To paraphrase Chesterton, it will be everybody’s church while at the same time being no one’s church at all, one in which nothing sacred will be left standing.

There have arisen "doubts" on the part of a small minority of the Church hierarchy, but destruction outpaces debate and somewhere, perhaps, an indeterminate number of angels dance on the head of a pin while Francis fiddles with Doctrine without slipping into open heresy and the "People’s Church" adapts itself to the new dispensation. And somewhere within the precincts of Vatican City, with its growing shroud of the smoke of Satan, Benedict does penance and prays. ■ Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 12

The Catholic Resistance Emerges in Belgium

By Elizabeth Yore

Welcome to the Catholic Resistance Movement. It spontaneously springs up around the world, as if out of nowhere, armed with the Truth.

It’s here. It’s young. It’s fearless. It’s deeply Catholic. It’s grounded in the Holy Rosary.

It’s the clandestine church, appearing to rise out of the catacombs to protest the usurpation of the Catholic Faith by Pope Francis as he, among many things, sanitizes and sanctifies the vile Martin Luther.

The Catholic Resistance is emerging from unlikely places, such as secular Belgium which claims that it is 75% Catholic, but only 6% attend weekly mass.

The latest resistance event occurred at the Ecumenical Service for the celebration of Martin Luther held in the Brussels Catholic Cathedral of St. Michael and St. Gudula. The service was inspired by the Pope’s reconciliation with the Lutheran Church on the 500th Anniversary of the Reformation.

Following the directions of Pope Francis who repeatedly advises young people to make a mess, the Belgium 12 carried out their protest. The Belgium 12 arrived at Brussels Catholic St. Michael’s Cathedral armed with the Truth and their rosary.

They prayed the rosary aloud during the ecumenical service honoring Martin Luther and handed out a pamphlet that proclaimed:

The occupation of our cathedral by Protestants to commemorate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation is therefore a profanation.

Profanation proliferates in this papacy. Recall the profanation on the sacred facade of St. Peter’s Basilica of a eco laser show funded by the abortion-supporting World Bank on the Holy Feast Day of the Immaculate Conception.

Or recall the profane hawking of the Sistine Chapel to corporate globalists.

Or recall the constant profane invitations and homage to population control proponents to the Vatican Pontifical Academies.

After his ouster from the Cathedral service, one of the Belgian 12 remarked:

We have here in Brussels a small group of men gathering together to pray and strengthen our Catholic identity.

The Holy Rosary is the weapon guarding against the modernist Francis agenda. Recently, on October 7th, on the Feast Day of Our Lady of the Holy Ro- sary and the Battle of Lepanto, one million Poles marched to the borders to pray the rosary to Our Lady for protection from Muslim Invaders and to protect Poland.

Similarly, the young people of the Belgium 12, prayed the Holy Rosary during the ecumenical Luther service. They were ousted by the Belgian Gendarmerie, famously known for their inability to even find a serial child pedophile murderer right under their nose.

These young Catholics are following in the historical footsteps of Belgian Cardinal Van Roey who bravely protested the Nazi invasion of Europe. Van Roey gained the moniker, The Iron Bishop for his bold witness which gave courage to his Belgian countrymen and clerics. Van Roey urged Belgians to resist during World War II:

We have a duty of conscience to combat and to strive for the defeat of these dangers….Reason and good sense both direct us toward confi dence, towards resistance.

Reason, good sense and the Holy Rosary give confidence to the modern Catholic Resistance.

Our Lady of Fatima, Pray for Us.

Our Lady of the Rosary, Pray for Us. ■

Young, faithful Catholics prayed the rosary aloud and refused to leave while their cathedral was being used to celebrate a heretic

One by one they were forcibly removed from the building

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 13

A Remnant Series in Denfense of Marriage...

How Our Lady of Guadalupe, St. Raphael, and a Necktie Brought Me My One, True Love

(Continued From Last Issue)

Gretchen remained in ICU until Tuesday of the week following her operation. Her sister Cathy came almost every day to stay with her, and on those days when Cathy couldn’t make it, her sister Carrie came and sat with Gretchen. I came and stayed with her each night so that between the three of us, Gretchen had round-the-clock family presence to help ease her fears. She was in great pain almost all of the time and there were more tubes and electronic leads and monitors and other paraphernalia attached to her than tentacles at an octopus family reunion! All through her suffering in the hospital, I was amazed at what a real lady (in the true sense of the word) she was; each time her nurse came in (and they came in often) to draw blood or disturb her or give her medications, etc.., all of which caused her pain, she very politely thanked them in her weak voice. There wasn’t much any of us could do to ease her pain except offer words of hope for a quick recovery. She used to like it when I stroked her hair at home when she was overly worried about something or just at the end of the day before drifting off to sleep, and so I stood by her bedside and stroked her hair lightly to reassure her of my presence and to comfort her in ever so small a way. The nights were long and sometimes because of the pain she would want to sit up for a moment and then, not knowing what to do with herself, she would lie back down again. Her sleep was always somewhat fitful and my vigil by her side was solemn and meditative, but full of hope for a complete recovery.

Occasionally, I caught some sleep, but usually only for a brief moment during those nights. When Cathy, or Carrie came in the morning, I would go home and take a long nap during the day, so that I could return that evening and relieve them and spend the night with her. The view outside of her hospital room, which was on the University campus, had a very European look to it, with a sort of bell tower and peaked rooftops like you might see in Germany or France. One night, it snowed, and the rooftops all freshly covered in a white mantle made me think about taking her to Europe again when she was well.

She always wanted to go back to Europe one more time and show Margaret the beauty of Germany, France and Italy, but her health would never have allowed it; now maybe we could make a trip with our daughter...

When I came to the hospital on Tuesday evening of the week following her operation, at around 6:00, I was glad to find that Gretchen had finally been moved out of ICU and up into a room on the transplant recovery floor. My sister-inlaw, Carol Matt, came to visit and offer her encouragement and assurance of her prayers. She brought Gretchen a colorful balloon with flowers on it, as Gretchen was still not allowed to have real flowers.

In fact, a few days before her operation, at one of the many pre-transplant meetings, Gretchen had been heartbroken to learn that her gardening days were over.

Because of her post-operation, antirejection drugs, her risk of contracting an infection from various viruses and bacteria in the soil was too great and so gardening was off limits! I assured her that I would weed her gardens, etc. or hire someone to do it, as her flower gardens were a great source of joy in her life. (Everyone knows that, other than maybe chocolate, nothing can possibly compete more than flowers for that special place in a woman’s heart!

Flowers and women are, somehow, two sides of the same coin, and no other part of creation is as uniquely feminine as flowers – not butterflies, or delicate snowflakes, or silvery moonlight, or whatever else you might imagine – nothing mirrors feminine beauty more than flowers!) Not being able to garden was going to be a tremendous cross for her, but she was willing to give it up for Margaret’s and my sake if that was what it took to live a longer life together!

She would have done anything for us!

The Shadow of the Sword of Damocles

God’s Will is not our will! He cannot be understood by our poor human intellects, however intelligent, wise or holy we may be. It would be far easier for an ant (either before or after being stepped on for that matter) to understand a treatise on stellar physics in Sanskrit than for our unaided intellect to grasp the Infinite Wisdom of God while still here in this veil of tears. In Heaven, it will be another matter, as the Beatific Vision will provide the grace of complete understanding, but while here on Earth, we have to be satisfied with the limited understanding and assurance our faith provides. So be the Will of the Creator! I know this much, though, of God’s Love; namely, that if any one of us were His sole human creation, He would have still made the vast universe with all of its beauty and splendor, all of the stars and galaxies, the sun and moon, oceans and mountains, all of the diversity of life we see around us, all of the world we know..., all of this, out of Love for just you or me alone! We all already know this truth in our hearts for, after all, He did exactly this for Adam, who was His sole human creation! (And aren’t we all Adam’s heirs?) But then Divine, Infinite Love outdid, Himself, so to speak, and created Eve, in all her mystery and beauty, from Adam’s rib... Who can fathom it!

It is beyond a lifetime of meditation!

Yet think of it, each marriage, in some wonderful, mysterious way harkens back, all the way down through the ages, through all these long millenniums, back to Adam and Eve themselves, back to the very beginning of God’s Plan! What a mystery! And this aspect of marriage, wondrous as it is, is only on the natural plane; after Christ, marriage took on the even greater living, breathing, sacrificial symbol of Christ’s love for His Church!

This is why marriage is now indissoluble – (before Christ, I would argue that marriage existed only on a natural level and that that is why the Jews were allowed to divorce in the Old Testament; for God would never have allowed this if it were something intrinsically evil! It is true, that Christ says in the Gospel, "that it wasn’t so from the beginning", but that is because He was God, and knew of His Own plan to establish marriage as a sacrament when He became man) – however, when Christ actually, finally came, He, Himself conferred upon marriage the sacramental symbol of His eternal love for His Bride, the Church (and Christ will never leave His Bride) – and so the living, breathing, sacramental symbol of His Love for the Church, namely marriage, is now, itself, also something indissoluble! Please forgive my digression here, I really shouldn’t wax theological, especially since I am not a theologian, but having lived a marriage commitment, and now being a widower, brings the wondrous mystery and sacramental privilege of marriage into keen focus! Death for me is not a parting, it is just an inconvenience, and so I will never take my wedding ring off – it is my privilege to wear it, until the day I die, as a symbol of Christ’s undying love for His Church and mine for my wife! I will only say along with St. Paul, that if you are lucky enough (in reality, blessed enough) to still have your spouse with you, "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church!" Enough said...

All of our married life, we had lived in the shadow of the Sword of Damocles.

Gretchen’s incurable illness was something we simply accepted. Everyone’s life is always in God’s hands and so, in our minds, we really weren’t much different than anyone else. A handicapped person is no less a human being than anyone else, and those hardships, which, so to speak, handicapped our marriage made it no less a true marriage compared to other marriages. And, if I might continue the analogy, most handicapped people I know have truly great souls, full of love for life and a very keen appreciation of each day that is given to them – and those extra hardships we faced in our marriage didn’t clip our wings – far from it – by God’s grace, our love for one another and our realization of what each of us mutually sacrificed for the other, carried us on powerful wings, over many dry, parched deserts and sharp, craggy mountain peaks. One of us always supported the other when things looked dark. I used to feel like I was a failure at times, especially when it was so difficult to land a job that paid a decent wage or even made use of one’s talents and experience (employers will deny it, but there is a very real age discrimination in the workplace!), but she would remind me that she didn’t mind our lack of material things because we had a solid marriage instead, and she was always proud of me, even if after eight years of college I was just bagging someone’s groceries at work; and at other times, when financial or health difficulties got her down, she sometimes would ask me, "What’s to become of us?", and I would simply say, "I love you, and you love me – God will take care of the rest!"

And God always did take care of the rest, but in His Own Infinite Way, which was always the best, even if it didn’t seem so to us. After all, God does know what He is doing. I compose music and often a piece of music will call for a certain dissonant note or chord, which if played on the piano, all by itself, out of the context of the piece of music, would make you cringe and think, "how ugly!", but when it is played in context with the entire piece of music it will often stand out as one of the high points of the piece! We are all part of God’s symphony – the real "Creation Symphony", (apologies to Mr. Haydn) – and some of us have, what may seem like, a more dissonant part to play than others, but in eternity we will hear the whole symphony, complete, and not just the isolated chord that is our own individual life’s story, and then, we’ll not only understand, but truly appreciate the beauty and perfection of God’s Masterpiece and our own small part in it! The American composer, Charles Ives, was fond of quoting his father, who was the local church choir director, and who after hearing a complaint from a parishioner about an off-key-sounding voice in the choir responded, "Don’t pay attention to those notes too closely or you’ll miss the music and the beauty of the Hymn!"

Both Gretchen and Lindsey were finally out of the ICU and into other hospital rooms. In a few days, Lindsey would finally be allowed to go home. Gretchen, was also going home soon, but she was going to her real Home, and leaving us behind.

They had given her some powerful sedatives the night before and she had slept for several hours peacefully. I mistook this, and the fact that they had moved her out of ICU, as a sign that she was finally on the mend. But that last night, she never really slept and was more agitated than she had ever been before. She was in great pain, especially in her abdomen which was looking quite distended. She would sit up and then after only a minute lie back down, all of which required a lot of maneuvering and care as she still had so many tubes, electrical leads and monitors attached to her, in addition to two heavy plastic, "canteens", one on either side of her abdomen, which were collecting abdominal fluids and had to be emptied every few hours. It would take a while to untangle everything and get it all sorted out each time she changed position. She needed to have someone right next to her for support whenever she was sitting up and during one of these episodes, I massaged her spine and rubbed her back.

She always had such soft, wonderfully smooth skin, and she laid her head on my shoulder while I stood holding her on the edge of the bed. It was the last time I was able to hold her close to me and I will never forget the blessing of that moment as long as I live! We had to scoot her up in the bed before she could lie back down and on that occasion she was a little confused about what we were doing and asked, "Where are we going?", and I nodded my head to the right and jokingly replied, "North!" – and she gave me a weak smile.

She suffered so much that night and I was so thankful for her nurse, Lisa, who was the most understanding and compassionate of all the nurses we had encountered at the hospital. She was excellent in every way.

She was probably in her late 30’s or early 40’s, of Asian descent, and very capable and professional, but her bedside manner was bar-none! I believe with all my heart that St. Raphael sent her, or used her, or that Lisa was even St. Raphael, himself, in disguise, there at Gretchen’s hour of need on her last night on earth! I met with Lindsey a few days before Gretchen’s funeral and she gave me a folded note that a nurse had given her to relay to me. It was from Lisa and it was very touching and beautiful. I have included a copy of her note in the appendix, but I wonder who she really is, though – the sentence structure and grammar, the punctuation, the thoughts and sentiment… everything

Continued Next Page

A Remnant Series in Denfense of Marriage...

J. Mills/ Concluded from Page 13

about that note is nothing like anything you’d expect from a run-of-the-mill nurse in today’s world… It is true, Lisa certainly wasn’t a run-of-the-mill nurse, but call me crazy, I still think that there is something more here than meets the eye!

Lisa came in the room around 2:00 AM and said that Gretchen’s lactic acid blood level had suddenly passed a critical point and so they wanted an x-ray of her abdomen. About 20 minutes later, a tech with a portable x-ray machine came in and I helped raised Gretchen’s back slightly up off of the bed so that they could slide the x-ray plate under her abdomen. This whole process was very painful for her and she moaned with each movement we made, however so gently we executed it! Lisa continued to care for Gretchen and tried to make her as comfortable as possible, giving her pain medications, blankets, etc. and offering her heartfelt sympathy for her sufferings. I stood at the head of her bed and held her hand and stroked her hair trying to comfort her. About 3:30 AM we heard back from the doctor who had read the x-ray that Gretchen had an ischemia of the small intestine, which means that some of the tissue in the small intestine had been damaged and that necrosis had set in (the tissue had died) and at the same time her blood work showed a serious sepsis infection (blood poisoning). Lisa came back into the room about 10 minutes later and told me that they were going to transfer her back down to the ICU and that her current state was critical.

Gretchen had been becoming noticeably more out-of-it since about 3:00 AM and all at once she looked up and said weakly, "I’m going to die!" There wasn’t fear in her eyes or in her voice, but sorrow, and I said reassuringly, "No you won’t, you’ll be okay." She looked at me for a second and then closed her eyes and went unconscious. It was the last time I saw her beautiful eyes or heard her musical voice!

A very sharp critical care nurse came in a few minutes later and prepared her for the transport back down to the ICU. Her condition was very rapidly deteriorating and I suddenly realized that she might not make it. Gretchen had been an LPN and had seen many deaths during her career and was a good judge of when someone was near death, and her assessment of her own condition now filled my heart with foreboding like the sudden approach of a distant thunderstorm!

Three other nurses came into the room and we rolled Gretchen down to the ICU. By now it was probably about 5:15 AM on Wednesday, April 12th. I tried calling Gretchen’s sister, Carrie, who I thought was coming to the hospital to be with Gretchen that day, to let her know what was happening, but I couldn’t get through to her. In the ICU, they told me that they were going to put Gretchen back on a breathing tube, sedate her and start dialysis to counteract the sepsis. I stood, helplessly off to the side, silently watching them work on my wife, dumbfounded at how quickly everything had changed. I set the little statue of St. Raphael that had accompanied Gretchen throughout her hospital stay on a shelf in the room and prayed quietly to St. Raphael, Our Lady and to God for her. The room was now full of about six or seven doctors and nurses whose demeanor was very serious and who were working very quickly to stabilize her condition. Shortly after this I was asked to wait in the visitor waiting room just across the hall from Gretchen’s room because they needed all of the space they could get. I went over to Gretchen, held her hand, gave her a kiss on her forehead and told her that, "Everything will be okay, they are going to give you dialysis to counteract the sepsis."

I tried to sound reassuring and give her hope, but somehow I knew that her last words were true and that she was going home to God! She was now intubated, heavily sedated and unresponsive, her eyes closed in what appeared to be sleep, and whether she could hear me or not, I told her how much I loved her, squeezed her hand and then let go and went to the waiting room. Sometime later Cathy and Carrie came in and I filled them in on what was happening. Gretchen’s two transplant surgeons came in and told us that she needed an emergency operation to repair her small intestine, but that they couldn’t even risk moving her down to the operating room because her sepsis infection was so critical at the moment; they said that she could die in transit on the elevator on her way down to the operating room! They wondered how much her heart could take and asked us if she had any previous heart conditions, and we told them, "No". They told us that Gretchen would be in the ICU for hours on dialysis to control the sepsis and Cathy and Carrie wanted me to go home and get some sleep (I had been up for almost 24 hours), but I wanted to go home and get Margaret so that she could see Momma, in case she was going to die. At home, Margaret quickly started getting ready to go to the hospital and was just heading into the bathroom when the phone rang and Gretchen’s doctor told me that her heart had stopped and that they were performing CPR. Margaret quickly used the bathroom and got her coat on and we were just about out the door, when a second phone call came in and the doctor informed me that Gretchen had been unresponsive to the CPR for over 15 minutes now and asked if I wanted them to continue to try and revive her, and I told them, "No, my wife made it clear to me that she didn’t want that."

(Gretchen told me before her operation, that if they needed to do CPR and that if she was unresponsive after 15 minutes or so, to please not let them continue any longer!) I thanked her doctor for all that she had done and she told me how sorry she was and hung up the phone. They placed her time of death at 1:40 PM on Wednesday April 12, exactly one week after her transplant operation. Margaret took the news bravely and said that she was so sorry for me and I told her how sorry I was for her. We hugged each other and then went off privately to cry alone and to try and comprehend Momma’s death. (I knew that Margaret was just like me and preferred some space to deal with her loss. We both took comfort in each other, but needed to be alone initially!) I went outside on the porch and cried quietly for a long time. I was utterly exhausted after having been up since about 3:00 the previous afternoon and now emotionally drained as well and Margaret wanted me to take a nap, but I didn’t want to sleep – I didn’t want to lose even one second of my last day with Gretchen – each moment of that day still linked me with her in some spiritual and physical way; she was alive when that day started and we were together; I wanted to consciously live and know each moment of my last day with her – I didn’t want to lose any of it to sleep’s oblivion! I sat on our deck and looked at all of the work we had done together to beautify our yard; her gardens, the high arched trellis I made for her, the bird baths and feeders we had put up, etc., and I saw that the tulips I had planted last Fall for her were just starting to sprout up out of the ground and all at once, I needed to write something to her – something expressing my deep love for her, and over the next hour or so, I worked on the following free verse.

To Gretchen The tulips and the daffodils, I planted last Fall for you, my Love, Had only just pushed their tender leaves into the sun, When you traded earthly dust for Heavenly Splendor.

They slept all Winter, Waiting to show you their delicate glory, Longing for the warmth of your radiant smile.

When they bloom, I will lay them on your grave, So that being close to you, my Love, They may glimpse the gardens of Paradise and blush!

(It was very comforting, gave a voice to my terrible loss and a sense of peace while working on this!) And indeed, on Mother’s Day, after the tulips and the daffodils had finally bloomed, Margaret and I took them to the cemetery and laid them on Gretchen’s and Grandma’s graves!

Epilogue

It has been two months now since Gretchen went home to God and Margaret and I are coping with her loss as best we can. Margaret has crammed a lifetime of love, fun and friendship in with her mother over their short 19 years together; in fact, their relationship is closer than several 60-year-old women I know who still are unable to appreciate or bond with their mothers. Margaret loved Momma more than anything, but she is wise and mature beyond her years – she knows what life is all about and she will survive – her Roman/Irish blood will see to that.

Each day I go to visit Gretchen at the cemetery and sit on the beautiful tombstone/bench marking my motherand- father-in-law’s graves. (Gretchen is literally buried at the feet of their graves.) Each day I give thanks for the wisdom of my mother-in-law for erecting a bench as part of their monument. (Aren’t mothers wonderfully wise and practical!) I bring flowers to Gretchen and say a Rosary there and it is very comforting to me, and I plan on doing so until I am physically incapable of such or, of course, when I am away from home on a trip. Afterwards, I tell her what is going on in Margaret’s life and mine, ask her prayers for us and those for whom I have promised to pray, tell her how much I love and miss her and then say goodbye for the day while standing on what will be my own grave. I really must say, that, far from being morbid, there is something very wonderful and marvelous about standing on your own grave that keeps you very focused on what is really important in life. (And, I have to confess that my Springman blood always gets the better of me, and if anyone asks me how I am, right after my daily visits with my wife, I really can’t resist the temptation and reply, "Pretty good, I think, for someone fresh from his own grave!") When Gretchen and I ran the medical transcription business we started out of our home and were very financially strapped, I found the following quote from, " The Musician’s Tale: The Saga of King Olaf" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and put it above her desk to bolster her spirits and give her encouragement. Now I too take comfort in this quote. (Oh, the things we do which come home to roost!…) The dawn is not distant, Nor is the night starless; Love is eternal!

God is still God, and His faith shall not fail us; Christ is eternal!

Angels, are by their very natures, superior to man in every way imaginable… if they can ever be said to envy man, it would be with respect to two things. The first is a woman’s gift of motherhood, of participating directly with God in bringing into this world a living, breathing creature whose end is none other than the Beatific Vision – no angel can do anything like this! And the second is man’s complete and utterly irrevocable gift of love to God of his very existence at the moment of death (his consummatum est!) trusting in His Creator in a way which even the angels must truly marvel at and envy with all their being! Gretchen was incredibly blessed to have given herself to the Love and Mercy of God in both these ways!

The inimitable Mark Twain wrote a humorous bit of prose called, "The Diaries of Adam and Eve", which contains moments of real insight into both the male and the female psyche along with many witty, imaginative incidents in the lives of our first parents. At the end of " Eve’s Diary", Adam, after losing Eve, writes the following beautiful inscription on her grave.

"Wheresoever she was, there was Eden!" I can think of no more apropos inscription expressing what my wife meant to me!

(If Mr. Twain objects to my quoting him without his express permission, he has my full permission to quote any line he wishes from any poem or piece of prose I have ever written, tit for tat, so to speak!) Love is not something which divides you, something which tears you apart like fighting a multi-front war, it is just something multifaceted, yet one, like the diamond in a wedding ring. I have my obligations and I intend to fulfill them to the best of my abilities; I have my promises and I intend to keep them as far as I am able. God will see Margaret, me and all of us through our lives as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow – He will do so, not because He owes us anything, but because He is God and loves each of us more than we can ever fathom!

I long for the day, with all my heart, when all of my obligations and promises have been fulfilled; when my daughter is well established in a happy life, filled with love and unshakable trust in God; when I have accomplished all that God wants of me here on earth and after having fought the good fight, I’m finally allowed to re-climb the winding stair of my dream and, this time, pass that celestial gate and take my true love’s hand again! ■ (Jim Mills - June 21, 2017)

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 15

The Last Word…

Peter Honors Judas

By Father Celatus

The Catholic Church has its holy days, the secular world has its holidays and the modernist church has its sacrileges.

This year there was a convergence among these three entities and their respective activities. As the Catholic Church celebrated All Saints Day and commemorated All Souls Day the secular world celebrated Halloween and the modernist church celebrated the 500th anniversary of the Reformation.

The Reformation celebration was very much like a Halloween party, with Protestants disguised as Christian clergy and a man named Jorge dressed up like a pope. Truth be told, there were more tricks than treats.

Sacrilege is not too strong a word to describe the activities of the modernist church. Consider a most recent example of modernist sacrilege: the commemorative postage stamp newly released by the Vatican on the occasion of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. The stamp depicts Christ Crucified with the two Protestant rebel architects Martin Luther and Philipp Melanchthon beneath the Cross and the city of Wittenberg in the background. A Vatican press release describes the two postage heretics in these words: With a penitential disposition, kneeling respectively on the left and right of the cross, Martin Luther holds the Bible, source and destination of his doctrine, while Philipp Melanchthon, theologian and friend of Martin Luther, one of the main protagonists of the reform, holds in hand the Augsburg Confession, the first official public presentation of the principles of Protestantism written by him.

It requires no more than a quick glimpse of this stamp by any devout Catholic to recognize that it is an unholy parody of the scene of the Crucifixion. The two most sacred individuals who are traditionally represented beneath the Cross, the Blessed Mother and the Apostle John, have been replaced with two heretics. Better to have depicted one of them as the unrepentant thief and the other with a bag of silver!

We should be scandalized but no one should be surprised by this sacrilegious FrancisVatican stamp. We have come to expect as much from a man who claims to be guided by the God of Surprises, which means whatever Jorge wants. And Jorge wants to celebrate the Reformation and honor his ancestral mentors, who pale as heretics by comparison to Jorge the Heretic, who undermines the Church from within.

A most recent area in which Jorge has undermined Church teaching regards Purgatory. It is well known that Martin Luther denied the existence of Purgatory, thereby denying the Suffering Souls therein of any spiritual assistance from the prayers of the Church Militant; not to mention how many souls have been lost the past 500 years because they were misled out of the one true Church and into a false denomination.

For Luther, Purgatory was unnecessary, because of his twisted heretical view that sin is never, ever taken away from the repentant sinner. According to Luther, it is not that sin is removed from the individual but that God overlooks sin in those who profess faith in Christ.

There is no ontological or real change in the person who has been forgiven. No wonder Luther was known to say, "No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to murder or commit adultery thousands of times each day!" A favorite image employed by Luther to illustrate this was that the forgiven sinner is a dung heap covered by snow, beautiful on the outside but filthy inside. This, by the way, is the operative theology in the popular hymn, Amazing Grace: "Amazing grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me." Once a wretch, always a wretch… What about Jorge? Does he believe in Purgatory? Almost certainly he does not. In our last installment of The Last Word we demonstrated that Francis of Rome does not believe in Hell; instead he subscribes to the heresy that souls that fail to achieve the Beatific Vision are annihilated. In this regard Jorge the Heretic shows himself to be heretical even beyond Martin Luther, who believed in Hell for the damned.

With regard to Purgatory, Francis made some remarks recently that are eerily close to the view of Luther: Heaven is not a dream place or an enchanted garden. Paradise is the embrace with God, infinite Love, and we enter it thanks to Jesus, who died on the cross for us. Where Jesus is, there is mercy and happiness; without Him there is cold and darkness. In the hour of death, a Christian repeats to Jesus: "Remember me." And if there isn’t anyone who remembers us, Jesus is there, next to us. He wants to take us to the most beautiful place that exists. He wants to take us there with the little or the lot of good that was in our life, so that nothing is lost of what He already redeemed. And He will bring to the Father’s House all that is in us that still needs to be redeemed: the failures and mistakes of a whole life.

In the Lutheran view, Heaven is populated by snow covered dung heaps, otherwise known as saints. In the Bergolgian view, the redeemed are brought to Heaven as they are, including "all that is in us that still needs to be redeemed: the failures and mistakes of a whole life." Sounds like snow covered dung to me!

While on the topic of Purgatory, on the Feast of All Souls, Jorge the Heretic showed his utter callousness toward the poor souls of World War II on the occasion of his visit to the American cemetery in Nettuno, Italy, wherein are interred 8,000 soldiers who sacrificed their lives to rescue Europe from Mussolini and Hitler. Using prayers for the dead as a pretext, Francis used the occasion to deliver his tirade against war: Hope is so often born and puts down its roots in so many human wounds, in so many human sufferings, and that moment of sorrow, of soreness, of suffering, makes us look to Heaven and say, "I believe that my Redeemer lives, but stop, Lord." And perhaps this is the prayer that we all utter, when we see this cemetery. "I am sure, Lord that these brothers of ours are with you. I am sure," this is what we say. "But, please, Lord, stop.

No more. No more war. No more of this useless butchery." It’s better to hope without this destruction: young men… thousands, upon thousands, upon thousands, upon thousands of broken hopes. "No more, Lord." And we must say this today, when we pray for all the dead, but in this place we pray especially for these young men; today, when the world is once again at war, and is preparing to go to war even more intensely. "No more, Lord. No more." With war, all is lost.

Contrary to what Francis said, those men did not die with broken hopes. They died with the hope that by their own ultimate sacrifice for the common good, the world would be rescued from a most terrible evil. Shame on you, Francis of Rome, for misleading souls from the truth and dishonoring American heroes! ■

New Vatican stamp replaces Our Lady and St. John with two excommunicated heretics

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Wed, 15 Nov 2017 | Cover | Page 16

Abortion boss brags about her abortion and aims to crush pro-life hero David Daleiden in court

Dear Remnant Reader,

Planned Parenthood’s president Cecile Richards turned purple with rage when prolife hero David Daleiden released his undercover videos exposing her g roup’s shocking cr imes.

In response to David’s undercover investigation, Richards lashed out against him in the most devastating way she could. She hired attack-dog lawyers to sue David in federal court for racketeering.

You see, Richards knew that David, who draws only a modest salary, would have to spend a fortune to defend himself against her frivolous lawsuit.

Richards wants to stomp David financially, cripple his Planned Parenthood- exposing project, and ruin his life for good. She’s frantic to stop David because his videos could topple her organization. This would end her $957,952 annual salary. But she has an even bigger concern.

Richards knows that Planned Parenthood’s executives and abortionists could be nailed with fines of $500,000 and 10-year prison sentences for some of the federal crimes David exposed.

Cecile Richards fears David

Visualize Planned Parenthood executives being hauled out of their posh offices in handcuffs to be fingerprinted and have their mug shots taken. Visualize Planned Parenthood abortionists c ooling t heir h eels b ehind bars for 10 years in a federal penitentiary. Visualize Planned Parenthood closing its doors for good. That’s David’s goal!

Could one young pro-lifer with guts, David Daleiden, topple the $1.3 billion-a-year abortion Goliath known as Planned Parenthood? Yes, he could. This is his mission in life. It’s what God created him to do.

In three years David Daleiden has accomplished what the entire pro-life movement was unable to accomplish in four decades: put Planned Parenthood on the defensive!

When Richards slapped David with her devastating lawsuit, David’s response was, "Game on!" He believes h er l awsuit w ill b ackfire on Planned Parenthood by bringing even more attention to the bloody racket he exposed in his undercover videos.

As you may know, it’s illegal to sell aborted babies’ hearts, brains, eyeballs, livers, kidneys, and other body p arts f or p rofit. Yet D avid’s videos document that that’s what Planned Parenthood has been doing!

Shame, shame, shame

Richards has dedicated her life to promoting abortion. She even brags about her abortion, which she admits she had for convenience. What’s more, she encourages others to boast about their abortions by "telling their stories" so that the "shame and stigma" of abortion will end.

But nothing can erase the "shame and stigma" of abortion because killing a baby in the womb is an unspeakable crime.

David exposed Planned Parenthood’s appalling crimes against God, nature, and decency. These crimes are also against federal law.

Incredible as it sounds, Planned Parenthood abortionists admitted to David on video that they still do the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure in order to harvest intact hearts, brains, livers, and other fetal organs to be sold.

How the abortionist harvests organs As you may know, partial birth abortions happen late in pregnancy, sometimes near the moment of birth. Wielding a killing tool, the abortionist dismembers the baby, who can feel pain.

At some point during this hideous procedure, Planned Parenthood abortionists harvested fetal organs for sale!

As David’s attorney, I can tell you that this is a brazen violation of federal laws that carry stiff fines and prison sentences:

z It’s illegal to alter an abortion procedure to obtain fetal organs (18 U.S.C. § 1531)

z It’s illegal to profit from selling fetal tissues (1 U.S.C. § 8)

z It’s illegal to commit partial-birth abortions (18 U.S.C. § 1531) Let me briefly introduce myself to you. I’m Tom Brejcha, the founder and president of the Chicago-based Thomas More Society. For 20 years my organization has defended the defenders o f i nnocent b abies. W e defend innocent pro-lifers like David Daleiden for free so that they can keep on saving babies.

Anti-lifers are piling on to stomp David David i s i nnocent, a nd h e h as strong legal defenses. But he’s in a lot of trouble because Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit isn’t the only one against him.

The National Abortion Federation filed its own racketeering lawsuit against David, and Planned Parenthood abortionists and their business partners at the University of Washington are also suing David in Seattle. Because of space limitations I can’t describe these lawsuits in detail here, except to say that the lawsuits against him require a complex, costly defense.

Without mercy, the attack-dog lawyers are nipping at David’s heels and harassing him with abusive, frivolous litigation. They’ve already gotten a gag-order against him, which prevents him from releasing many more videos. They hope he’ll knuckle under and settle.

But David will never quit. He’ll never settle. He’ll never compromise.

David hired the Thomas More Society because I successfully defended America’s No. 1 pro-life activist Joe Scheidler in a similar federal racketeering lawsuit, which we won by a unanimous vote of the U.S. Supreme Court. David has confidence that my group will successfully defend him, too. That’s why we’re depending on friends like you to support his legal defense.

I’m not asking for myself. I’m asking for David, who needs the strongest possible legal defense, and for the babies David will save by putting the abortionists out of business. If, God forbid, David loses his lawsuits, babies will die. It’s that simple.

W ith t he f inancial s upport o f friends like you, we’ve beaten the false criminal charges filed against David in Houston. But the most dangerous lawsuits against David remain hanging over his head.

Please rush your gift for David’s legal defense. The Thomas More Society runs on a shoestring. Because David’s case is a complex, multi-front battle—with two federal lawsuits in San Francisco, one in Seattle, and 15 false felony charges in California criminal court—the financial needs for David’s defense are enormous.

David Daleiden faces ruin without our help now!

The anti-life lawyers bent on destroying David are outspending us by a wide margin. But victory for David is a must! I’m committed to fight for David for the long haul. The o nly t hing t hat c an s top u s i s shortness of funds.

I’m praying t hat t wo heroes w ill step forward with a tax-deductible sacrifice of $10,000 or more. Could you consider being one of those heroes? If not, please join me in praying that someone else will step forward with a gift like that.

Could you consider making a gift of $1,000, $2,500, or $5,000? The Thomas More Society needs gifts in that range to win a victory for David.

We also need many gifts of $500, $250, or $100—and even more gifts of $50, $35, or whatever you can sacrifice. No gift is too large, and no gift is too small. Please dig deep and send the biggest sacrifice you can. Your gift will help us defend not only David Daleiden but other innocent pro-lifers who depend on the Thomas More Society for free legal help.

Every sacrifice is precious to the Lord—even a widow’s mite, as the Gospel says. Please rush your tax-deductible gift now, made payable to the Thomas More Society.

Very truly yours,

Tom Brejcha, attorney Founder and President Thomas More Society P.S. The abortionists hope you’ll ignore this appeal. They hope David Daleiden’s defense team will run out of funds so they can win their lawsuits by default and ruin David Daleiden. Please don’t let that happen. Please pray for David’s victory, and mail your sacrificial gift right now while the reply coupon is at hand.

Meet David Daleiden, who describes himself as the child of a crisis pregnancy. His 30-month undercover investigation exposed a shocking scandal of illegal trafficking in aborted babies’ body parts. The evidence is so damning that it could topple Planned Parenthood and put its abortionists and executives behind bars. When Cecile Richards sued David in federal court, he replied, "Game on!" David depends on friends like you to support his legal defense. He says, "Please send your tax-deductible gift to the Chicago-based Thomas More Society."

Meet Cecile Richards, the president of the abortion Goliath known as Planned Parenthood. She boasts about her abortion. She and her husband already had three children, and "that was as big as our family needed to be," she said. Richards slapped pro-life hero David Daleiden with an unjust federal racketeering lawsuit, and she hired smart, attack-dog lawyers to rip David to shreds in court. She wants to bankrupt David with a ruinous judgment.

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 11/15/2017