A Spirituality of Advent

NOVEMBER 30, 2018 

BY FR. DAVID VINCENT MECONI, S.J

Advent is a time of preparation. It has many parallels to Lent: we don the purple, we suppress the Gloria (awaiting the angels to sing it again for the first time at Midnight Mass), and we are given weeks to allow the Holy Spirit to prepare our hearts to receive the Son of God. While Lent prepares us to receive him resurrected and glorified, we prepare now to meet him humble and needy. This is an invitation that goes out to all the world year after year. The liturgical seasons call us all back yet again. The great Benedictine liturgist Dom Virgil Michel (1890–1938) saw how we Christians need to repeat these liturgical times over and over. In fact, Michel wrote that committing ourselves each year to the movement of the Church’s calendar is

in harmony with our human nature . . . the liturgical cycle is repeated year after year, just as the divine sacrifice is repeated in the Church day after day. As we are unable to exhaust our capacity for the Divine in a day or a year, the Church of Christ, with the infinite patience and the tender love of her divine Founder, continues to present to us the divine means of living Christ, thereby truly fulfilling her mission of achieving the ever increasing plenitude of the Redeemer. It is for this reason that the recurring daily and annual cycles of the liturgy never grow old for those who enter into their participation with the understanding and love of their divine Head. Ancient as the hills, the liturgy is still ever new, it has ever a new store of the divine life to hold out to our grasp, and with the recurring years the realization of its meaning grows ever richer. (The Liturgy of the Church: According to the Roman Rite, 91–92)

The sacred events which these days celebrate may have occurred in history only once, but we mercurial mortals need to revisit them again and again in order to appropriate what we can of these infinite mysteries. We are the Church on pilgrimage and until we “get it right,” this Church will never tire of calling us back to continue to live out the mysteries of Christ in our own life.

Every action that Christ instituted for our salvation is transmitted to us liturgically so as to be appropriated by each of us mystically. Think of the “overshadowing” of the Holy Spirit when Our Lady began to give human life to the Christ Child. That same action is continued in the Epiclesis of the Mass when the priest’s hands “overshadow” the bread and the wine, which are then beginning to be transformed from that which was once natural and impersonal into a supernatural person. That Eucharistic action is performed solely for the sake of the sanctification of Christ’s Church — consecrated not simply to be adored but to be assimilated into the lives of each present. Again, this is key to understanding what we do Sunday after Sunday, season after season: the historical is transmitted by the liturgical for the sake of the mystical.

This is why Saint John Paul the Great saw in Advent a sign of the Church in any season. He pointed us to the two great sacraments of Christ’s incessant Presence: Reconciliation and the Most Holy Eucharist. Is this not what Bethlehem is all about? For here the enfleshed Lord reconciles sinful man to perfect God, becoming our living bridge between heaven and earth, between divinity and humanity:

Nevertheless, it is certain that the Church of the new Advent, the Church that is continually preparing for the new coming of the Lord, must be the Church of the Eucharist and of Penance. Only when viewed in this spiritual aspect of her life and activity is she seen to be the Church of the divine mission, the Church in statu missionis, as the Second Vatican Council has shown her to be. (John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis §20)

As God’s chosen ones “on the way,” we must insist on the quiet of Advent. As a pilgrim people, it is too easy to get caught up in the stresses and demands of these days, as lovely as purchasing presents and decorating the house is. Can we use these four weeks of Advent to make four holy hours, to get to Confession at least once, daily Mass when possible? We must show the world that Christmas starts at Christmas and that the Lord himself asks us to use this time to purify our ears so we can hear him and to sit peacefully before a God who comes to us so humbly and quietly.

C.S. Lewis knew that this is precisely how God chooses to come to us. In one of his Screwtape Letters, those missives from a high-ranking demon below, Screwtape by name, to his nephew Wormwood above, the devils on earth are warned that there is something God refuses to use to woo us to his side. There is something that God thinks too unfair, too overwhelming of our free will, namely his absolute and irrefutable Presence. He thus calibrates his greatness to our smallness, measures his Absoluteness to our numerous contingencies: “the Irresistible and the Indisputable are the two weapons which the very nature of His scheme forbids Him to use. Merely to override a human will (as His felt presence in any but the faintest and most mitigated degree would certainly do) would be for Him useless. He cannot ravish. He can only woo” (Screwtape Letters, no. 8). The Lord enters the world as courteously and as politely as he can; he will enter our souls as gentlemanly as he can: without force and without demands, but simply with a gift to be received only when we are ready.

To be ready, the Church offers us these days. These are the days that every human heart has longed for, the time every created soul awaits God in the flesh. The Catechism of the Catholic Church brings us into Advent by inviting us into the Jewish expectation of the Messiah as well as focusing our spiritual lives on Christ’s increasing and our decreasing:

When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes present this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Savior’s first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming. By celebrating the precursor’s birth and martyrdom, the Church unites herself to his desire: “He must increase, but I must decrease.” (CCC 524)

To decrease demands that we first detect those places of our lives which do not want to receive the Christ Child. From which areas of our existence do we prefer to keep the Lord away? To decrease means not to obliterate ourselves, as if we were distractions or nuisances before the Father; it means to allow those selfish tendencies and disordered affections to be transformed as the Lord of all Life draws near. This is ultimately what makes a martyr like John the Baptist — not the bloody wounds, but the other-centered soul.

I would also invite you to think of four different activities marking the four weeks of Advent. Possibly,

1. Praying a nightly rosary with family and friends; having that often uncomfortable conversation with loved ones and neighbors about “praying together”;
2. Finding a “Giving Tree” and taking the time to find presents for needy children;
3. Making a holy hour, allowing yourself to be at Bethlehem as that quiet God-made-flesh simply lies on the snowy white linen and asks you to offer yourself as he has done the same for you in this glorious Incarnation;
4. Spending some extra time in spiritual reading, especially as regards Our Lady. What happened to Mary months and months ago was known only to her. She is the humble Tabernacle who housed our Lord until Christmas, when she let the rest of the world in on her cosmic secret: God has become a babe! The Annunciation (Lk 1:26–38) is the Gospel proclaimed most often throughout the liturgical year. Ponder and relish the exchange between Mary and Gabriel: What did she feel when God broke into her life’s plans this way? What did she understand was going to happen?

In particular, I would like to encourage each and everyone of you to purchase Fr. William Saunders’s new book, Celebrating a Merry Catholic Christmas: A Guide to the Customs and Feast Days of Advent and Christmas, which TAN Books out of Charlotte, NC, just released. It makes great spiritual reading and an equally excellent gift, especially for those who have left the Church but do not find Christmas particularly threatening.

Ignatius of Loyola had a great devotion to the Newborn Jesus and begged Our Lady to let him hold the Child in his arms. Ignatius even waited an entire year after his ordination in Florence to celebrate his first Mass in Rome. Why so? He waited so long in order to travel so as to meet the Lord in his hands for the first time directly over the boards of the original crib of Christ, which is still housed under a side altar in the Church of Maria Maggiore in Rome. Let us have that same devotion, to hold the Christ Child in all areas of our lives. God has come to earth because he loves us, and he loves us so much he continually offers us this season of Advent, the season of allowing us once again to enter into the quiet and peace of Bethlehem.

FILED UNDER: EDITORIAL TAGGED WITH: ADVENT, C.S. LEWIS, CHRISTMAS, LITERATURE, LITURGICAL YEAR, PASTORAL ISSUES, POPE JOHN PAUL II, PRAYER

STEVE JALSEVAC

• S

BLOGSFAITH, FREEDOM, HOMOSEXUALITY Fri Nov 30, 2018 – 7:58 pm EST

  Christianity, Faith, Gay Movement, Homosexuality, Islam, Islamism, Peter Kreeft

November 30, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) –Five years ago I was privileged to conduct a fast-paced, 9-minute video interview with renowned Boston College professor and prolific author, Peter Kreeft. It was an amazing interview, with the professor quickly responding to each of the 11 questions with profound insights. I was impressed that, not at all knowing beforehand what I was going to ask him, he came back each time with what seemed to be the best possible answer to challenging questions on difficult subjects. 

There have been massive developments on the two issues that were the subject of the questions since the time of the interview. Few could have predicted that things could have gone as far as they have in so short a period of time – but Peter Kreeft warned us. 

John-Henry Westen wrote the article below on the interview, BUT, I would strongly suggest watching the video to obtain the best understanding and impact of the interview. It is even more relevant now than it was in 2013. 

Why the simultaneous rise of homosexuality and Islam? An interview with Peter Kreeft

In a recent interview with LifeSiteNews.com co-founder Steve Jalsevac, famed Catholic philosopher and Boston College professor Peter Kreeft noted key similarities in the homosexual activist movement and radical Islam which have led to their ascendency in recent times. 

Asked about the simultaneous rise of militant Islam and the homosexual activist movement despite their opposing ideologies, Kreeft replied: “They’re the only two movements in Western civilization that will fight and die for their beliefs.”  

“It is an amazing paradox that they’re opposites in almost every way, and yet they’re similar in that they will still fight,” added Kreeft. “Christians are supposed to fight too, the notion of spiritual warfare, the true meaning of jihad – a war against sin rather than flesh and blood. This is central to Christianity and we’ve lost it, and therefore opposite forces are entering the vacuum.”C

Kreeft explained that as the Christian faith has weakened in the West, it has caused a vacuum.

“Well, in Western civilization, at least, there is certainly a moral and religious decline…we’re losing the faith. Europe is already almost lost,” he said. “Nature abhors a vacuum, spiritually as well as physically. So when the Faith weakens, another faith enters, because no one can live without faith, and Islam is a very strong faith. It has its good points; it has its bad points. But when we withdraw from the battlefield, someone else enters. It’s as simple as that.”

Asked specifically about the reason for the rise of the homosexual activist movement, Dr. Kreeft replied:

Because we became sheep. We said, “Abuse us. We’re polite. We’ll smile at you. We are tolerant of everything.” When people are that way, someone who has principles, bad or good, enters. We so worship equality that we are afraid to be different, to be distinctive, to have a distinctive message. And equality is a good defensive weapon, but it has no offense in it. We need equal rights to protect ourselves, but we need something much deeper than equality: We need distinctiveness, we need identity. And if we abandon that, others will come in and take over.

Kreeft stressed however, that in confronting homosexuality Christians are being loving, in the truest definition of the word.

“Love fights. Love cares. Love discriminates. And therefore there is in Scripture, very clearly, a thing called the ‘wrath of God’. God hates all enemies of love as the doctor hates the cancer that’s killing his beloved patient. If you really love a human being you will hate all the dehumanizing forces that are harmful to that human being,” he said.

“If on the other hand you don’t really love a human being but just tolerate a human being, then you will hate nothing,” Kreeft added. “So, love and hate go together. Love of a human being, no matter who he is, and hate of a human being, no matter who he is, are exact opposites, they are black and white. But love of all humans and hate of all sins – that goes together.”

How can Christianity experience a renewal in North America and Europe?  Kreeft answered in his characteristic rapid fire style stating simply: “It must recapture its essence, its identity. It must return to Jesus it must do what Vatican II did – go back to the sources and plant the roots in the only possible foundation.”

See the Peter Kreeft website.

Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., is a professor of philosophy at Boston College and at the King’s College (Empire State Building), in New York City. He is a regular contributor to several Christian publications, is in wide demand as a speaker at conferences, and is the author of over 67 books including:
Handbook of Christian Apologetics 
Christianity for Modern Pagans
Fundamentals of the Faith

NOVEMBER 26, 2018

50 Years of Effete and Infertile Liturgical Culture Is Enough

ANTHONY ESOLEN

CRISIS MAGAZINE

Last Sunday I was away from home; this normally means trouble. It means I do not attend Mass at the chapel of Saint Thomas More College, which is where I teach, nor at Northeast Catholic College, which is in the town where we live. It means I must hear Mass, or have Mass drummed into my ears, somewhere else. I am like a cash-strapped player on the Monopoly board, staring down seven hotels, a railroad, and a utility company, and hoping against hope to land on “Chance,” which might yet kill me, but might also give me a breather.

I rolled the dice and landed at the “hotel” in Marvin Gardens. When I entered, the priest was stationed in the vestibule, ready to greet people on their way in—and perhaps offer to carry their luggage. I do not want to be greeted on my way in. I want to prepare and to pray, which is never easy for me because my thoughts wander.

The inside of the church resembled the lobby of a three-star hotel trying to be a four-star. Its shape was a flattened ellipse, with its entry on the broad side, so that there was more room from left to right than from back to front. There was no sacristy. Instead there was a large teardrop-shaped peninsula, like the Peloponnese, extending from the front and far into where the people would be seated. This Peloponnese was raised a few feet from the level of the front pews, and in the middle of the teardrop, sort of near Sparta, stood the altar, with the priest’s chair stationed ten feet behind it. At Athens, to the right, stood a lectern (which served as the pulpit) facing neither the people in front nor the priest, but maybe something beyond them in the distance, like Crete.

A church lady stood at the lectern and began to “announce things,” including the name of the priest. She also instructed us that at Our Lady of Perpetual Motion, we do not kneel after Communion—might this be lest we show undue honor to the Lord? We were to remain standing until Father was seated, in order to show our unity with those whose order-numbers were still to be called.

At Thomas More, I am teaching a course in poetry and liturgy, called Coram Angelis—In the Presence of the Angels. We have been reading Monsignor Ronald Knox’s series of sermons for the schoolgirls at Aldenham, called The Mass in Slow Motion. It is a missive from another universe, like a letter you might find intact under the rubble of a bombed-out city. It is quite charming. Monsignor Knox describes his thoughts and feelings in a tone that ranges from the jocular to the quietly profound, as he moves from one part of the Mass to the next. He gives no thought to being special. When he gets to the place in the canon where he is to insert “Pius” for the pope’s N. and “Moriarty” for the bishop’s N., he notes that the N’s suggest that he the priest is eminently replaceable by somebody else; he is just an instrument that God is using for his purposes. His simile for it is a pattern for humility:

You know how they put down little reflectors of red glass at the corner of the road where there is a cross-roads, or where some sharp turn makes it dangerous; and as your car comes up at night, the light of the headlamps is caught by these and reflected back? Well, the priest ought to think of himself as one little piece of red glass; the moment when he consecrates, when he offers sacrifice, is the moment in which the prayer of the universal Church is caught up and reflected in him. Only for a moment; then he goes back to being a dull, ordinary piece of glass again.

There is no such sense of self-effacement at Our Lady of Bustle and Business. We name ourselves, we hear the name of the priest, we hear the names of the servers, and I believe we heard the name of the Church Lady. Then—may God help us—we begin to sing. Or, rather, the Church Lady, a coloratura soprano, sings into the Athenian microphone, and the congregation mumbles along.

The Second Vatican Council’s document on the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, says that Latin is the language of the Church; there was no Latin. It says that the pipe organ is best fitted for worship for its grandeur; there was no music on the organ, there was a woman playing the piano, in that style befitting a hotel lounge or a posh funeral parlor—all tinklety-tinkly ninths and elevenths and swoons. SC says that the people in charge of the music should avail themselves of the vast treasury of Christian hymns; there was one true hymn while the other three were show tunes—slovenly, effeminate, unfit for the liturgy, and impossible to sing for a congregation of both sexes; but it didn’t matter, since Beverly Sills was at the microphone, drowning out every other voice, and holding the whole notes at the end of each verse as long, long, long as her breath held out, or until the consummation of the world, whichever came first.

It would be hard to find the tabernacle in the lobby of the Sheraton, and it was hard to find it in Our Lady Seat of Wellness. I never located it. There was a large crucifix, and Stations of the Cross, sufficiently distant and small so as not to disrupt the feeling of blankness that the “lobby” engendered. This was unfortunate, because I was there with two men of the Eastern Orthodox Church and they were looking here and there for something, i.e., something that would suggest the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I did defy the directive to remain standing after Communion, but it did me no good. The Athenian singer broke into a second song, one not listed on the board, and it prevailed against my attempt to pray a customary Litany of the Sacred Heart. “Heart of Jesus, substantially united to” eagle’s wings or something.

Sacrosanctum Concilium says that silence should be respected, but there was no silence. How could there be? We are to be silent before the holy, but at Saint Secular of Southern California there was no sense of the holy. “There’s nothing more splendid in the Mass,” says Monsignor Knox of the moment when “the priest bends down and drops his voice to a low murmur: Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth.” It’s as if he “has reached the very door of the heavenly temple, and takes one look through the keyhole. And he says ‘SSSH! I’ve seen it! The glory of God, that fills earth and Heaven, shining in front of me. Take off your shoes, and let’s go in very quietly, on tiptoe, quite close.’” These are not the words of a man for whom divine worship is a hobby. Christ is about to come down to us in the holy sacrament.

Christ did come down to us in the sacrament. That was why I was there: to hear the gospel and to receive the Lord. Yet everything about this Mass made it as difficult as it possibly could have been for me to do those things. The building, the lack of art, the lousy songs, the showboating pianist and soprano, the do-nothing servers in their jammies, the replacement of the Nicene Creed with the Apostles’ Creed, the meet-and-greet, the repression of kneeling, the absent tabernacle, the Catholic Jacuzzi babbling all the while, and the applause at the conclusion of the recessional—everything said, loud and clear, “We are having fun, and this is how we like it.”

Here I might say that to celebrate the Mass in such a way is to betray the explicit directives of Sacrosanctum Concilium. I have since read the document in the original. And I am struck by the strange inability of the council fathers to do the very thing they were urging the Church to do, which was to take stock of the times. Again and again, they instruct bishops and priests to adapt the life of the Church, including her places and manner of worship, to the times and to the characters of the various peoples of the world. What they missed, and what was right in front of them to be noticed, was that modernism as an ideology, with mass entertainment and mass education as its main engines, was obliterating cultures everywhere. Romano Guardini had written of this loss in The End of the Modern World. It was therefore the task of the Church not to be enculturated in a vacuum, which would be akin to emptying herself of her peculiar character, but to be herself and thereby to form culture, i.e., to bring culture once again to people who were rapidly losing their hold on all cultural memory.

This did not happen. It would have required profound meditation upon the meaning of culture, by churchmen steeped in the learning of three thousand years of Jewish and Christian arts and letters, and of the Greco-Roman matrix wherein the Church, by the providence of God, was brought to birth. However, schools and universities were abandoning that learning by throwing it overboard as ballast. When Sacrosanctum Concilium urges bishops to require seminarians to take courses in liturgy, my alarm bells ring. Who was to teach such courses? What was their musical training? Were they proficient in Latin and Greek? What did they know about poetry in general, and religious lyric in particular? What did they know about sacred art and architecture?

In several places, Sacrosanctum Concilium betrays a modernist preference for what is called simplicity but what is often just bareness. I am aware that the Church has often had to prune back an excessive exuberance in the arts, so that the visible would not overmaster the invisible. I know that, at Trent, the Fathers were careful to advise that choral music should not drown the words the choristers were singing. Yet there was no danger—none—that a Church surrounded by modernism would be too exuberant or too gaudy. The danger was, and is, all on the other side. Or, rather, we now have the worst of both worlds. We have neither the magnificent intricacies of the Baroque, nor the stark simplicity of the Grande Chartreuse; we have the showy and tacky, and a spiritual vacuity.

“By their fruits ye shall know them,” said Jesus; fifty years is long enough for us to pass a fair judgment. Sacrosanctum Concilium is an orthodox document. But I wonder if it would have done better to have said, “Let the Mass be said sometimes in the vernacular, let there be three readings from Scripture for Sunday Masses, and let most of the priest’s prayers be said aloud.” This would have required no concession to modernist iconoclasm. Instead, we have endured fifty years of lousy church buildings, lousy music, lousy art, banal language, lousy schooling, dead and dying religious orders, and an unfaithful faithful whose imaginations are formed more by Hollywood than by the Holy One. We have been stuck in cultural and ecclesial neutral, i.e., rolling backward and downhill, or neuter, effete and infertile.

There is only one thing to do: for the future of the Church, we must build again, drawing on those cultural accomplishments that are timeless, in the service of Christ, who is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, in saecula saeculorum.

Tagged as liturgical abuse, Liturgy, Monsignor Ronald Knox, post-Vatican II Crisis,Sacrosanctum Concilium

FATHER GEORGE W. RUTLER’S WEEKLY MESSAGE    A bishop condescendingly asked John Henry Newman, “Who are the laity?” To which the great saint, and, one hopes, future Doctor of the Church, replied that the Church would look foolish without them.    The same might be said of those who are consecrated in the Religious life. The difference is that most of the Church consists in laypeople, while monks, nuns, and other consecrated Sisters and Brothers are a small fraction of the People of God, but are needed to remind all the baptized that our true home is in heaven. The distinctive habits that they wear are reminders of their role.   Since the Second Vatican Council, many ill-advised Religious have abandoned conventual life and even those Religious habits. It was an abuse of the Council’s modest prescriptions for updating the consecrated life, and in fact, it often fostered dissent from the Faith itself. Since 1965 the number of women Religious in the United States has dropped from 181,421 to fewer than 47,000 today. Eighty percent are older than 70, so the death rattle is ominous in at least 300 of the 420 Religious institutes. Yet, many refuse to admit their mistakes, rather like the definition of insanity: “Doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.”   But there is also a dramatic upsurge in Orders that live the traditional counsels, teaching, caring for the poor and sick, and not wasting their time in “workshops” on climate change and nuclear weapons.   Some of these new communities are growing dramatically: the Dominican Sisters of the Sacred Heart, the Carmelite Sisters of the Most Sacred Heart of Los Angeles, and our own New York-based Sisters of Life (who share our parish’s hospitality), among others. The Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, whose mother house is in Michigan, have grown in just twenty years to more than 140 Sisters with an average age of 32. They teach in preschool through college throughout the United States and this coming year will open another large convent in Texas for 115 sisters.   A choir of these Sisters in their traditional habits was invited to sing at the lighting of the National Christmas Tree in Washington. This is a big change from just a few years ago when an earlier Administration threatened to sue the venerable Little Sisters of the Poor for maintaining Catholic moral principles.   The Advent season bids us to think more deeply about Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell. The Religious are consecrated to remind the faithful about these Four Last Things. “See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess” (Deuteronomy 30:15-16.).

Sanhedrin Invites 70 Nations to Hanukkah Dedication of Altar for the Third Temple

{Read this and think about the plan of God that His Son, Jesus Christ, would be sacrificed in an unbloody memorialization of the bloody sacrifice of Jesus on the altar which takes place on our Catholic altars every time an Alter Christus offers the Sacrifice of the Mass.}

By Adam Eliyahu BerkowitzNovember 29, 2018 , 4:07 pm

The people that walked in darkness have seen a brilliant light; On those who dwelt in a land of gloom Light has dawned. Isaiah 9:1 (The Israel Bible™)

Special showbreads are brought as offerings by the Kohanim (priests). (Courtesy Sanhedrin)

The nascent Sanhedrin released a declaration to the 70 nations for Hanukkah to be read at a ceremony in Jerusalem on the last day of the holiday. The ceremony will include the consecration of a stone altar prepared for use in the Third Temple. The declaration is intended as an invitation to the nations to participate in the Temple and to receive its blessings. 

The altar is currently in the form of loose stone blocks ready to be transported to the Temple Mount and stored in a manner that will enable them to be transported and assembled at a moment’s notice. When complete, the altar will be a square nine feet on each side and five feet tall, and includes a ramp for the priests to ascend (ACTUALLY THE RAMP IS TOO STEEP FOR THE PRIESTS TO WALK UP IT, IT IS THERE TO ENABLE THE SACRIFICIAL ANIMALS TO WALK UP TO THE ALTAR SURFACE WHERE THEY WILL BE KILLLED)  The decision to prepare the blocks and all the details of their composition is the result of a long study performed by the members of the Sanhedrin in conjunction with the Temple Institute. The stones are made of aerated concrete and are fit for use in the Temple. There are plans underway to prepare a new set made of actual stones which are considered the ideal material from which to build the altar. (THE STONES WILL BE IMPERMEABLE SO THAT THE BLOOD OF THE SACRIFICED ANIMAL CAN BE EASILY WASHED OFF OF THE ALTAR.}

A full-dress reenactment of the Korban Olah Tamid (the daily offering) will take place. Kohanim (Jewish men of the priestly caste descended from Aaron) wearing Biblically mandated garb will lead the ceremony. The location is still unclear as the Jerusalem municipality is weighing security concerns that a Jewish ceremony of this sort will precipitate Muslim violence if performed in view of the Temple Mount. Also at question is whether the Kohanim will ritually slaughter a lamb or whether prepared meat will be brought. Though the Sanhedrin has received all of the necessary permits from the government organizations in charge of slaughtering animals, they are still waiting for the municipality to approve that part of the ceremony. In either case, the meat will be roasted on the newly consecrated altar. 

The priests will also perform the korban mincha in which the grain offerings that accompany the korban tamid are offered along with nesachim, a wine libation. 

A large menorah will be lit as part of the ceremony. Rabbi Hillel Weiss explained the significance of the ceremony being held on the last day of Hanukkah. 

“According to Jewish tradition, the tabernacle and Aaron the Priest were consecrated for service on the last day of Hanukkah,” Rabbi Weiss explained to Breaking Israel News. “It is fitting that we should invite the nations to the ceremony since Hanukkah is about bringing light to the darkness. The Jews were meant to do this for the entire world,” he said, quoting the Prophet Isaiah.

For He has said: “It is too little that you should be My servant In that I raise up the tribes of Yaakov And restore the survivors of Yisrael: I will also make you a light of nations, That My salvation may reach the ends of the earth.” Isaiah 49:6

“The Jews were brought back to Israel for the purpose of spreading the light to the nations,” Rabbi Weiss said. “As the sages instructed the Jews to pray every day, ‘A new light will shine upon Zion,and we should all merit to this light very soon.’ This light is Torah, the light of Torah which comes from Zion, which reveals the hidden aspects of God.”

The ceremony will also be part of the Sanhedrin’s ongoing effort to establish a Bible-based international organization to replace the United Nations. To this end, they charged Rabbi Yoel Schwartz, president of the Sanhedrin’s Court for the Noahides, with preparing a declaration that would describe the spiritual basis for the organization. Rabbi Schwartz is one of the most respected Torah scholars of this generation, a prolific writer, and winner of the Moskowitz Prize for Zionism.

The text of the declaration is printed below:

The Song of Israel and the World – Sanhedrin’s Declaration

“The name Yisrael, by which Jacob was called and all of his descendants after him, indicates the connection of the people of Israel to the Creator, and this connection is also strengthened through the singing of the Song of God, which is achieved through the Book of Psalms. The highest purpose of song is to praise the Creator. 

It is for this purpose that on the 25th of Elul (Sept. 3), the Sanhedrin and the Mikdash Educational Center hosted the World Creation Concert as a musical gathering for all nations to give thanksgiving to the creator, to share with all mankind the gratitude for His mercies that fill creation. All of humanity needs to prepare for the day that the Lord will reign in Zion, when they too will make pilgrimage to Jerusalem to take their part in the Temple service.

The sages teach us that the world stands on three things: on Torah, on the Temple Service, and on acts of loving-kindness. Lacking the Temple service the world is like a throne that stands on two legs.

We are very close to the time about which the prophets of Israel prophesied that the God of the world who created everything will be called by the world in the name of the God of Israel, for only the people of Israel remained attached to Him.

Humanity created religions such as Christianity and Islam that served as instruments throughout history to bring humanity closer to this great day, when everyone would recognize the God of the world that was revealed on Mount Sinai in a desert that belongs to no people. It should be emphasized that the Ten Commandments that were given at that time belong to all the nations. They were heard all over the world in 70 languages so that every nation would hear these things in their own language, the echo of things. This is as witnessed by the reality that it is the only book in the world printed in every language that has a printed book and was hinted at by the Prophet Zephaniah. 

For then I will make the peoples pure of speech, So that they all invoke Hashem by name And serve Him with one accord. Zephaniah 3:9

At that time, we will all serve the one Creator and fulfill the moral obligations incumbent on all mankind. This was the case since the beginning of creation, when he charged Adam with these obligations, and once again he charged those who left the ark after the Flood and Noah with his sons, and again at Mount Sinai, giving to humanity seven ironclad rules.

These are the seven messages of the Creator of the world to humanity known as the Seven Noahide Laws:

Belief in God: He who created everything. There is none besides Him and no one should turn away from Him.

Blessing Hashem (God, literally ‘the name’): Respecting the Creator and the sages who are familiar with His Torah, and respecting the places of worship where the Torah is learned and prayers are recited to him. It is forbidden, God forbid, to speak harshly against them or to curse them.

Stealing: The preservation of the rights of others to property and honor and body and not to desire to take anything belonging to others that is not for sale.

Laws: To establish courts to judge justice and to direct society and obey the orders and decisions of the courts.

Killing: Do not shorten the lives of people, including the lives of the terminally ill. The opposite is also true; to invest efforts to heal diseases and maintain health.

Have mercy on creatures: Not to be cruel to animals. One of the most forbidden acts is eating the organ or limb from a live animal. The animal must first be killed in a way that is less distressing such as cutting the neck.

Prohibition of prostitution: The mitzvah (Bible commandment) to build a proper family life. It is a severe prohibition to commit adultery with a married woman. It is also forbidden to perform a same-sex marriage. Also forbidden is sexual intercourse with animals and homosexuality.

Therefore, anyone who receives upon himself all of these seven rules in front of a rabbinic court has a special status in Judaism. Even though they are not Jewish, they have entered into a full partnership in the service of God. 

God’s call to return his people to his land will show that the belief of some nations that Israel was in exile as a punishment was a mistaken belief. The exile was only in order for Israel to serve as an example to the nations for serving God. Were it not for the exile, Muhammad would not have known God and would have been idolatrous like his other brothers. Were the Jews not in Rome, the  idolaters would have remained to this day. The Torah was translated into Greek, and the nations copied the word of God because there were Jews in the Egyptian exile.

Now, it is time for the Creator’s people to return to their land, and from here light will come forth to the world. And when we merit it, and the Temple will be restored and built on its place, then even more will all the nations realize that the time has come to worship God. The crisis of religion today is a preparation for the true worship of the Lord.

In conclusion: Anyone who wants to accompany us, to be a partner in serving God, and to connect with his people, must be a believer in the God who was revealed at Sinai, and to be as the people of Israel who were present there and preserved this status to this day. 

We see God’s hand clearly in the miracle of the Jewish state that arose again two thousand years after its destruction. It is incumbent upon all those who accompany us to try as much as possible to spread the belief according to the prophets, just as the Jews guarded and observed their words and to prevent, God forbid, the spread of man-made religions. Those who do so must also aid the Jews in observing what God commanded them. God required of the Jews an additional amount, more than he required from the other nations, since the Jews will serve as the priests of the mankind. And the other nations should not, God forbid, try to influence his people to join their religions.”

Rabbi Dov Stein, Secretary of the Sanhedrin, described the dire need to replace the United Nations.

“We now live in an era when threats are global and not limited to one country,” Rabbi Stein told Breaking Israel News. “This is true of weapons, environmental issues, and even social issues. The solutions must come from a universal effort. The United Nations has failed in its mandate by rejecting God as the creator and the Noahide Laws common to all of mankind.”

As an example, Rabbi Stein described the resolution being drafted to make abortions and assisted suicides a “universal human right” which the rabbi said violated the Noahide law prohibiting murder.

“They have rejected the basics of humanity that were given at Sinai. We have to re-educate the world in order to address these issues. We need a universal organization that will return to the Bible, re-educate the world. This is not a religious initiative. This is a national initiative with each nation bringing its special aspect, all nations joining together in Jerusalem, where the world was created.”FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestEmailWhatsAppCopy Link

With the removal of Cardinal Donald Wuerl as Archbishop of Washington, D,C, by Francis the Merciful and his appointment by Francis as Administrator of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. pending the selection by Francis of the next Archbishop of Washington, D.C. speculation is widespread as to who Francis will select for the appointment.  Some publications have already named the prelate that they figure has the best chance of being selected by Francis: Archbishop Gregory Michael Aymond, presently Archbishop of New Orleans.

Why Archbishop Aymond?  One of the principal reasons to believe that he will be Francis’ choice is because the two American members of the Congregation for Bishops, Cardinals Wuerl and Cupich, would find Aymond’s record in New Orleans prior to the years he spent as Bishop of Austin, make him acceptable to the Lavender Mafia, which, along with Wuerl and Cupich, constitute the closest advisers to Francis.

Here is some of the background of Archbishop Gregor Michael Aymond. 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Notre Flame Seminary?

By Don Quixote de la Santa Fé

   Jousts with windmills – and been known to win a few

“But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go and rebuke him between thee and him alone.  If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.  And if he will not hear thee:  take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.  And if he will not hear them:  tell the church.  And if he will not hear the church:  let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.  Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth shall be bound also in heaven:  and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth shall be loosed also in heaven.”  [Douay-Rheims, Matthew 18: 15-18]  

   

There is an unresolved allegation that at one time Notre Dame Seminary (New Orleans, Louisiana) was also known as “Notre Flame.”  This is an allegation that The Most Reverend Gregory Michael Aymond, Archbishop of New Orleans, is best qualified to confirm or deny.  

In the spirit of fraternal correction – Matthew 18:15-18 – this allegation demands answers from all concerned.  

The Allegation

There is an unresolved allegation that at one time Notre Dame Seminary (New Orleans. Louisiana) was also known as “Notre Flame.”  In 2002 author Michael S. Rose wrote:  

“According to former seminarians and recently ordained priests, this “gay subculture” is so prominent at certain seminaries that these institutions have earned nicknames such as Notre Flame (for Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans) and Theological Closet (for Theological College at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.). St. Mary’s Seminary in Baltimore has earned the nickname the “Pink Palace.” 

In this regard, in 2002 Michael Rose also wrote:  

“In the late 1980s, Stephen Carrigee was active in an organization at Louisiana State University called Catholicism on Campus when he felt called to pursue a vocation to the priesthood with the Archdiocese of New Orleans. “A number of the more experienced members warned me that I should purposely act effeminate and talk with a lisp if I really wanted to be sponsored by New Orleans,” said Carrigee. “At first I thought they were being funny, but they were dead serious because they knew from personal experience.” ⁴⁴⁴

Author Michael Rose repeated his “Notre Flame” allegation in an opinion published in the Dallas Morning News on October 18, 2005.  Rose started his opinion by asking, “Are gay priests the problem?”  To this Rose replied, “Yes, when they’re part of the church’s gay subculture, the Lavendar Mafia.”  In this opinion Rose went on to say:

“In my own study of seminary life over the past three decades, I have found that many heterosexual men give up their seminary studies precisely for this reason, leaving behind a student body gradually swollen with homosexuals.  I’m not talking about the presence of a few gay-oriented men who want to live chastely, but rather the institutionalization of a gay subculture that has earned some seminaries nicknames such as the Pink Palace, Notre Flame (emphasis supplied), and Theological Closet.” 

“One aspect of this gay subculture of both priests and seminarians is that too many men who want to be chaste, whether gay or straight, are propositioned, harassed or even molested – occurrences that are more common than one might think.  This doesn’t aid the moral and spiritual development of the church’s future clergy.  Rather, it fosters a pathological pattern of living.” 

“This is not simply about homosexuality or homosexual acts.  It’s about an agenda and subculture that systematically undermine celibacy, a state to which the Roman Catholic priest is called.  This gay subculture is also in direct conflict with the teachings of the church.  Those involved are promoting this conflict and escalating the problem.” 

Sadly, none of the principals have stepped forward to deny or refute any of Rose’s allegations.  

Why bring this allegation up after all these years?  First, this allegation is about homosexual activity at a Catholic seminary.  Second, many Catholics have been waiting for years for the Church to confirm or deny this allegation.  

More importantly, contemporary media is churning with allegations of sexual misconduct by priests, bishops, archbishops, and Cardinals.  All you have to do is read Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s eleven pages of explosive testimony implicating Pope Francis and several senior prelates in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s alleged sexual abuse of seminarians and priests.  

Best Qualified to Confirm or Deny

Because of his long association with Notre Dame Seminary this is an allegation that The Most Reverend Gregory Michael Aymond, Archbishop of New Orleans, is best qualified to confirm or deny.  

Archbishop Aymond’s long association with Notre Dame Seminary – as a seminarian (four years ending in 1975), faculty member (18 years), and President-Rector (from 1986 through the end of the 1999-2000 academic year) – is well documented by his official archdiocesan online biography that states in pertinent part:  

“…he [Archbishop Aymond] went to St. Joseph Seminary College in St. Benedict, La. and graduated in 1971. He earned a master’s degree in divinity from Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans in 1975 and was ordained as a priest of the New Orleans Archdiocese the same year.”   

“From 1973 to 1981, he [Archbishop Aymond] was a professor, business administrator and then Rector of St. John Vianney Preparatory Seminary in New Orleans. From 1981 to 1986, he was professor of pastoral theology and homiletics and Director of Education at Notre Dame Seminary.”   

“The archbishop served as President-Rector of Notre Dame Seminary from 1986 until the end of the 1999-2000 academic year, longer than any rector in the seminary’s history. He also was a member of the seminary faculty for 18 years. During his tenure, Notre Dame Seminary grew to become the third-largest seminary in the country.  Archbishop Aymond was ordained an Auxiliary Bishop of New Orleans in 1997.”   

“He [Archbishop Aymond] has made mission work a strong emphasis of his ministry. In the 1980s, Archbishop Aymond and groups of seminarians from Notre Dame Seminary began to visit Sotuto, Mexico, where they built housing and offered religious training.”

“In 1994, he [Archbishop Aymond] began a medical mission program in Nicaragua called ‘Christ the Healer,’ taking volunteer teams of health care professionals to the town of Granada to offer medical help at San Juan de Dios Hospital.”   

In an aside – given Michael Rose’s previously cited comment reference Stephen Carrigee – Carrigee was pursuing his vocation to the priesthood at a time (“In the late 1980’s) when Archbishop Aymond” served as President-Rector of Notre Dame Seminary from 1986 until the end of the 1999-2000 academic year.”

In a second aside – given today’s media focus on pedophilia in the Catholic Church – Archbishop Aymond’s official biography also states in pertinent part:  

‘Archbishop Aymond has served as chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on the Protection of Children and Young People.”   

Archbishop Aymond’s online archdiocesan biography is essentially confirmed by an online secular biography, last edited June 26, 2018, that states in pertinent part:  

“Aymond was ordained to the priesthood by Archbishop Philip Hannan on May 10, 1975.  He then served as a professor and later rector at St. John Vianney Preparatory Seminary in New Orleans until 1981, when he became director of education and professor of pastoral theology and homiletics at his alma mater Notre Dame Seminary.  From 1986 to 2000, he served as president-rector of Notre Dame; his tenure was the longest in the seminary’s history.”   

“During the 1980s, Aymond and groups of seminarians from Notre Dame began to visit Mexico, where they built houses and offered religious training.  In 1994 he founded Christ the Healer, a medical mission program of the New Orleans Archdiocese in Granada, Nicaragua.”    

This online secular biography also makes it clear that Archbishop Aymond is not a stranger to pedophilia and homosexual issues:  

“As an Auxiliary Bishop of New Orleans, one of Aymond’s duties included the oversight of Catholic schools in the archdiocese.  In 1998, then-Auxiliary Bishop Aymond allowed Brian Matherne, a coach at Sacred Heart of Jesus School in Norco, to remain in his post for several months after receiving information from the victim’s father that Matherne had molested his son some 13 years earlier. He dropped the matter without alerting police after unsuccessful attempts to speak to the alleged victim. The youth (then 24) later told the St. Charles Parish Sheriff’s Office about the matter. Matherne was arrested and later pleaded guilty to molesting 17 youths over a period of 15 years and is serving 30 years in the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola.  Aymond in part defended the church’s handling of the case, saying it had followed the law but also admitted his mistake in not immediately firing Matherene.  In Austin three years later, Bishop Aymond began tightening the Diocese’s sex abuse policy, based partly on the Matherne case stating: “That painful experience — I will never forget it. It helped me to understand the complexity of pedophilia better.”   

“In June 2013, Aymond issued a statement of regret that his predecessor, Archbishop Philip Hannan, and the local church leadership ignored the arson attack on a local gay bar that killed 32 people 40 years earlier. Aymond wrote to Time magazine that “In retrospect, if we did not release a statement we should have to be in solidarity with the victims and their families… The church does not condone violence and hatred. If we did not extend our care and condolences, I deeply apologize.”     

That being said, why should we expect Archbishop Aymond to confirm or deny Michael Rose’s allegation?  

Why Should We Expect Confirmation or Denial?

Why should we expect Archbishop Aymond to respond to Rose’s 2002 allegation that at one time Notre Dame Seminary (New Orleans. Louisiana) was also known as “Notre Flame?”  Because in Archbishop Aymond’s online secular biography it also states in pertinent part:  

“Aymond has a reputation for taking on controversial issues in a direct and vocal way. He has called the confrontations a necessary part of being a bishop. “I don’t feel I have a responsibility or an obligation to make people do what the church says,” he said in 2008. “In fact, I think that would be wrong. But I do have an obligation to say, “This is what the church’s teaching is.”   

What say you Archbishop Aymond?  Do you confirm or deny Michael Rose’s allegation that at one time Notre Dame Seminary was also known as “Notre Flame?”  

BISHOPS: BAN JESUIT FR. JAMES MARTIN NOW

NEWS:COMMENTARY

by Church Militant  •  ChurchMilitant.com  •  November 29, 2018    89 Comments

Fr. Kevin Cusick: ‘Martin exploits the uncatechized portion of the Catholic Church’

Yo

By Fr. Kevin M. Cusick

The bishops in Baltimore were stymied in their attempt to pass meaningful and effective measures to impose their own sexual morality guidelines on themselves. The Holy Father shot down their planned votes on two measures to police themselves by asking them not to act.

Stephen P. White in The Catholic Thing makes the point that the Pope, in effect, humiliated our bishops, and I’m inclined to agree. He also says the Pope may be angered by their lack of support for him in reaction to the explosive charges levied by Abp. Carlo Viganò. It is true that they have rightly called for an investigation of Viganò in connection with the McCarrick malfeasance. Their call to Rome for releasing all documents in connection with McCarrick was voted down. I think we can be certain that Pope Francis doesn’t want anybody who believes Viganò to get their hands on any documents at all.

Recognizing the connection between homosexuality and preying upon minors is something the bishops can act on without permission from Rome. They can begin by shutting down the James Martin, S.J. road show.

You may remember that Martin was disinvited from speaking at the Theological College. The authorities there denied that the decision had anything to do with his subversive message, but stated instead that they wish to avoid controversy. It was a small victory.Free clip from CHURCH MILITANT PremiumWATCH MORE LIKE THIS

Martin spreads confusion about Catholic teaching in his books and talks, telling a homosexual man, for example, that he looks forward to the day when he and his “partner” can kiss each other during the “Sign of Peace” at Mass. This is clearly an acknowledgment and approval of the sodomitic relationship two such men share. This is clearly in violation of the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, our Church’s application of Scriptures and Tradition to faith and morals. He partly quotes those portions of the Catechism he can twist to his evil purposes. Such a deception helps him to maintain credibility among the more gullible.

Martin’s heresy is the worst sort imaginable. His partial quotations of the Catechism only to undermine its teaching is not pastoral or compassionate. The Church’s mission is not to accommodate to the world and penultimate agendas. The Church’s mandated mission imposed by her divine founder is to lead souls to Heaven, to make saints. Encouraging mortal sin does the opposite. This is why Martin needs to be restricted by every bishop.Martin’s heresy is the worst sort imaginable. Tweet

Until the bishops unite behind a common mission to teach faith and morals, clearly and univocally in each diocese, we cannot begin to make the Church safe for the vulnerable of any age. The sexual abuse of any person is a violation of Church teaching on chastity. Every vocation demands chastity.

No permission from the Pope is ever needed to teach faith and morals. It is the charge from Christ Himself to Peter, the first pope, and every other bishop thereafter to “Teach them all I have commanded you” in connection with the mandate to baptize all nations with the invocation of the Trinity.

Christ taught by His own example of holiness and affirmation of the Ten Commandments that God’s teaching on marriage between one man-husband and one woman-wife cannot be changed. He said not one jot or tittle of the law will be changed until it all comes true. He intended this above all in regard to the Decalogue, the Sixth Commandment, which says that no violation of the vows between husband and wife can under any circumstances be violated without sinning.

This is intended for those within marriage, who share an exclusive relationship. By the same token, it is intended for those outside of any marriage for whom all genital expression is forbidden with others, married or unmarried.

The sexual faculty is given for the generation of children within the expression of the married love of man and woman alone. No one else may share in the gift no matter how their errant attractions may unfortunately tempt them. God’s grace is enough, for “with God all things are possible.” The hope with which each one of us lives each day is inspired by the promise of God that we can all share in His life now and forever by loving His truth. No matter how we fail or fall short, He is always ready to welcome us back and does so through nothing less than a sacrament, that of confession.

We cannot love what we do not pursue. Thus, the task for each of us is to know the truth and to make it the operating principle of our lives. We just need to be authentic: to live what we believe.

Martin can never speak for God’s love or serve the true good of others until he reorients his life around Jesus Christ and His truth — all of it. Truth is inconvenient and may sometimes be uncomfortable on our way to Heaven. We enter into the combat of holiness for the eternal reward no matter the cost. True courage is required.

Joseph Sciambra is working very hard to help our bishops speak out and stop Martin. He is on Twitter, among other venues, tracking Martin’s heretical teachings and opposing them with the truth of faith. Sciambra once lost his soul in the homosexual “lifestyle” and then rejected that lifestyle for the sake of truth. At josephsciambra.com, he says Martin is not “compassionate” or “sensitive,” but rather the opposite:

In his recently published book, Building a Bridge: How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion, and Sensitivity, Martin repeatedly applauds “The Catechism” for bolding stating that homosexuals must be treated with “respect, compassion and sensitivity and that ‘every sign of unjust discrimination'” must be avoided.

Yet, he also denounces the same Catechism for being “needlessly hurtful” toward homosexuals because, in his words, the Church describes “one of the deepest parts of a person — the part that gives and receives love” as “objectively disordered.”

James Martin is full of nonsense: The part of every human being that gives and receives love is not contained in his or her sexual organs, but in the intellect and will, which give and receive love independently of the physical operation of the body. We all know individuals who are permanently disabled and unable to experience marital genital expression because of war injuries, disease or accident. Will we tell them they cannot love their spouse as a result? Everyone can easily see what an insult this would be.Martin exploits the uncatechized portion of the Catholic Church and enables those who hate the Faith and seek only to undermine the body of Christ.Tweet

A most damning indictment tweeted by Sciambra: “I gave up on the bishops long ago. I recall the day — a certain AB doesn’t listen; except to whining LGBT advocates. I confronted his secretary at a public event. He laughed after I told him that openly partnered gay dissidents held (paid) positions of authority at a local parish.”

Martin exploits the uncatechized portion of the Catholic Church and enables those who hate the Faith and seek only to undermine the body of Christ. Call on your bishop to permanently ban him from any speaking engagements and reject his books and other writings. James Martin opposes the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Any bishop who does not ban him now is guilty of undermining the faith of the Church by cooperation in the sin of heresy and immorality. Any bishop who betrays his divine mandate to protect and save the flock cannot be saved.

Thank you for reading, and praised be Jesus Christ, now and forever.Father Kevin M. Cusick is a priest of the archdiocese of Washington and pastor of St. Francis de Sales Catholic Church in Benedict, Maryland, where the Traditional Latin Mass is offered on weekdays and weekends. Father Cusick is a weekly columnist for The Wanderer and is on Twitter: @MCITLFrAphorism.

Republished with permission from The Wanderer. 

• o

• HEALTH

Mom Dresses Six-Year-Old Son As Girl, Threatens Dad With Losing His Son For Disagreeing

https://thefederalist.com/2018/11/26/mom-dresses-six-year-old-son-girl-threatens-dad-losing-son-disagreeing/

A Texas custody case splits a 6-year-old child’s gender identity in two.

By Walt HeyerNOVEMBER 26, 2018

Six-year-old James is caught in a gender identity nightmare. Under his mom’s care in Dallas, Texas, James obediently lives as a trans girl named “Luna.” But given the choice when he’s with dad, he’s all boy — his sex at birth.

In their divorce proceedings, the mother has charged the father with child abuse for not affirming James as transgender, has sought restraining orders against him, and is seeking to terminate his parental rights. She is also seeking to require him to pay for the child’s visits to a transgender-affirming therapist and transgender medical alterations, which may include hormonal sterilization starting at age eight.

I learned of James’ plight on a recent visit to Plano, Texas, where I spoke to teenagers about my own transgender story. I lived through a similar scenario when I was his age. I was cross-dressed for two-and-a-half years by my grandmother, who made a purple chiffon dress for me. Somewhat like James, my cross-dressing occurred under one adult’s care, but away from grandma’s I was all boy with my mom and dad. Also, just like James, I found my way into the office of a gender therapist, who quickly started me toward transition.

When his mother, a pediatrician, took James for counseling, she chose a gender transition therapist who diagnosed him with gender dysphoria, a mental conflict between physical sex and perceived gender. James’ precious young life hinges purely on the diagnosis of gender dysphoria by a therapist who wraps herself in rainbow colors, affirms the diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and dismisses evidence to the contrary. Remove the “rainbow” from James’ diagnosis, and it crumbles under the weight of the criteria for the diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

The diagnosis is critical, because labeling a child with gender dysphoria can trigger a series of physical and mental consequences for the child and has legal ramifications in the ongoing custody case. Get it wrong and young James’s life is irrevocably harmed.

James Does Not Fit the Gender Dysphoria Criteria

The criteria for a diagnosis of childhood gender dysphoria are that a child be persistent, consistent, and insistent about being the opposite sex. James’s mom is “all in” on the diagnosis of gender dysphoria and assisting with social transition. She used the name Luna to enroll him as a girl in first grade, and provides only female clothes.

Meanwhile, Dad isn’t seeing signs of gender dysphoria. In the father’s home, James appears to be a normal boy and doesn’t identify as a girl. He has a choice of boy’s or girl’s clothes there, and he chooses to dress as a boy. The fact that James changes gender identity depending on which parent is present makes the diagnosis of gender dysphoria both dubious and harmful.

The transition therapist has observed that James is not consistent, insistent, or persistent in the desire to become “Luna.” For example, a dossier filed with the Dallas court says that, under the skilled eyes of the therapist, the child was presented two pieces of paper, one with the word “James” and one with the word “Luna,” and asked to pick the name he preferred. When the appointment only included his mother, James selected Luna, the name and gender he uses at his mother’s home and in his first-grade classroom. When the appointment was only with his father, however, James pointed to the boy name James, not the girl name.

The glaring disparity between a child’s preferred identity when in the presence of one parent versus the other should cause a therapist to reassess, perhaps nullify the diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and terminate any steps toward transition. But in the case of James, this  hasn’t happened.

Using a Little Boy as a Weapon of War

When James is away from his mother, he consistently rejects the idea that he is “Luna girl” or that he wants to be a girl. Because the court prohibits dad from dressing James as a boy or from teaching him that he is a boy by sharing religious or science-based teachings on sexuality, dad presents James with male and female clothing options and James always chooses, even insists on, his boy clothes. Dad told me, “James violently refuses to wear girl’s clothes at my home.” This is not a sign of gender dysphoria.

Eyewitness accounts from friends corroborate dad’s observations of James preferring to be a boy. Bill Lovell, the senior pastor of Christ Church Carrollton, wrote: “Based on the three occasions I’ve spent time with him, I’d say he acts and looks unmistakably like a healthy six-year-old boy. … I am praying for James, an average six-year-old boy, a sweet-natured, intelligent, lovable and at this point particularly vulnerable young man, caught up in a titanic clash of worldviews.”

Ellen Grigsby shared in an email her observations after meeting James and his fraternal twin brother for the first time: “They were both ‘all boy’ and were having a great time. Both boys were absolutely dressed as boys and behaving as boys.”

Sarah Scott is a family friend and mother of three boys who frequently play with James and his brother. She and her husband are sensitive to allowing James to lead the way in gender choices such as names, pronouns, and clothing. I asked her the obvious question: “How do you know James does not want to be a girl?” Sarah responded in an email with several examples she’s seen of James’ desire to remain a boy:

Friday, Sept. 21: We had the boys over. The boys took turns telling stories and James made up a story about five little boys (himself, his brother and my three sons) who were such good friends that they magically turned into pumpkins, so they could stay in the pumpkin patch together forever. He didn’t say kids. He specifically and happily referred to himself as a boy.

Saturday, Oct. 20: We all went on a walk to the park. We had such fun! It had rained the night before. On the walk, James slipped and got his clothes dirty. He asked if he could borrow some of my boys’ shorts and if I could wash his clothes. I said sure! — and went to grab something he could wear. While I was looking, he said, ‘Guess what Mrs. Sarah?  You don’t need to find a shirt because boys don’t have to wear them if you’re hot!’ I laughed and told him I guess that’s a good thing about being a boy! He said, ‘Yes, it is!’

Saturday, Nov. 3: His mother came to pick up the boys to take them to [his brother’s] soccer game. James hugged his dad and said, ‘Love you.’ He refused to go to the soccer game as a girl with mom and stayed with dad. That evening they came to our house.

James exhibits no desire to be “Luna” the girl except when he is with his mother. The boy’s behavior offers a stinging rebuke of the diagnosis of gender dysphoria. This by all accounts is not a true or clinically correct diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Yet the therapist stands by her diagnosis and continues to keep “Luna” on track to gender transition.

Is This Therapy or Manipulation?

Unlike James, I was an adult at the time of my diagnosis. Grandma was gone by then, but the therapist, like so many today, affirmed my cross-gender identity and guided me through gender transition. He provided access to hormones and surgery and I soon had the full gender-affirming surgery and identified as “Laura.” I felt that my gender identity and biological sex were at odds, but what the therapist failed to consider were the other factors driving my desire to change gender, which needed to be addressed first.

What this mom is doing to James looks very much like what my grandmother did to me by affirming me in the purple dress. My grandmother didn’t intend to harm me, but her actions destroyed my childhood and my family and consumed nearly 50 years of my life.

James has no idea what he is in for or how his gender journey will play out, but with an incorrect diagnosis it will be ugly. I became very concerned about James because he is not exhibiting the diagnostic attributes of gender dysphoria. His gender preferences are not consistent or insistent, but flip back and forth, according to which parent is present.

When James is permitted to relax around friends away from his mom, he seems natural and happy being a boy. If James truly had gender dysphoria, he would demand the proper pronouns, always dress as a girl and insistently, persistently, and consistently claim to be a girl in all situations, not just with mom. Instead, friends say he has done the opposite — he has insisted on being a boy. It is time to consider that the boy is not transgender.

Misdiagnosing People Has Horrific Consequences

Misdiagnosis of gender dysphoria happens around the world, and people’s lives are harmed when it does. I wanted people to see what I see, that people of all ages have been incorrectly diagnosed with gender dysphoria, so I wrote a book, “Trans Life Survivors,” that shares many first-hand stories of misdiagnosis of gender dysphoria and the heart-breaking results.

Therapists are taking notice, too, of the increasing prevalence of people detransitioning and going back their birth sex, and suggesting a need for comprehensive psychological assessments, rather than fast-tracking children to transition. An article in The Atlantic shares interviews with Scott Leibowitz, a psychiatrist who treats children and adolescents in Columbus, Ohio, and Laura Edwards-Leeper, a psychologist at Pacific University and Oregon’s Transgender Clinic. Both believe as Edwards-Leeper shares, “that comprehensive assessments are crucial to achieving good outcomes for TGNC [transgender and gender non-conforming] young people, especially those seeking physical interventions, in part because some kids who think they are trans at one point in time will not feel that way later on.”

Pediatrician Michelle Cretella, executive director of the American College of Pediatricians, describes the pediatric community’s encouragement of sex change and hormonal treatments for children as “institutionalized child abuse.”

If we do not save James from a misdiagnosis, his next step is chemical castration at age eight, only two years away. James needs a more comprehensive psychological assessment to explore why he identifies as a girl with mom and as a boy with dad. I want to do what I can to “Save James” from his gender nightmare, and to raise awareness about how easily children can be misdiagnosed and labeled as gender dysphoric and the extensive damage that can cause in their young lives.

A questionable diagnosis locks a vulnerable child into an alternate gender identity long before they can understand what is happening or where it might lead. It’s up to the adults to observe the child carefully, consider and question the grey areas, and ultimately guard innocent children against hasty diagnoses and conclusions about something so fundamental as their gender identity.

• S

Fr. James Martin, SJ

The Church Militant

The Catechism states on homosexuality:

Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (2357)

It goes on to state:

Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. (2359)

Father James Martin has made a career out of trying to normalize homosexuality. The following are some of the more egregious examples:

1. Fr. Martin asserts that chastity is not required of homosexuals.

• In an interview on August 29 with Brandon Ambrosino (an openly gay man engaged to his male partner), Fr. Martin claimed homosexuals aren’t bound by Church teaching on chastity because it hasn’t been “received” by the LGBT community. “For a teaching to be really authoritative,” he said, “it is expected that it will be received by the people of God, by the faithful. The teaching that LGBT people must be celibate their entire lives has not been received.
• This is a heretical statement because it rejects the infallible teaching authority of the Catholic Church, and makes dogma dependent on how it’s “received” by the people. Church teaching isn’t determined by democratic assent or by popular vote. Its truths are absolute, rooted in the Truth, Our Lord Jesus Christ.
• Canonist Ed Peters notes, “Martin might regret that, in virtue of Canon 1055 (which presents the nature of marriage itself), two lesbians cannot marry each other, nor can two homosexuals, but, if that is what underlies Martin’s complaints about celibacy supposedly being imposed on such persons, he needs to take it up with the infallible Magisterium of the Church.”
• Gregory Brown, writing in First Things, rejects Fr. Martin’s characterization, writing, “The authority of teachings cannot be tested by consulting the inner senses of practicing Catholics. … Subjective certainty is not a certain guide — nor even, really, a reliable one — to whether one’s intuition actually springs from the sensus fidei.”

2. Fr. Martin states that Catholics should reverence gay “marriage”

• At a September 5, 2017 symposium at Fordham University, Fr. Martin described same-sex “marriage” as “a loving act” and said the Church must “reverence” it.
• The Church’s immutable teaching on marriage is clear: A “covenant by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring.”

3. Fr. Martin supports transgenderism in children.

• On both Facebook and Twitter on October 2, 2017, Fr. Martin posted comments supporting the right of a very young “transgender” child to receive religious education at a Catholic parish, which he claimed was denying the boy-turned-girl. Martin called it “a scandal.”
• Martin failed to disclose the fact that the parish was willing to educate the boy, as long as he registered under the sex listed on his baptismal certificate (his biological sex: a boy). His mother refused, insisting that the parish accept her boy as a girl, using his female name, and supposedly allowing him to use the girls’ restrooms. The parish, consistent with Catholic teaching, refused. 
• In early 2017, Pope Francis told Bp. Andreas Launer, “Gender ideology is demonic.” And in July 2016, Pope Francis said, “We are experiencing a moment of the annihilation of man as the image of God. Today, children — children! — are taught in school that everyone can choose his or her sex. … And this [is] terrible!” Pope Francis went on to say, “God created man and woman; God created the world in a certain way,” Pope Francis said, “and we are doing the exact opposite.”
• In September 2017, the American College of Pediatricians (ACP) released an updated document,”Gender Ideology Harms Children,” claiming, “Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse.”

4. Fr. Martin supports a dissident priest who promotes gay “marriage” and women “priests”

• On October 2 on Twitter, Fr. Martin retweeted a post cheering the fact that Fr. Greg Boyle, SJ would be permitted to speak in the diocese of Orange, California, and characterizing faithful Catholics who oppose Boyle as “missionaries of hate.” 
• Father Boyle has made public comments openly supporting gay “marriage” and women “priests,” accusing those who oppose such things as being fearful.

5. Fr. Martin publicly derides Catholics adhering to Church teaching on homosexuality as “homophobic” and “close-minded”

• During his September 5 Fordham University appearance, Fr. Martin derided Catholics who submit to Church teaching on homosexuality, branding them“homophobic” and “close-minded.”
• This would include the many same-sex attracted Catholics who heroically embrace their cross and choose to live in accord with Church teaching.

6. Fr. Martin affirms the idea of active gays kissing at Mass

• During an August 29, 2017 interview at Villanova University, Fr. Martin told a practicing homosexual who attends Mass, “I do hope in 10 years you’ll be able to kiss your partner. Why not? What’s the terrible thing?”
• Unlike platonic expressions of affection between family or, in some cultures, friends of the same sex, kissing between sexually involved same-sex couples is a violation of natural and divine law. Public displays during Mass would flout Church teaching, constituting sacrilege.

7. Fr. Martin claims former homosexuals don’t lead a fully “integrated life”

• Again in his August 29 Villanova interview, Fr. Martin claimed that the many thousands of people who have left the homosexual lifestyle are in “conflict” with themselves — that their lives aren’t “integrated” as current homosexuals are. He insinuated that freedom from homosexuality is not achievable and characterized suggestions otherwise as “sad.” Attempting to explain away those who have left the homosexual lifestyle, he told his audience, “What happens is their own junk inside gets focused outwards on people who are actually trying to live a more integrated life.”
• The multitude of testimonies of former gays contradicts Fr. Martin’s assertions. YouTube is filled with accounts that affirm freedom is possible; a search for “ex-gay” reveals vast numbers of former homosexuals who have gone on to recapture a healthy, heterosexual orientation. Thousands of men and women report successfully leaving the homosexual lifestyle, many going on to marry and have families. Groups like PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays) and Voices of Change document such experiences.
• Fr. Martin’s dismissal is a slap in the face to those who have worked hard to be faithful to God, leaving the homosexual lifestyle and carrying their crosses heroically for the sake of something greater than themselves. Such people would say they lead more fully integrated lives now than they did as active homosexuals.

8. Fr. Martin characterizes censured pro-gay nun Sr. Jeannine Gramick as worthy of sainthood

• During a June 16, 2017 podcast, Fr. Martin said Sr. Jeannine Gramick, a dissident nun and co-founder of pro-gay New Ways Ministry, should be declared a saint.
• Fr. Martin’s admiration for Sr. Gramick stems from her obstinate refusal to comply with Church teaching and her unwavering rebellion against Magisterial authority. In 1999, Sr. Gramick was censured by the Vatican for her affirmation of homosexual practices and ordered to stop ministering to homosexuals. She defied the order. By suggesting Sr. Gramick is worthy of sainthood, Fr. Martin “blesses” her revolt against Church teaching, while propagating her heresy.

9. Fr. Martin publicly suggests that God created homosexuals that way

• During his June 16 podcast, Fr. Martin referenced Psalm 139:13-14 (“You formed my inmost being; you knit me in my mother’s womb. I praise you, because I am wonderfully made!”) to claim that homosexuality is an innate and beautiful condition, created by God.
• In suggesting that God is the author of homosexuality, Fr. Martin distorts Scripture and blasphemes Our Lord. He also confirms practicing homosexuals in their sin, perpetuating their spiritual, psychological and emotional brokenness and denying them the opportunity for healing in Christ.

10. Fr. Martin publicly welcomes the esteem of dissident, pro-gay groups condemned by the Holy See

• On October 30, 2016, Martin accepted an award from pro-gay group New Ways Ministry.
• New Ways Ministry has been censured by the Church for its rejection of Catholic teaching on homosexuality. Cdl. Francis George of the archdiocese of Chicago condemned the group, warning, “No one should be misled by the claim that New Ways Ministry provides an authentic interpretation of Catholic teaching and an authentic Catholic pastoral practice.” It is condemned and unrecognized by the Church.  

11. Fr. Martin publicly promotes homosexuals’ ordination to the priesthood

• In the November 2000 issue of Jesuit magazine America (where he is editor-at-large), Fr. Martin published an article promoting the ordination of homosexuals to the priesthood.
• In advocating homosexual ordination, Fr. Martin openly dissents from the Church’s position. According to the Congregation for Catholic Education:

[T]his Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture.”

Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.

12. Fr. Martin publicly supports a scholar who proclaims “Jesus is queer”

• In a September 21, 2017 tweet, Fr. Martin lamented the cancellation of a talk (due in part to a Church Militant exposé) at Madonna University featuring pro-gay author Dr. Shawn Copeland. In her writing, Copeland cites pro-gay advocates unapologetically; one citation reads: “On Easter, God made Jesus queer in His solidarity with us. In other words, Jesus ‘came out of the closet’ and became the ‘queer’ Christ. … Jesus is queer by his solidarity with queers.”
• By endorsing Copeland, Fr. Martin is promoting her blasphemy.

13. Fr. Martin lauds pro-gay dissident Bp. Thomas Gumbleton

• In a November 1 tweet, Fr. Martin promoted a film celebrating the dissenting prelate, calling him “the great Bp. Thomas Gumbleton.”
• Gumbleton is a notorious gay activist forced into retirement by the Vatican in 2006 owing to his open revolt against Church teaching. Gumbleton has been forbidden to speak on diocesan property in some dioceses because of his pro-homosexualist views.
• In 2013, for example, Gumbleton said to homosexuals living in a state of grave sin, “Don’t stop going to communion. You’re okay.”

14. Fr. Martin praises laicized gay priest Gregory Baum

• On October 20, Fr. Martin tweeted praise for Gregory Baum at the former priest’s passing, retweeting approvingly a note that called him “one of the gentlest, most brilliant, and fearless theologians I have known.”
• Baum revealed in his autobiography that while serving as an adviser at the Second Vatican Council, he began a homosexual relationship with another man and continued it for 30 years, even after he left the priesthood and married an ex-nun, Shirley, who approved of the relationship.
• Baum admitted he hid his active homosexuality so as not to lose influence in theological circles. “I did not profess my own homosexuality in public because such an act of honesty would have reduced my influence as a critical theologian,” he conceded, adding, “I was eager to be heard as a theologian, trusting in God as salvator mundi (Savior of the world) and committed to social justice, liberation theology and global solidarity.”
• Baum spent his career trying to dismantle Church teaching on birth control, and is recognized as a key player behind the notorious Winnipeg Statement, the Canadian bishops’ rejection of Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical reaffirming Church teaching on contraception.

15. Fr. Martin consistently refuses to answer the simple question whether he believes Church teaching that gay sex is a sin.

• Professor Robert P. George of Princeton University has noted that Fr. Martin will not answer the straightforward question, in spite of his talkativeness otherwise:

But Fr. Martin gave just the opposite impression moments later when I tweetedin reply, “Thank you, Father. May I take this, then, as an affirmation of the Church’s teaching that marriage is the conjugal union of husband and wife, and that sexual acts of any type outside the marital bond are immoral? If so, I am happy to correct what I said.” In response, I did not get a “yes.” Or a “no.” Fr. Martin fell silent, though we had just been exchanging tweets. It turns out that he always refuses to answer such questions or engage those who ask them. He simply refuses to say what the Church in fact says, namely, that though we must love those who experience and even act on same-sex desires, homosexual acts are wrong and sinful — morally and spiritually harmful to those engaging in them.

16. Fr. Martin publicly refers to the Holy Spirit as “She”

• In a September 19, 2017 Facebook post, Fr. Martin complained about pushbackover his heretical espousals from groups like Church Militant. He urged hissupporters to “Hope in the Holy Spirit. Things can always improve. And the Holy Spirit knows what She’s doing.”
• Although the concept of being Spouse to Mary is not meant to be taken literally, the phrasing still indicates a type of spiritual marriage between Our Lady and the Holy Spirit, a similar espousal to that of a consecrated nun, who refers to herself as the “spouse” of Jesus. In both cases, it’s clearly a masculine-feminine spiritual union, reflected in the marriage of man and woman. Martin’s deliberate reference of the Holy Spirit as “She” implies Our Lady was espoused to a female entity, a feminine-feminine (lesbian) union.
• Some argue the Holy Spirit should be referred to in the feminine because the original Hebrew word in the Old Testament, rūaḥ, is a feminine noun. But in linguistics, grammatical gender has no bearing on actual gender of the noun. The neuter Greek word pneuma is used for “spirit” in the New Testament, and in Latin (the official language of the Church) the masculine spiritus is used. Our Lord Himself referred to the Holy Spirit as paraclete, using the Greek word parakletos, a masculine noun. Additionally, St. John uses the masculine pronoun in reference to the Holy Spirit, even though he is referring to the Greek neuter pneuma, indicating his deliberate choice to refer to the Spirit as “He” rather than “It.” In short, there is simply no scriptural or historical or theological precedent to refer to the Holy Spirit as “She.”

In sum, Fr. Martin co-opts Christ in his attempts to normalize homosexuality in the Church.

Martin has been criticized by various prelates. Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois has criticized him for propping up the gay lobby in the Church. And Abp. José Ignacio Munilla of San Sebastian in Spain has dismantled Martin’s argument that a Church teaching is only dogmatic if it’s “recieved” by the people

Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, issued a public rebuke to Martin specifically for his failure to mention the need for chastity in his book Building a Bridge. 

“Those who speak on behalf of the Church must be faithful to the unchanging teachings of Christ,” Sarah said, “because only by living in harmony with God’s creative design do we find deep and lasting fulfillment.”

Sarah reminded his audience a key fact omitted from Martin’s book: homosexual acts are “gravely sinful and tremendously harmful to the well-being of those who partake in them.”

“People who identify as members of the LGBT community are owed this truth in charity,” Sarah insisted, “especially from clergy who speak on behalf of the Church about this complex and difficult topic.”

In a video publicizing his book Building a Bridge, Fr. Martin speaks as if Christ embraced sinners and their sinful lifestyles. “Jesus in his public ministry was always trying to include people and made a point of specifically reaching out to people who felt marginalized,” says Martin, “because for Jesus there was no one who was other. For Jesus, there was no us and them; there is only us.”

This is false. Christ showed mercy to sinners, but He also admonished them to turn away from their sin. In John 8:11, Jesus tells the woman caught in adultery, “Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more.”

Father Martin does just the opposite. He affirms homosexuals in their sin, in essence telling them, “Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin more.”

Resources

Videos

The Vortex—Secret Gay Operatives

The Vortex—Drain the Clerical Swamp

The Vortex—Fr. Martin Is a Heretic

The Vortex—Stop Lying

The Vortex—Four Traitors

The Vortex—On the Way to Hell

The Vortex—Media, Mitres and Martin

The Vortex—Something Much More Ominous

The Download—Perfidious Priest

Articles

“Fr. James Martin is Creating Chaos in Catholic Circles,” John Zmirak

“The Perfidious James Martin SJ,” Austin Ruse

“James Martin SJ Thinks You’re a Nazi,” Austin Ruse

“Father Martin and his allies: intolerance masked as a plea for tolerance,” Phil Lawler

“Pope Francis, Fr. Martin, and Faith without Reason,” Robert Royal

“Overcoming Fr. Martin’s dissent through genuine, transforming love,” Dr. Janet Smith

“Fr. James Martin: Ex-Gays Don’t Lead Fully ‘Integrated Life,'” Christine Niles

“African Cardinal Rebukes Pro-Gay Fr. James Martin,” Christine Niles

“Pro-Gay Fr. James Martin Disinvited From Major Speaking Event,” Christine Niles

“Fr. James Martin Dumped Again,” Christine Niles

“Catholics Overwhelmingly Agree: Defrock Fr. James Martin,” Stephen Wynne

“Fr. Martin: Homosexuals Not Bound to Chastity,” Trey Elmore

“Fr. Martin Calls for ‘Reverence’ for Homosexual Unions,” Trey Elmore

CATHOLIC LEAGUE FOR RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL RIGHTS Guess Who Is Going To Jail? November 29, 2018Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an important date in the Pennsylvania grand jury issue:   Kathleen Kane is finally going to jail today. The former Pennsylvania Attorney General was convicted more than two years ago on nine counts. She not only perjured herself, she was found guilty of obstruction of justice and abuse of office.   Why does this matter to the Catholic League? Because she was the one who singled out the Catholic Church—allowing every other religious and secular organization to get off scot free—for a grand jury investigation of the dioceses, all because of one teacher at a Catholic high school in Altoona-Johnstown who molested a minor in the 1990s.   How did Kane find out about the guilty party, Brother Stephen Baker? It was Altoona-Johnstown Bishop Mark Bartchak who went public by notifying the authorities immediately upon learning about Baker’s conduct. Instead of congratulating Bartchak for outing one of his own, Kane took the opportunity to scour the state looking for other cases of abuse involving Catholic personnel.   Catholics, I have said repeatedly, are being played. They, and the public more generally, are being set up to believe that somehow the Catholic Church owns this problem. It is because of people like Kane, and her successor, Josh Shapiro, that so many have come to believe the worst about the Catholic Church.   Do Catholics get it? Had Bishop Bartchak acted the way virtually every other religious and secular leader has handled cases of sexual misconduct, namely internally, Kane would never have known about Baker. Which means there would have been no grand jury investigation. That probe never allowed the accused, most of whom were either dead or no longer in ministry, to defend themselves. As it turns out, Kane abused her office in more ways than one. At least now she can think about what she has done while sitting in jail. Sweet justice. Phone: 212-371-3191 E-mail: pr@catholicleague.org