A LOOK INSIDE TEXAS GOVERNOR GREGG ABBOTT’S TRANSPORTATION OF MIGRANTS AWAY FROM THE TEXAS BORDER

Inside Migrants’ Journeys on Greg Abbott’s Free Buses to Washington

Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition volunteer Scott Slater prepares to receive the first bus of migrants arriving for travel assistance in Del Rio, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022. (Kaylee Greenlee Beal for TIME)

Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition volunteer Scott Slater prepares to receive the first bus of migrants arriving for travel assistance in Del Rio, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022.

Kaylee Greenlee Beal for TIME

BY JASMINE AGUILERA/DEL RIO, TEXAS 

SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 7:00 AM EDT

The first group of migrants arrives in a white bus as the rain calms. On a soggy August morning in Del Rio, Texas, about 50 men, women, and children have just been released from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) custody. Despite deboarding into a rare desert downpour, most of them are smiling.

After weeks of traveling from their home countries of Venezuela, Cuba, Colombia, and Honduras, these migrants are now permitted to be on U.S. soil free from government detention. The next leg of their journey awaits. For many, it will mean stepping onto yet another bus— and into a national political debate over which American communities host them. 

Since April, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, has been chartering buses to send migrants crossing the border from Del Rio and nearby Eagle Pass to cities like Washington, D.C., New York City, and Chicago. It’s a political salvo to Democratic leaders: liberal “open border” policies, Abbott says, are overwhelming Texas, and he wants to give them a taste of what Texas communities are going through by shuttling migrants to their cities instead.

More than 7,700 migrants have been dropped off in Washington on more than 185 buses since April, according to Abbott’s office, and more than 2,100 people have been sent to New York City. Those cities’ Democratic mayors have struggled to respond to the flow of migrants who may not be able to secure their own housing, health care, or transportation. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowserhas twice requested help from the National Guard to support the arrivals, blaming Abbott for using “desperate people to score political points.” New York City Mayor Eric Adams called busing “horrific” and accused Texas officials of forcing migrants onto buses. 

The busing—part of Abbott’s Operation Lone Star, a controversial initiative to secure the Texas-Mexico border that launched in March 2021— has cost Texas taxpayers more than $12 million as of mid-August, according to the Texas Division of Emergency Management, while Abbott has raised more than $303,000 in private donations to fund the effort. But for the migrants who choose to board them, the buses are free. And for many of the travelers, the transportation has been a welcome gift beneath the political gamesmanship.

Migrants arrive at the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition carrying plastic bags tagged with Department of Homeland Security baggage check forms and missing shoelaces in Del Rio, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022. (Kaylee Greenlee Beal for TIME)

Migrants arrive at the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition carrying plastic bags tagged with Department of Homeland Security baggage check forms and missing shoelaces in Del Rio, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022.

Kaylee Greenlee Beal for TIME

Fifteen migrants who spoke to TIME in Del Rio and Washington said they were thrilled for the option of free transportation, and were surprised to learn that Abbott’s intentions were less about accommodating them than inconveniencing his political opponents. “It’s great that he helped us,” says Oliver, a 26-year-old migrant, in an interview conducted at his arrival in Washington on July 26. Oliver, whose surname TIME is withholding because he fears for his family’s safety in Venezuela, knew the bus was organized by Abbott, but he didn’t know why, nor did he understand the political overtones.

Other states are beginning to follow Abbott’s lead. Arizona started a version of the busing scheme, sending more than 1,600 migrants to Washington since May in 45 buses that cost roughly $83,000 apiece, according to C.J. Karamargin, communications director for Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, a Republican. El Paso, Texas, a city led by Democrats and historically considered welcoming of immigrants, has decided to charter its own buses independent of Abbott’s operation, to send migrants to New York City and Chicago. Florida officials have also flirted with the idea.


More from TIME


Never before have state governors taken it upon themselves to bus migrants, and the move means they’ve inserted themselves in immigration processing that is typically handled by the federal government. Meanwhile, Congress has failed to act on significant immigration measures, and the population attempting to cross the border has shifted from primarily single adult Mexican men who the government can quickly return to Mexico, to families from countries they can’t be easily returned to. 

If the states intended to sway the federal government to toughen immigration policy, they so far have been unsuccessful. But in the process, they’ve provided a service to thousands of migrants seeking homes in the United States.

‘I consider them the U.S.’ responsibility’

The Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition (VVBHC), a local nonprofit, is ready to receive the migrants in Del Rio on Aug. 15 when the CBP bus arrives at their headquarters. 

VVBHC is the only organization in the county working with CBP and the Texas National Guard to help process migrants to board Operation Lone Star buses. Tiffany Burrow, VVBCH’s director of operations, ushers the migrants inside one of the buildings to receive an orientation about their two options: either pay for travel arrangements themselves, or take one of Abbott’s free buses bound for New York City later that day. 

Most migrants who cross the border don’t have much cash on hand and never intended to stay in Del Rio. Many are trying to reunite with family or friends in other parts of the country. When orientation is over, the migrants come back outside into the rain, each carrying a yellow folder with the name of their destination handwritten over the top—Chicago, New Jersey, Miami, Washington D.C. More than half of the 273 people who arrived that day decided to take the Operation Lone Star Bus.

Kevin, a 26-year-old migrant from Venezuela, shows his baseball cap outside of Saint Peter’s Church on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Aug. 26, 2022. The cap was a gift from his mother, he says, so he has done his best to preserve it along his journey.

Shuran Huang for TIME

Jennifer’s 9-year-old daughter shows her stuffed animal, a gift she received from Saint Peter’s Church after her arrival in Washington on Aug. 26, 2022.

Shuran Huang for TIME

Jennifer and Jimmy, two migrants from Peru, hold each others hands on Aug. 26, 2022.

Shuran Huang for TIME

Jennifer shows the wrist band given to her by Arizona officials to track her journey to Washington.

Shuran Huang for TIME

Those who have opted to take the bus are quickly ushered into a building manned by the Texas National Guard. “As soon as they step foot in the U.S., I consider them the U.S.’s responsibility,” says one of the Guardsmen, who spoke under condition of anonymity because he isn’t authorized to speak to the media. It isn’t political to him, he says, but rather about helping people on American soil.

The crush at the border is increasing. In 2021, VVBHC assisted about 23,300 people who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border. Between January and August of this year, that figure neared 32,000. In August alone, 4,500 people were processed through VVBHC. 

When VVBHC was founded in 2019, the protocols were different. CBP would either release migrants to local churches or at drop-off points, where they would be on their own to figure out their next steps. The organization was formed as a stopgap to aid migrants and keep the community from being inundated with people unsure of where to go, says Burrow. “When I hear that Washington D.C. is overwhelmed with people, I’m not sure they really realize what they’re saying,” she says. “They haven’t been to the border. They are not seeing what my eyes are seeing here.”

While the migrants wait for their charter bus to arrive, many make use of VVBHC’s portable showers. It’ll be their last chance to wash before the two-night journey to New York City. After five minutes, a Guardsman in a camo-pattern rain poncho knocks on their door, rushing them out. “Buena suerte,” he tells them: “Good luck.”

‘Thank God they’re helping us’

The first Operation Lone Star bus of the day arrives at VVBHC around noon. Before boarding, each of the migrants is fitted with a white wristband imprinted with a barcode—a way for Texas to monitor people who use the program. As the travelers board the bus, an official scans their bands and checks their bags, and Burrow hands out sweatshirts for the air-conditioned ride. The bus’s 52 seats fill up quickly. A dog sniffs for drugs, and then it takes off. Even through the tinted windows, it’s easy to see hands waving goodbye.

For the next two days and nights, 27-year-old Jhason from Venezuela sleeps upright. He and the other passengers are fed pink packages of food resembling military MRE’s. “HUMANITARIAN DAILY RATION,” the wrapping reads in all capital letters. Beneath the image of an American flag it says: “Food Gift From the People of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

An official scans a migrant’s assigned barcoded wristband required to travel on an Operation Lone Star bus to either Washington, D.C. or New York, New York, from the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition in Del Rio, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022. (Kaylee Greenlee Beal for TIME)

An official scans a migrant’s assigned barcoded wristband required to travel on an Operation Lone Star bus to either Washington, D.C. or New York, New York, from the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition in Del Rio, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022.

Kaylee Greenlee Beal for TIME

“The food isn’t that good, but thank God they’re helping us with this,” Jhason, who is being identified only by his first name because he fears for the safety of his family in Venezuela, tells TIME in Spanish via WhatsApp from aboard the bus. Jhason says he traveled through seven countries over 43 days to get to the U.S.-Mexico border. He has no family or friends in the U.S., but he decides to hop off the bus in Washington because it sounds like a good place to find work, and because he’s looking forward to a cold winter.

The passengers on the bus share the same objective, according to Jhason: “To be safe and well emotionally, physically, and psychologically, and even financially.”

On Aug. 26, a different bus carrying migrant families arrives at a local Catholic church in Washington D.C. after a two-night trip from Yuma, Ariz. The travelers are met by volunteers who help the migrants plan travel to their final destinations, and give them food, clothes, and the option to shower.

Jennifer and Jimmy are traveling with their three children, ages 16, 13, and 9. They are trying to get to Boston where they have cousins. The family fled Peru in July when Jennifer started receiving threats from a local gang member. Jennifer, who is being identified only by her first name because she fears retaliation, shows TIME a recording she took on her phone of the gang member threatening to kill his wife, who is one of Jennifer’s friends. When the gang member found out about the recording, Jennifer says, he started threatening her for collecting evidence of his behavior.

After that frightening ordeal, a safe, free bus that would take her family closer Boston was a “blessing,” she says while her youngest child plays with a stuffed animal gifted to her by the church. And the food wasn’t too bad: “We ate hamburgers every day,” she says with a laugh. Tatiana Laborde, managing director of SAMU First Response, the international nonprofit leading the Washington operation, says migrants on the buses from Arizona often have more amenities than those arriving from Texas— better food than Jhason’s rations, for example, and paramedics onboard. “Texas is Texas,” Laborde says.

A complicated political environment

All these migrants have entered a political debate over immigration policy in the U.S. which has only intensified in the weeks leading up to the midterm elections. Politicians on the right have cast people like Jennifer, Jhason, and Oliver as part of an “invasion” at the Southern border. While the left signals a more welcoming posture, many Democratic politicians, particularly in border states, are leery of being attacked for lax immigration enforcement. And the leaders of the liberal cities receiving Operation Lone Star buses have struggled to keep up with the influx.

On Sept. 8, Washington Mayor Bowser declared a public emergency in response to the busing. In New York City, Mayor Adams has said local homeless shelters have been overwhelmed with migrants (a claim local immigrant advocates deny is true). Abbott’s latest busing destination is Chicago, a move Mayor Lori Lightfoot called “racist” during a press conference.

Jennifer and her family stand for an anonymous portrait outside Saint Peter’s Church on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Aug. 26, 2022. (Shuran Huang for TIME)

Jennifer and her family stand for an anonymous portrait outside Saint Peter’s Church on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Aug. 26, 2022.

Shuran Huang for TIME

So far, busing has not led to policy changes, and only a small number of people compared to the total number allowed to cross the border have access to the program. But experts and the migrants themselves see potential benefits of the new system, regardless of the intent behind it. If done ethically, it can spread some of the strain of thousands of new arrivals away from over-stressed border towns, they say, and it can help individuals with few resources reunite with family or connections elsewhere in the U.S. “If it weren’t for the politics…then yes, [busing is] a solution,” says Theresa Cardinal Brown, managing director of immigration and cross-border policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington think tank. “From a practical standpoint, if it’s helping migrants on their onward journey… and they understand what’s going on, and they don’t feel like they are being misused or maltreated in any way, then, okay.”

Yet the unprecedented nature of the operation means politicians, immigration experts, advocates, and migrants themselves are figuring it out as they go, with the travelers often left to make split-second decisions about their futures.

Amparo, a 29-year-old migrant from Peru, arrived in Washington on Aug. 26 from Yuma. She is being identified by her first name because she fears for the safety of her family back home; she shows TIME the fresh scar on her right temple, which she says she got after a police officer attacked her with a baton at a protest against the Peruvian president. She decided to head to the U.S., hoping to join a cousin in Atlanta. Once reaching Yuma, Amparo was given the option of paying for her own flight to Atlanta or taking a bus to Washington. Because her credit card was declined, she decided to take the bus. 

“I had nowhere else to go,” Amparo says. But the bus was a boon: from Washington, a flight to Atlanta turns out to be more than $300 cheaper, she says. “Everyone here is so grateful.”

With reporting by Mariah Espada and Julia Zorthian/New York

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on A LOOK INSIDE TEXAS GOVERNOR GREGG ABBOTT’S TRANSPORTATION OF MIGRANTS AWAY FROM THE TEXAS BORDER

Louisiana Senator JOHN KENNEDY asks for your help!

Senator John Kennedy 
to me


Folks, 

I have hope for my Liberal friends…jellyfish have survived for more than 165 million years without a brain, so there is hope for a few of them. 

Just going over the situation in the United States Senate so far it’s looking like it could be one of our worst months in recent memory.

If you are on my team and have a brain, unlike the D.C. Radicals, then I’m asking for a prayer that we just might beat Chuck Schumer ! 

I’m a simple man. I like a good book, taking my dogs for a Sunday stroll, and beating Chuck Schumer in any way possible. 

Will you give me the satisfaction of besting that Yankee from New York? 

God Bless You, 

 
Senator John Kennedy   

 
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Louisiana Senator JOHN KENNEDY asks for your help!

Remember that Saint Ambrose fought heresy, a plague within the Church while he fought paganism, forces from outside the Church. His strategy was the same. Be holy, preach the truth in love.

Roman Trads and the Traditional Toleration of Demons

 Vincenzo Randazzo September 12, 2022 0 Comments

In 382 the Roman emperor Gratian made a pretty extreme decision which would offend a sizable portion of the Roman populace. He removed the altar of Victory from the Roman senate. Moved by the preaching of St. Ambrose of Milan, he risked losing the favor of pagans by going with the signs of the times. Of course, in those times the new, hip, cool thing was Christianity. The traditional thing was Roman paganism. Nevertheless, Gratian stuck it to the 4th century trads pretty hard with what he did.

The trads in those days were similar to the trads now. They were humble in numbers, they often felt hopeless, as though they were losing their people to the zeitgeist, and many of them just wanted to be left alone to worship as they pleased. They decided to politely complain and appealed to Gratian, himself a pagan at the time with sympathies for Christians. Gratian graciously insisted the two sides have a debate. The new kids on the block, the Roman Christians, picked Ambrose of Milan to fight the tired old followers of the traditional Roman Cult: the trads. The Christians were freshly turned from victimized group to bona fide Roman religion complete with roman places of worship and a recent wave of senators becoming Christian (albeit, some of whom were opportunist types).Their opposition, the pagans, were becoming a sad bunch of deplorables, gripping piously to what was left of their dying religion. The Roman pagans had a few supported long-held institutions of theirs left in Roman society. One of these was a liturgy of sorts: the senators would burn incense to the goddess Victory at her altar before their assembly. But that too was about to be taken from them. Who then would they choose to debate the great Ambrose, of whom they knew Gratian was particularly fond?

They picked Symmachus. A well-loved, respectful, pious pagan who did not hate Christianity. Many Christians, in fact, loved Symmachus and he loved them too. He studied and was close friends with Ausonius, a Christian rhetorician from Gaul (France), and people knew he could easily win the admiration of Christians everywhere. Heck, he and Ambrose knew each other, being from upper class Roman society and both being old men, Symmacchus was the perfect pagan to make a “come on, man!”-type argument to Gratian for keeping the Altar of Victory on the Capitoline hill. Of course, his argument would also be very eloquent, which was a mark of the time, a time with a lot more reason than perhaps our own, but I digress.

Symmachus vs. Ambrose

How did it go? Well, Symmachus’ arguments were awesome. They were perfect. He did not disrespect the Christian people with ad hominem attacks, even though people knew many baptized Christians were the worst sort of hypocritical opportunists. He did not criticize the Christian liturgy, which was so odd and reminiscent of that of the Judeans, whom the Romans were keen on insulting. He didn’t even insist the roman cult is the true religion of Rome, an argument which could have easily been made especially by riding the coattails of the recent 1000-year anniversary of Rome’s founding and appealing to patriotism to Rome, something even Ambrose took very seriously. What then would be the crux of Symmachus argument? Symmachus slyly appealed to how Rome is an empire which tolerates peoples’ traditions. Yes, he appealed to the tolerance of Rome. And he insisted the pagans who love their cult be left alone to engage in their traditions. Text is taken from Letter XVIII Reply of St. Ambrose to the Memorial of Symmachus

Rome is calling to us and saying: Respect the great age which the holy rites have helped me reach. Let me use the ancestral ceremonies; I have no change of heart in regard to them. Let me live in my own way; I am no slave. This worship has made the world subject to my laws. These sacred rites drove Hannibal from my walls, the Senones from my Capitol. Have I been saved to be insulted at my age? I shall make provisions for the institutions they think they must now set up; yet attempts to reform an institution of long standing come too late and are insulting. We are asking that the gods of our fathers, the gods of our country be left unmolested. All religions should be regarded as one. They all seek truth and there is no one road to so vast a secret.

How can you argue with that? He’s right of course. It was the Roman gods who helped Rome conquer the lands surrounding the mediterranean. And all religions seek truth and should therefore be respected. Right? And even if he’s wrong, he’s an old man for victory’s sake! Let him have his traditions in peace.

Enter Ambrose:

If the gods were fighting against Hannibal, how explain his numerous victories? With the gods against him, he reached the very walls of Rome and besieged the city. As for the Senones, they would have captured the Capitol, if a goose had not by its terrified cackling betrayed their presence. Where was Jupiter? In the goose? Hannibal worshiped the same gods as the Romans. You cannot have it both ways. Whoever won, the pagan gods were defeated. Rome does not address us in the words of Symmachus. Rather she says: Why stain me daily with the useless blood of harmless victims? Victory depends not on the entrails of animals but on the strength of the soldiers.

…Africanus gained his victory facing the battle lines of Hannibal, not facing the altars of the Capitol. One pagan emperor in captivity and the whole world in captivity in another’s reign have shown that the ceremonies which promised victory proved a deception. Was there not an altar of Victory then?

…I am not ashamed to be converted, along with the whole world, at my age. It is indeed true that no age is too late to learn… It is no shame to change to a better course …Why do you seek the words of God

in dead animals? …Let God himself who made me teach me the mystery of heaven, not man who does not know himself. Whom should I believe rather than God in things concerning God?

And the winner is: Ambrose of Milan. Even though the Church loves Rome and adopted everything great about her, the Church can never tolerate the worship of demons.

To my fellow Trads: at some point or another we have thought of our category: Traditional Catholics, and worried that it betrays us. Do we love our faith because it is our tradition? Or do we love our Tradition because we love Truth! Ambrose argues with Symmacchus’ salvation in mind, and we should do the same. This is not a matter of Tradition vs. Modernism. This is a matter, just like it has always been, against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness. Remember that Ambrose fought heresy, a plague within the Church while he fought paganism, forces from outside the Church. His strategy was the same. Be holy, preach the truth in love.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Vincenzo Randazzo

Vincenzo graduated from the University of St. Thomas with a double major in Philosophy and Catholic Studies. He spent three of his undergraduate years in formation at the St. John Vianney Seminary—part of which was in Rome. He has arranged several pilgrimages for young adults around the U.S. as well as internationally to Panama, Costa Rica, Poland, and Italy and he worked as an Evangelization Manager for five years in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. He currently lives in Rome where he works for Notre Dame part time as he pursues a masters degree in financial technology.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Remember that Saint Ambrose fought heresy, a plague within the Church while he fought paganism, forces from outside the Church. His strategy was the same. Be holy, preach the truth in love.

It seems that Francis Catholics like Dave Armstrong and Mike Lewis appear to believe that Francis’s Amoris Laetitia teaching allowing Communion for adulterers is infallible and “ALL” his “statements… are infallible”:

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Might Francis Catholics be “Proximate to Heresy”?

It seems that Francis Catholics like Dave Armstrong and Mike Lewis both appear to believe that Francis’s Amoris Laetitia teaching allowing Communion for adulterers is infallible and “ALL” his “statements… are infallible”:

In April, Where Peter Is’ Mike Lewis in his continued campaign for COVID tyranny called Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò a “dissident cleric” which is an approximate term for a “heretic.”  [https://wherepeteris.com/catholic-media-and-critical-thinking/]

Might Fratelli Tutti and Amoris Laetitia promoter Lewis be a “dissident” heretic or at least “proximate to heresy”?

Again, Lewis (and his collaborator Armstrong) appear to believe that Francis’s Amoris Laetitia teaching allowing Communion for adulterers is infallible and “ALL” his “statements… are infallible.”

He seems to think Francis cannot fall into heresy because he is the definitely pope and “ALL” his “statements… are infallible”:

Lewis (and his collaborator Armstrong) who are Pachamama apologists seem to think Francis cannot fall into heresy because they think he is definitely the pope because apparently there has never been a anti-pope in Catholic history and,again, “ALL” his “statements… are infallible.”

Here is what Vatican I expert Fr. Chad Ripperger, PhD, in his book “Magisterial Authority” says to Lewis and Armstrong who it appears are “proximate to heresy”:

“[T]reat[ing] ALL papal statements as if they are infallible… is proximate to heresy because it rejects the precise formulation of the conditions of infallibility as laid out in by Vatican I… by essentially saying that the pope is infallible regardless of conditions.”

“… Worse still, those who were to follow a pope who was in error in a non-infallible teaching which is taught contrary to something that is infallible is not, therefore, excused.”
(Magisterial Authority, Pages 5-14)

Might Lewis be a heretic?

Lewis has seems to have shown how so-called “conservative” Francis Catholics become first liberal Catholics and finally apparently Modernist heretics.

The answer appears to be that they reject Thomistic realism and it’s principle of non-contradiction as applied to the infallible teachings of the Church and believe that Cardinal John Henry Newman’s speculations on “Development of Doctrine” as well as his nominalist philosophy which denies the principle of non-contradiction are more infallible than the actual infallible Church teachings against Communion for adulterers and idolatry.

Lewis explains Newman’s nominalist thinking:

“Newman himself spoke of the need to understand that doctrine might not DEVELOP [my capitalization] in a way that we can anticipate or in a way that our preconceived notions are prepared to accept.”
(Where Peter Is, “The shock of developing doctrine: A response to Fr. Dwight Longenecker, May 22, 2018)

Although, I respect Cardinal Newman as a historian for his chronicling of St. Athanasius as well as the Arian crisis and use his historical work as good history, it appears that there is a problem with his philosophy which make problematic his theological idea of development of doctrine.

According to two scholars, Newman’s philosophy appears to be tinted with nominalism.

Cardinal Johannes Willebrands who took part in Vatican II said:

“Newman was in fact a convinced individualist. The individual always supersedes the universal, the individual is the only reality… This doctrine is at odds with the doctrine of Saint Thomas Aquinas and amounts to nominalism.”
(So, What’s New About Scholasticism? How Neo-Thomism Helped Shape the Twentieth Century,” Last chapter, books.google.com)

Also, scholar Jay Newman wrote:

“When he tells us that common nouns stand for what is non-existing and speaks of the mind’s gift ‘of bringing before it abstractions and generalizations, which have no existence, no counterpart, out of it.’ Newman is letting us know that he has rejected the metaphysical ‘realism’ of the scholastics in favor of the ‘nominalism’ of the British empiricist school.”
(The Mental Philosophy of John Henry Newman, Page 40)

Nominalism according to Wikipedia is defined as the philosophy that there “is a concept in the mind, rather than a real entity [objective truth] existing independently of the mind.”

In terms of truth and Catholic doctrine nominalism means Church teachings can change or GROW that is “DEVELOP,” but in Newman’s system the growth can’t contradict the previous accepted doctrine, but THE BIG QUESTION IS how can one who rejects Thomism as well as realism by being a nominalist then seriously speak of contradiction.

Even more important, “Development of Doctrine” is a speculation that apparently contradicts the infallible teaching of Vatican I.

The important American theologian Fr. Joseph Fenton who did his doctoral dissertation under the great Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange and was a collaborator with Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani explained the problem with this speculation:

“The statement that our Catholic dogma or doctrine is the growth or the development of the seed planted by the Apostles would seem to be seriously objectionable. According to the Vatican Council [Vatican I] the Holy Father has been empowered to teach infallibly, NOT the GROWTH or the DEVELOPMENT [my capitalizations] of the primitive Christian teaching, but the ‘revelation delivered through the Apostles, or deposit of Faith’ itself.”
(American Ecclesiological Review article, 1953)

It appear that the so-called “conservative” and “moderate” Francis Catholics like Lewis by thinking Newman’s “Development of Doctrine” is infallible dogma when it is only speculation by someone who was tinted with the false philosophy of nominalism eventually become liberal Catholics and finally Modernist heretics by rejecting the Law of Non-contradiction.

Dante scholar and Editor in Chief of The Catholic Thing Robert Royal explained that Lewis and all Communion for adulterers Francis Catholics need God to “repeal the Law of Non-contradiction”:

“Pope Francis… listens to… Cardinals Maradiaga, Marx and Kasper. The last in particular seems more and more incoherent and yet as he tries to explain precisely why marriage is indissoluble and yet those in a second sexual relationship – though not a marriage – may be absolved and return to receiving Communion. The only way that’s possible is if God repeals the Law of Non-contradiction. I don’t think that’s on his to-do list.”
(Fr. Z’s Blog, “Good comments on Card. Burke and a serious translation error,” November 10, 2014)

Also, is Armstrong calling his beloved Francis a liar?

LifeSiteNews reported these words of Francis:

“I would like to say a word about the pachamama statues that were removed from the Church of Traspontina.”
(LifeSiteNews, “Full transcript of the Pope’s comments on pagan ‘Pachamama’ statues,” October 25, 2019)

The National Catholic Register’s contributing writer Armstrong (according to the journalism website muckrack.com) is in a dilemma because either he is calling his beloved Francis a liar or he is saying statues which Francis called “the pachamama statues” are not what he called them, but instead “a strong case can be made that the naked images “represent the [naked] Blessed Virgin Mary”:

“There is a strong case to be made that they [the naked images Francis called “pachamama statues”] represent the [naked] Blessed Virgin Mary.”
(patheos.com/blog/davearmstrong, “‘Pachamama’ [?] Statues: Marian Veneration or Blasphemy Idolatry?,” November 5, 2019)

How dare the so-called pro-family National Catholic Register have a writer who claims the naked images Francis called “pachamama statues” can by “a strong case… be… [naked images of] the Blessed Virgin Mary.”

Maybe someone needs to organize a Catholic boycott of the National Catholic Register.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1

– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1

What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for America.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on It seems that Francis Catholics like Dave Armstrong and Mike Lewis appear to believe that Francis’s Amoris Laetitia teaching allowing Communion for adulterers is infallible and “ALL” his “statements… are infallible”:

WHY DO SO MANY OF THE CATHOLIC HIERARCHY NOT UNDERSTAND THE TRUE NATURE OF SHIA LaBEOUF’S CONVERSION TO THE CATHOLIC FAITH??????????????


Crisis Magazine

A Voice for the Faithful Catholic Laity

SEPTEMBER 13, 2022

The Hierarchy Doesn’t Understand Shia LaBeouf’s Conversion

EMILY FINLEY

Barron and Labeouf

Last I checked, Bishop Barron’s interview with Shia LaBeouf had almost 1.5 million views on YouTube and thousands of comments. I was impressed to see how many people in the comments mention their being profoundly inspired by LaBeouf. One was encouraged enough by his testimony to “pray the rosary for the first time since elementary school,” and many others say that they are returning to Mass after long being absent, some even mention wanting to attend the Latin Mass (and one of these a Protestant!). Let us hope that LaBeouf’s impact will be a lasting one for a Church in need. 

Why, then, did Bishop Barron come across as somewhat reluctant to really delve into the heart of LaBeouf’s conversion? I mean, of course, the role that the Latin Mass played. It is no secret that the current pontiff has, for some reason or other, chosen to do battle with the traditionalists and the Tridentine Rite for the sake of “unity” (he and Biden seem to be on the same page—strength through unity!), so we can understand why Barron squirmed when LaBeouf mentioned (repeatedly) that it was the Latin Massthat brought him into the Faith. 

Whenever LaBeouf was about to peel back another layer to his conversion experience, Barron would retreat. I assume that most viewers, like me, were captivated by LaBeouf’s honesty and candor and hung on his words. Barron’s rhetorical pirouetting was, therefore, something of a letdown and seemed, at times, to prevent LaBeouf from finishing his thoughts. Was this intentional?

In a way, this interaction between Barron and LaBeouf represents a microcosm of the Church today. Barron, to be sure, is on the “conservative” side within the Church hierarchy, in that he is not actively pushing a woke political agenda. However, he is one of the Boomer churchmen who come across as generally unaware of the real reasons why people are leaving the Faith in droves and why younger generations are not drawn to the Church. 

A couple of years ago, at the General Assembly of the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops, Barron laid out a five-step plan for bringing young people back to the Church. None of his prescriptions, however, recommend that which finally converted LaBeouf. He mentions the “way of justice,” “missionary outreach,” and “creative new use of media”—but these were hardly more than fluffy talking points for a room full of bishops who more and more resemble the out-of-touch, globe-trotting elites of the political sphere.   

Barron’s suggestion to the bishops to “beef up the intellectual content of our religion classes” may be somewhat helpful—most Catholics are almost completely ignorant of what the Faith actually teaches (I was one of these). However, as LaBeouf points out, Padre Pio “didn’t touch people through profundities” but by appealing to the imagination through his own witness to Christ. He is still moving people in this way, as LaBeouf’s conversion attests. More than an increase in rational understanding of the Faith, what is needed is a better way of capturing the imagination—reclaiming it from the powerful grip of militant progressivism and sentimental romanticism. 

Barron is on the right path when he highlights the role of beauty in this regard. The Sistine Chapel and Dante, for example, show the Faith rather than explain it, he says. “How beautiful are our churches? How beautiful are our liturgical spaces?” (Notice that he does not say “the liturgy.”) He is aware of the power of the Church’s rich aesthetic tradition, but like his discussion with LaBeouf, he draws back from confronting the full implications of his insight, which would lead to a reconsideration of the very unaesthetic choices that have been made in the Church over the last 60 years. 

Look no further than the Vatican’s “nativity” displayed during Christmas 2020. Churches built after the Council look much like their drab, lifeless Protestant counterparts—and the same could be said of many Novus Ordo liturgies when they aren’t trying to resuscitate the form with bubbles and guitar blessings. Yet this desire to bring life back to the Church (literally and figuratively) illustrates just how out of touch many priests and prelates of the Boomer generation are. 

ADVERTISEMENT – CONTINUE READING BELOW

For Barron’s part, he suggests we make church websites more beautiful. On one level, Barron gets it, hence his mention of Dante and Flannery O’Connor. In a moment of candor, Barron admits to LaBeouf what a failure was the post-1960s decision to advise priests to discuss their “experiences” over the Bible. But at the same time, Barron is beholden to the post-Vatican II belief that the liturgy and the churches ought to try to accommodate themselves to the times, to go digital, to create a nice app! 

Do young people really find satisfaction in the virtual hellscape, or are they hoping for something more? One of the most moving moments of Barron’s interview is when LaBeouf discusses the challenge of representing the sacrifice of the Mass on camera. The weight of it, LaBeouf says, at times was too much. He would pray with Br. Alex, whom he brought to Italy and who became his close friend. He would tell him he loved him and they would pray together to be guided through the scene. It was the Latin Mass, LaBeouf says, that drew him “out of the realm of the intellectual” and put him in the realm of “feeling.” He felt as if he was “being let in on something that is very special.”

This is precisely why LaBeouf made Barron so uncomfortable. LaBeouf’s conversion suggests that all of the five-step plans and compassionate platitudes about “meeting people where they are” will not do, that the aggiornamento failed. Beating the drum of “modernization” and “freshening up” manifests as the Church trying to be something it is not; because, ultimately, it cannot conform to modernity if it is to retain the message of Christ. The churchmen who try to push this end up looking like car salesmen, to paraphrase LaBeouf. 

ADVERTISEMENT – CONTINUE READING BELOW

It is the more orthodox and traditional Christian communities that refuse to stray from the difficult message of repentance, combined with the message of joy that attends the life rightly lived, that are growing amidst this crisis of the “nones.” Four years ago, the chapel where my family first began attending the Latin Mass was only about half full on any given Sunday. Today, the overflow room is nearly full. I have heard that same story from others I know in parishes across the country. And the pews of these traditional Masses are filling with young people—couples engaged, young families, and bigfamilies. My Orthodox friends report a similar trend at the Divine Liturgies they attend. 

Even the media has taken notice. It is not without reason that NPR, the Washington Post, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Anti-Defamation League try to defame these traditional Christian groups. If they really were just a fringe minority, they could be ignored. But these God-fearing, big families—the extremists!—represent a great threat to the globalist progressives. 

There are plenty of young people who are not looking for another version of the secular culture to affirm them. They are not looking for fancier websites or to be “community organizers” à la Saul Alinsky (Barron’s words, incredibly). They are looking for meaning. And for Shia LaBeouf at least—someone who knew depression and depravity well—the traditional form of the liturgy provided something radically opposed to the unhappy ways of modernity. It opened his soul to God. Take a look at the comments alongside the interview and you will see that he is not the only one for whom such a conversion is possible. 

At this juncture in history, Catholic thought could greatly benefit from a serious look at the role that imagination plays in conveying truth. Doing so would almost invariably lead the Church on the path of beauty—actual beauty, which, it turns out, is largely to be found in the tradition before the 1960s, in church architecture and art, and in its music, smells, and liturgical form. Restoring those elements that impress the senses and nourish the heart and mind would draw in the souls of people starved for beauty and seeking, like LaBeouf, to find peace in an order not of their making. 

https://www.facebook.com/v2.10/plugins/like.php?action=like&app_id=485814248461205&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df26bb772a7a5492%26domain%3Dwww.crisismagazine.com%26is_canvas%3Dfalse%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.crisismagazine.com%252Ffd791d0b9214fa%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=660&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.crisismagazine.com%2F2022%2Fthe-hierarchy-doesnt-understand-shia-labeoufs-conversion&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&share=false&show_faces=false

By Emily Finley

Emily Finley is the author of The Ideology of Democratism (Oxford University Press, 2022). She holds a PhD in Politics from The Catholic University of America.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on WHY DO SO MANY OF THE CATHOLIC HIERARCHY NOT UNDERSTAND THE TRUE NATURE OF SHIA LaBEOUF’S CONVERSION TO THE CATHOLIC FAITH??????????????

BIDEN’S POLICY OF OPEN BORDERS WILL COST AMERICAN TAXPAYERS 20.4 BILLION DOLLARS ANNUALY

Revelation: Illegal Aliens Released Into the U.S. Under Biden Will Cost American Taxpayers an Additional $20.4 Billion Annually(September 13, 2022, Washington, D.C.) — According to a new cost analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, providing for the needs of illegal aliens who entered the country under President Biden adds an additional $20.4 billion annual burden on American taxpayers. This figure is in addition to the well over $140 billion a year cost burden taxpayers are already bearing to provide benefits and services for the longer-term illegal alien population.The Biden administration has willingly released approximately 1.3 million illegal aliens into the country’s interior after removals and Title 42 expulsions are accounted for. Add to this figure approximately 1 million “gotaways” according to FAIR’s sources within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and it can be safely estimated that approximately 2.3 million illegal aliens successfully entered the country’s interior after President Biden took office.Based on the most recent comprehensive cost study, FAIR conservatively estimates that each illegal alien costs American taxpayers $9,232 per year. “Even in an age in which trillion dollar spending packages are considered modest, the additional $20.4 billion the Biden Border Crisis has heaped onto the backs of American taxpayers is still staggering,” noted Dan Stein, president of FAIR. “$20.4 billion could address some very important needs of the American public, instead of covering the costs of the surge of illegal migration triggered by this administration’s policies.”The $20.4 billion that taxpayers will spend this year, on just the illegal aliens who have entered the country in the last year and half, could cover the cost of:Providing every homeless veteran in America $50,000 per year for a decade. This would effectively end veteran homelessness.Giving every family in America earning $50k or less a grocery voucher of roughly $410.Providing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to more than 7 million additional needy families.Funding and expanding the entire National School Lunch Program.Hiring more than 315,000 police officers to combat rising crime across the country.Hiring of 330,000 new teachers, which would easily end the long-standing teacher shortage in America.Construction of nearly the entire Southern Border Wall (which could prevent millions more illegal aliens from entering).“According to another new report, 35 percent of U.S. families with a full-time worker struggle to meet their basic needs. These are the people President Biden pledged to champion. Instead, he is choosing to divert an additional $20.4 billion away from their needs, in order to fund a radical open borders agenda with no end in sight,” concluded Stein.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

I HAVE A BOOK RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU

I have just started reading a new book by Father Timothy V. Vaverek entitled “AS I HAVE LOVED YOU” and subtitled “Rediscovering Our Salvation in Christ.”  It is excellent.  I would like to quote from its Introduction to give you an idea of just how good it is.

“As it stands, we can scarcely imagine the miracle of our participation in Jesus’life and mission, so, of course, we cannot live his life as fully as we might or bear as faithful a witness as our always-troubled Church and world need.  The result is that the true breadth of the abundant life Christ offers to share in this world and the next remains hidden from us and from others.  We need to rediscover that life for our sake and theirs.  Then we will be better able to set about the work of witnessing to the Good News and the truth about human life regardless of the specific cultural challenges facing us.  

The entire human race awaits the Church’s gospel witness, for  deep within every person is a yearning that finds fulfillment only in communion with God and one another.  We were created, endowed and called by the Trinity so in Jesus we might enter that communion while on earth and enjoy it forever in heaven.  This orientation can be obscured or stifled by culture, syncretism, error and sin, but it cannot be undone.  There are signs of it in the desire for community, the dissatisfaction with the material world, and the search for enduring meaning and love that stir in every human person, regardless of historical and cultural circumstances.  Authentic  Christian witness cooperates with God in appealing directly to this most intimate human purpose and longing.  The person of Jesus and the life he offers open a new world that we previously could not have imagined but which was there all the time, underlying, transfusing, and transforming the world we new – or thought we knew.

     To offer others a credible witness, we have to our own vision and imagination by becoming familiar with much older Christian understandings of God and His eternal covenant, human nature and sin, Jesus’ life and mission, our participation in Christ’s saving work, and the consummation of the Wedding Feast of Heaven.  That renewal involves the difficult work of setting aside inadequate or mistaken views of the Gospel that have developed within Christianity as well confronting misconceptions about human life that dominate our culture.  Fundamentally, this requires a recovering of an understanding that human beings are not autonomous, self-actualized individuals but are divinely created persons whose identity and purpose are fulfilled in relationships with the
Trinity, others, and the world, relationships with the Trinity, others, and the world, relationships that are ultimately set right only by sharing covenantal life with Christ in his Church.  Most importantly, therefore, this depends on encountering Jesus and his saving work in a new way, allowing him to show us more fully the life he offers.  Fostering that encounter and rediscovery is the purpose of the chapters that follow.

Father Vaverek’s book is published by Emmaus Road Publishing and is available from Amazon.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

THE HYPOCRISY OF CHICAGO MAYOR LORI LIGHTFOOT IS DEMONSTRATED BY HER RETRANSPORTING SIXTY-FOUR OF THE ILLEGAL MIGRANTS THAT THE TEXAS GOVERNOR HAD SENT TO THE SANCTUARY CITY OF CHICAGO TO ANOTHER SMALLER NON-SANCTUARY CITY IN ILLINOIS

Chicago Mayor Absolute Hypocrite, Re-Buses Texas Migrants Out of the City of Chicago to another city in Illinois

September 11, 2022

Image by Lonnie H. Chambers Jr / Shutterstock.com
Image by Lonnie H. Chambers Jr / Shutterstock.com

After more than 60 migrants were sent to his town and left in a local hotel, the Republican mayor of a suburban Chicago municipality has called out the Windy City Mayor Lori Lightfoot. One hundred forty-seven migrants arrived in Chicago after being bused from Texas. Sixty-four of those migrants were then transported to a Hampton Inn hotel in Burr Ridge, Illinois, just outside Chicago, where they will be staying for at least the next 27 days. Burr Ridge Mayor Gary Grasso, a Republican, said to Fox News that Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker are using the migrants as “political pawns.”

According to his understanding, when refugees arrived from Afghanistan around a year ago, this hotel allegedly received some through faith-based or philanthropic organizations, but today the state feels they can merely send migrants. This isn’t about them; the migrants are OK; the governor and mayor are using them as political pawns, Grasso said.

Grasso also criticized Lightfoot for complaining about Texas Governor Greg Abbott sending migrants to Chicago, then “sending [the migrants] out to the” suburbs.

Grasso stated that he was more than pleased for individuals to find freedom. Still, the mayor of Chicago’s complaint against the governor of Texas is hypocritical. Grasso said that he agrees with what Gov Abbott is doing. The city of Chicago claims it’s going to be a sanctuary city, which he opposed. There must be unoccupied hotel rooms in Chicago. In a city of millions, this is hundreds of people. Why are they being dispatched to the Republican suburbs? “You have to wonder, “Grasso stated.

He stated that just because the Hampton Inn was previously used to accommodate Afghan refugees does not give the governor or the mayor carte license to transfer a couple of bus loads of migrants to our community without informing us.

The southern border scenario is very different from that of Afghan refugees. The state’s assumption that it can send migrants to the Chicago suburbs is entirely arrogant, Grasso said.

NBC5 says the refugees were initially housed in the Salvation Army Shield of Hope in Chicago before relocating to the Hampton Inn. According to the newspaper, a statement from the Illinois Department of Human Services states that the refugees are “getting temporary shelter at hotels in cities and suburbs that have housed vulnerable families from Afghanistan and other areas of the world. They appreciate individuals and organizations throughout Illinois for their hospitality and care.

According to the statement, they will continue to take steps to guarantee that everyone in Illinois has access to basic, vital assistance. Texas will continue to bus migrants to Illinois, and the state remains committed to helping in the orderly, compassionate, and prudent reception of new arrivals.

Lightfoot has often chastised Abbott; Lightfoot said that Greg Abbott and his supporters in Texas, with these continuous political stunts, have proven what many of us regrettably knew. Gov. Abbott is a guy without morality, humanity, or shame, Lightfoot stated during a press conference on September 1.

Abbott also opted to “inhumanely pack them onto buses” and transport them to Chicago with “no consideration for what the following steps are,” according to Lightfoot.

According to Seth Christensen, chief of media and communications for the Texas Division of Emergency Management, the migrants were transported on an air-conditioned bus. They were given food, drink, and protection.

President Biden’s inactivity at our southern border continues to endanger the lives of Texans — and Americans — and overburdens our towns, Abbott stated. Chicago will join neighboring sanctuary cities Washington, D.C., and New York City as an additional drop-off option to continue giving much-needed assistance to our little overwhelmed border communities. Mayor Lightfoot frequently touts her city’s commitment to welcome everybody, regardless of legal status. Abbott states that he eagerly awaits the day when these migrants get resources from a sanctuary city with the capacity to support them.

Lightfoot told reporters on Thursday that it is “my prayer” that Abbott “finds some compassion” and stops sending buses of migrants to Chicago, but that if he does, “we’re ready.”

“[Abbott] is attempting to create problems in Democratic-controlled communities to demonstrate his toughness,” Lightfoot added.

Abbott’s press secretary, Renea Eze, told Fox News Digital that Lightfoot is an “absolute hypocrite.”

Eze asked where was her fury and denunciation of President Biden when he flew planeloads of migrants across the country at night and dropped them off in communities. Mayor Lightfoot knows nothing about Texas’ busing policy and should stop spreading misinformation and instilling panic. Texas is continuing to respond to the Biden-created border crisis by taking extraordinary steps to confront the historic volumes of illegal immigrants, terrorists, and deadly narcotics like fentanyl pouring into our neighborhoods and overwhelming border towns, Eze said.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on THE HYPOCRISY OF CHICAGO MAYOR LORI LIGHTFOOT IS DEMONSTRATED BY HER RETRANSPORTING SIXTY-FOUR OF THE ILLEGAL MIGRANTS THAT THE TEXAS GOVERNOR HAD SENT TO THE SANCTUARY CITY OF CHICAGO TO ANOTHER SMALLER NON-SANCTUARY CITY IN ILLINOIS

JORGE BERGOLIO IS NOT REALLY/VALIDLY POPE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Vigano: “Simple people… understand that we have a Non-Catholic Pope…[causing] problems of a Canonical Nature” & Bp Gracida: “[I]f the [Pope Benedict] Renunciation is Doubtful, then in virtue of Canon 332 §2, it is Invalid for lack of Due Manifestation”

 “We have come to the point that even simple people with little knowledge of doctrinal issues understand that we have a non-Catholic pope, at least in the strict sense of the term. This poses some problems of a canonical nature.” – Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano

Bishop Rene Gracida summed the “canonical” situation we are in with the doubtfulness of the Pope Benedict XVI resignation:

“[I]f the [Pope Benedict XVI] Renunciation is doubtful, then in virtue of canon 332 §2, it is invalid for lack of due manifestation”
[https://abyssum.org/ ]

Moreover, it appears that if someone has definite solid reasons from canon law to doubt the validity of Pope Benedict’s resignation one can it appears possibly commit a sin if he doesn’t resolve that doubt before claiming Francis is definitely pope.

The important theological book “Rodriguez and the Confession of Doubtful Mortal Sins” in page 225 says:

“If one does not resolve the doubt and deliberately does the action anyhow, it means that he is willing to offend God gravely, and therefore he commits a mortal sin.”
(Google: Theological Studies -cdn- 1 PDF by U. Adelman – Cited by 1 Related articles)

Moreover, Dogmatic theology scholar Fr. Elwood Sylvester Berry (1879-1954), who was professor at Mount St. Mary’s Seminary in Maryland, in his apologetic and dogmatic treatise which according to his introduction “was originally written in Latin” stated that according to Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine: “a doubtful pope is no pope… ‘if a papal election is doubtful for any reason'” therefore a imperfect council of bishops is needed:

“Hence the saying of Bellarmine: a doubtful pope is no pope. ‘Therefore,’ continues the Cardinal, ‘if a papal election is really doubtful for any reason, the elected should resign, so that a new election may be held. But if he refuses to resign, it becomes the duty of the bishops to adjust the matter, for although the bishops without the pope cannot define dogma nor make laws for the universal Church, they can and ought to decide, when occasion demands, who is the legitimate pope; and if the matter be doubtful, they should provide for the Church by having a legitimate and undoubted pastor elected. That is what the Council of Constance rightly did.'” 8
(The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise, By Rev. E. Sylvester Berry,  Page 229, Note 8: Bellarmine, “De Concilio, ii, 19)

Latin Language expert Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s detailed why Pope Benedict’s resignation may be doubtful according to St. Alphonsus dei Liguori:

https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2020/01/05/why-saint-alphonsus-dei-liguori-would-say-the-renunciation-was-invalid/

Why Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori would say the Renunciation was invalid

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The Saints who have been canonized are already in the glory of Paradise, and so, baring an extraordinary grace, do not speak to us anymore. But those Saints who have fully explained their opinions or teaching on any point, can be said to speak to us today. This is especially true of Saints who have taught on questions of law and the principles to be followed in controversies.  Of which kind is Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori, Doctor of the Church on all questions of moral theology, and not a few questions of law.

No one has the right to interpret a Papal Resignation

As I reported in my notes for my meeting with Bishop Arrieta, Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Legal Texts — who is the top Vatican official for questions of legal interpretation — he emphatically declared, that no one has the right to interpret a Papal Resignation. It must be clear in itself.

This statement by Bishop Arrieta clears up the entire controversy over the renunciation of Pope Benedict. Because, it ends it.  That is, since Pope Benedict XVI renounced the ministerium, not anything else. No one has the right to say that he renounced the Papal Office or petrine Munus or even power of governance.  Because to say that something else, requires an interpretation. And no one, not even the man who is the pope, has the right to interpret the act of renunciation.

But the statement of Bishop Arrieta is not of his own making. It is the necessary conclusion of legal principles.  First, that a declaration made by the man who is the pope, inasmuch as he is the man, and not the pope, cannot be judged by anyone except according to the norm of law. And since a declaration by such man when regarding the renunciation of the Office regards the renouncing of the Office, one cannot appeal to the holder of the office to interpret it. Because if it was valid, then the holder is no longer the holder, and thus cannot receive appeals. If it was not valid, then appealing to the holder of the office is tantamount to declaring the renunciation in valid.

Any appeal to Pope Benedict XVI to clarify what he meant means that the Resignation is invalid

This is a very important point, which has been overlooked in this 7 year controversy. Anyone who appeals to anything which Pope Benedict said before or after Feb. 28, 2013, to explain that the Renunciation means the renunciation of the papacy, or of the petrine munus, or of the power of governance IS IMPLICITLY AFFIRMING THAT POPE BENEDICT IS STILL THE POPE AND THAT THE RENUNCIATION WAS INVALID, because they are trying to have recourse to an official interpretation. And if the act needs to be interpreted, then it is doubtful. And if the renunciation is doubtful, then in virtue of canon 332 §2, it is invalid for lack of due manifestation.

What Saint Alphonsus says about the interpretation of a law:

For those who have overdosed on the falsehood of universal acceptance, and quote Saint Alphonsus, let us see what the Saint would say about the games the authors of such sophisms play with the words “munus” and “ministerium,” to make the Resignation say what it does not say.  For this we must have recourse to the teaching of Saint Alphonsus, taken from his great work, Theologia Moralis, Bk. I, tract ii, p. 242, De interpretatio legis. I will first quote the Latin, for those who can read Latin, and then give an English translation:

DE INTERPRETATIO LEGIS

 200. Interpretatio alia est Authentica, alia Usualis, alia Doctrinalis. Authentica fieri potest vel ab ipso legislatore, vel ab eius successore, aut a superiore. Usualis est illa, quae ita ab usu est recepta. Doctrinalis autem est declaratio quaedam mentis legislatoris, quase a quocumque doctore fieri potest.

 Hic dubitur an delcarationes, quae fiunt a Pontifice, vel a principe alicuius legis, indigeant promulgatione, ut obligent. In hoc distinguere oportet declarationes pure tales ab aliis quae sunt non pure tales, sed potius sunt merae interpretationes. Declarationes pure tales sunt, cum ab illis explicatur aliquis sensus, qui usque ab initio iam erat clare imbibitus in lege: ex. gr. si dubium sit, an sub verbo filii intelligatur solus legitimus aut eitam spurius, et legislator declarat intelligi etiam spurium, tunc verum fit quod sensus in lege erat clare imbibitus. Interpretatio autem, sive declaratio non pure talis est illa, cuius sensus non est clare imbibitus in lege, sed circa ipsum variae sunt opiniones, et tantum deducitur ex argumentis, v. gr. quod sub nomine patris intelligatur eitam avus, aut quod sub nomine moartis intelligatur etiam mors civilis, prout est carcer perpetuus, aut simile, recurrendo ad quamdam impropriam significationem.

 His positis, dicimus cum Suarez, Castropal. Vasques, Sals, Salm. Holzaman, La-Croix, Supplet Sporger etc. quod declaratio sensus clare imbibiti in lege non requirit promulagationem, sed etiam obliget eos omnes qui illum noverint, cum talis declaratio non sit nova lex. Interpretatio vero alicuius sensus non clare, sed tantum obscure, sive improprie imbibiti in lege, quae est declaratio non pure talis (ut diximus) haec, quia habetur tanquam nova lex, ut obliget, necessario promulgationem requirit, sicut omnes aliae leges juxta dicta. n. 95 et 96. Hinc infertur cum Suar. de Leg. 1. 6. c. 1. n. 3 et Castrop. tr. 3. eod. tit. d. 5. p. 3. §. 1. n. 5 (qui citat pro se Bon. Salas, et Lorca) quod declaratio, quae fit a legislatore alicuius sensus clare in lege imbibiti (juxta exemplum adductum filii legitimi, et spurii) non requirit promulgatioem, ut obliget. Contra vero declaratio sensus obscure imbibiti (juxta exemplus avi sub nomine patris, vel mortis civilils sub nomine mortis) indiget quidem promulgatione; tunc enim ipsa novam constituit obligationem, quae per se non erat prius clare in lege imbibita. Et idem dicunt Suar. loc. cit. et Castrop. n. 2 de illis declarationibus, quae fiunt non ab eodem legislatore, sed ab eius successore, aut superiore; quia legislatoris mens nequit his esse ita cognita, ut erat ipsi legislatori; unde tunc, ut declaretur sensus (quamvis imbibitus in lege) alicuius obligationis, semper opus est recurrere ad argumenta, et interpretationes, quae novam legam constituunt, reddendo certum quod erat dubium; et ideo promulgatio requiritur, alias declaratio nunquam authentica, sed tantum doctrinalis repubabitur.

My English translation:

On the Interpretation of Law

200. One interpretation is authentic, another customary, another academic.  An authentic (interpretation) can be made either by the legislator himself, and/or by his successor, or by a superior. A customary (interpretation) is that, which has been received thus by custom.  Moreover, an academic (interpretation) is a certain declaration of the mind of the legislator, which can be made by any professor.

Here, there is doubted whether declarations, which are made by the Pontiff, and/or by a prince for any law, are in need of promulgation, to oblige.  In this, it is necessary to distinguish those which are purely such from those which are not purely such, but rather mere interpretations.  Declarations are purely such, when by them there is explicated some sense, which was clearly incorporated in the law already from the beginning: e. g., if there be a doubt, whether under the term, “son” there be understood only a legitimate or even an illegitimate son, and the the legislator declares (the word “son” in the law”) is to be understood even as an illegitimate one, then indeed it becomes that (that) sense in the law was clearly incorporated in the law.  But an interpretation, or declaration which is not purely such, is that, the sense of which is not clearly incorporated in the law, but about which there are various opinions, and as much as is deduced through arguments, e. g., that under the term, “father”, there be understood also a grandfather, or that under the term, “death”, there be also understood a civil death, insofar as is perpetual incarceration, or the like, by recurring to a certain improper signification.

With these things posited, We say with Suarez, Castropal., Vasquez, Sals. Salimancans, Holzman, La-Croix, Supplet Sporget etc.., that the declaration of a sense clearly incorporated in the law does not require promulgation, but that it also obliges all those who know of it, though such a declaration is not a new law.  But an interpretation of some sense not clearly, but obscurely, or improperly incorporated in the law, which is not a declaration purely such (as we have said above), this (kind), because it is held to be a new law, to oblige, requires necessarily a promulgation, just as all other laws spoke of in nn. 95 and 96.  Hence, there is inferred with Suarez de Leg. 1. 6. c. 1. n. 3 and Castrop. tr. 3. eod. tit. d. 5. p. 3. §. 1. n. 5 (qui citat pro se Bon. Salas, et Lorca), that a declaration, which is made by the legislator of any sense clearly incorporated in the law (according to the example given above of the legitimate and illegitimate son) does not require a promulgation, to oblige. However, contrariwise, the declaration of a sense obscurely incorporated (according to the example given of a grandfather under the term of “father”, and/or of a civil death under the term of “death”) do indeed need a promulgation; for then it itself constitutes a new obligation, which per se was not beforehand clearly incorporated in the law. And the same is said by Suarez. loc. cit, and Castrop. n. 2, of those declarations, which are not made by the ssame legislator, but by his successor, or superior; because the mind of the legislator is never so known to other as it was to the legislator himself: on which account, then, to declare the sense (though incorporated in the law) of any obligation, it is always necessary to have recourse to arguments, and interpretations, which constitute a new law, by rendering certain what was doubtful; and for that reason a promulgation is required, otherwise the declaration is never an authentic one, but only is reputed to be a doctrinal one.

Thus, Saint Alphonsus.

What the teaching of Saint Alphonsus on Legal interpretation means in regard to the Renunciation

From this text, we can glean three truths.

  1. When the meaning is clearly incorporated into the law, that meaning is the authentic one, and its sense is binding upon all, as for example, when Benedict says he renounces the ministry, all are obliged to understand that as a renunciation of ministry.
  2. When the word which is subject to a possible interpretation is a noun which includes all possible interpretations according to its essential signification, such as “son” includes natural and legal sons, not just legal sons, then the interpretation is a customary one and is obliging upon all, once the legislator declares that his mind was to include all such possibilities.  But before such a declaration it is not binding.
  3. When the word which is subject to a possible interpretation is a noun, which DOES NOT include the possible wanted interpretation, such as “ministerium” in the text of Pope Benedict’s resignation is wanted to mean “munus” or “officium” which are entirely other words, then the interpretation is NOT AUTHENTIC and is not binding upon anyone, and only can become binding, when promulgated by the legislator or his successors.

And thus one can conclude, from the testimony of Bishop Arrieta and Saint Alphonsus, that the interpretation of the Cardinals and Bishops that Benedict’s renunciation of ministry is equivalent in law, or signification, or intention, to a resignation of the Papal Office or Petrine Munus, is not only an illegitimate interpretation, but is an interpretation which is not binding upon anyone!

Moreover, one can conclude, that even if hypothetically any successor of Pope Benedict XVI were to say that such a reading of the text (where ministerium = munus) is the one Benedict intended, then the act itself posited by Benedict was invalid as per canon 332 §2, since it was not duly manifest in itself, but required another promulgated interpretation to make it valid.

And this means that the very existence of the plot to solve the Pope Emeritus problem is not only evidence that the resignation was invalid from the start, but is DOOMED TO FAILURE since as an interpretation of the act, its very promulgation will publicly testify to and canonically establish the invalidity of the renunciation!

In other words, there is no way to fix the invalidity of the resignation by any subsequent act. And what the Cardinals and Bishops are doing is GRAVELY IMMORAL AND DISHONEST and, moreover, is a grave USURPATION OF RIGHT.

One can also honestly say, therefore, that the usurpation of the Papacy by Bergoglio is a moral consequence of the usurpation of the right of interpretation by the Cardinals, and that Bergoglio’s bizarre moral character and state of mind is the perfect fruit of and punishment for their sin.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1

– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1

What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for America.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

IF THE REPUBLICANS WIN THE NEXT ELECTION I PREDICT THAT TRUMP WILL APPOINT NANCY PELOSI AMBASSADOR TO THE HOLY SEE; SHE WOULD LOVE SUCH AN APPOINTMENT AND JORGE BERGOLIO DESERVES IT


Pelosi to Italy if GOP Wins House Majority in Midterms?

September 7, 2022

0

284

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, like Hillary Clinton, never fails to amaze and/or amuse both her adversaries and colleagues. Pelosi, 82, is a controversial figure who refuses to leave the stage or fade into the sunset, much like Hillary (Meemaw meaning “affectionately”)

Nevertheless, wouldn’t it be awful to see the gasbag go?

Fox Business has been told by well-placed sources that Madam Speaker is already choosing her next job if the House Republicans win the majority in November midterms. However, I doubt that the “red wave”, as some keyboard warriors believe, will happen.

The first time I read the report, I laughed out loud and simultaneously shook my head in dismay. We’ve all seen that Pelosi’s hypocrisy is unbridled. It begins with the Speaker, a staunch supporter of abortion. She also supports on-demand abortions until birth. This she calls “sacred ground”.

Ready?

Pelosi asks Biden to nominate Madam Speaker for the U.S. ambassador position to Italy. This is a post she holds dearly. So, Ambassador to Italy? Pelosi does a great job. Not made in heaven.

The plot thickens.

Biden has failed to nominate an Italian ambassador since Trump took the presidency. Fox Business sources said that Pelosi is also open to the position.

The U.S. Constitution allows the Senate to confirm ambassadorships. This would make Pelosi’s confirmation doubtful at best if the GOP gains majority control of the Senate. My view is that the reaction would be mixed. Pelosi might be able to leave the country if she is allowed to remain in her ambassadorship, which is largely ceremonial.

Presidents have historically bestowed ambassador positions in desirable locations to people, in or outside of government, who helped propel them into the White House or supported their presidencies. These include political operatives or wealthy donors.

Isn’t that something? Biden would be able to get two for one with Nancy and Paul Pelosi.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment