UN Judge to Britain: Detain The Pope!

The attacks get loonier and loonier – but here’s the thing.  Someone, someday, will seriously attempt this.

From CathNewsUSA:  Prosecute Pope, UN Judge Proposes

United Nations judge Geoffrey Robertson has called on the British government to detain Pope Benedict during his upcoming visit to Britain, and send him to trial in the International Criminal Court for “crimes against humanity.” 

In an article published last week, Robertson said that jurists should invoke the same procedures that have been used to indict war criminals such as Slobodan Milosevic, C-Fam reports.

Robertson is one of five select jurists in the UN’s internal justice system responsible for holding UN officials accountable for corruption and mismanagement. His article was published in several countries and reported on by the Associated Press. 

Professor Hurst Hannum of the Fletcher School at Tufts University told the Friday Fax that it would be a “real stretch” to use the ICC since that court’s jurisdiction is mainly reserved for crimes during war.

More likely, Hannum said, is that experts would invoke the principle of “universal jurisdiction” so that national courts all over the world could detain the pope whenever he stepped foot on their soil. 

Yet Robertson insisted that the ICC could be used as long as the Pope’s sovereign immunity was waived and as long as jurists can show that the sex abuse scandal was carried out on a “widespread or systematic scale.”

Anti-Catholics and secularists across the globe would love nothing better than to see the Holy Father in handcuffs, led away to court and found guilty of perpetuating the sex abuse scandal.  I predict it would lead to a full-scale worldwide investigation of every cardinal, bishop, priest and deacon, which in effect would bring the work of the Church to a standstill.  The goal, of course, being the destruction of the Church.  This has nothing to do about children.

This judge’s opinion is not so far-fetched.  There are lawyers in Kentucky who want to question the Holy Father under oath.  There are reports that lawyers in Australia are keeping a close eye on this case, and will consider similar tactics if this is successful.

But for crimes against humanity, in the ICC?  With these folks, anything is possible. 

When he became Pope in 2005, the Holy Father asked that we pray he not flee from the wolves.  That he will stand strong to defend the Church.  So keep praying, and when you’re done, pray some more.

And let’s not forget – the world has been battling against the Church since the beginning.  Nearly every Pope for the first three centuries or so were martyred.  Part of the job description is persecution.  It comes with being a Catholic.  We’re not to actively seek out persecution, but we aren’t permitted to run away from it either.  That’s why I have little respect for those who are abandoning the Church – oh, I understand why they do it.  It’s a weakness, a condition of our humanity.  They feel betrayed, or overwhelmed with disillusionment.  For many, it’s the primeval ‘fight or flight’ response.  In this case, though – in the all-important matter of salvation – flight is the wrong response.  This isn’t akin to abandoning your hometown baseball team because they traded your favorite player, or boycotting a manufacturer’s product because they use slave labor, or even switching political parties over ideological issues.  Leaving the Church over the sex abuse scandal is an abandonment of faith.  Leaving the Church over the media’s spin on the sex abuse scandal is an abandonment of reason.  There is no excuse for either.

Someday, down the road, some Eurocrat or bureaucratic anti-religionist may get their wish, and have the Holy Father arrested.  I pray it doesn’t happen.  But for those who understand the nature of the battle we’re engaged in, such a development ought not surprise us.  “Strike the shepherd and scatter the sheep” is the strategy of the enemy.  Right now the Church needs fighters.  The Holy Father needs his defenders.  The weak are running away, leaving fewer soldiers in the ranks to battle it out. 

So will you be scattered, or will you stand?

How Pope Benedict Relaxes

Now, you might think it’s inconceivable that the Holy Father would spend his free time surfing Catholic blogs, and even more unlikely that he would read mine, but when you look at this image taken from my blog’s Sitemeter on Tuesday afternoon – - -

- – - well, I’m convinced!

Spin Cycle

Poor David Gibson. His opinion piece in today’s Washington Post is the latest attempt to creatively interpret Pope Benedict’s recent invitation to the TAC. The liberals are trying so hard to frame the ecumenism angle to their advantage, and they’re looking like idiots in the process. It’s actually quite funny.

I nicked it from the National Catholic Distorter: Washington Post Calls Pope Benedict ‘Closet Liberal’

The Washington Post has posted an article online today exploring the recent news that the Vatican will be creating special structures for Anglicans wishing to convert to Roman Catholicism.

The article, written by David Gibson, author of “The Rule of Benedict: Pope Benedict XVI and His Battle with the Modern World”, claims that the news shows that Benedict is, like any good ‘liberal’, a fan of change.

Here’s one of the take-away quotes:

With the latest accommodation to Anglicans, Benedict has signaled that the standards for what it means to be Catholic — such as the belief in the real presence of Christ in the Mass as celebrated by a validly ordained priest — are changing or, some might argue, falling. The Vatican is in effect saying that disagreements over gay priests and female bishops are the main issues dividing Catholics and Anglicans, rather than, say, the sacraments and the papacy and infallible dogmas on the Virgin Mary, to name just a few past points of contention.

That is revolutionary — and unexpected from a pope like Benedict. It could encourage the view, which he and other conservatives say they reject, that all Christians are pretty much the same when it comes to beliefs, and the differences are just arguments over details.

And that could be the final irony. For all the hue and cry over last week’s developments, Benedict’s innovations may have glossed too lightly over the really tough issues: namely, the theological differences that traditional Anglicans say have kept them from converting, as they could always do.

The whole article is worth a read; take a look here.

Here’s the thing – this accommodation has little to do with main issues dividing Catholics and Anglicans – but it has everything to do with the issues dividing Anglicans and Anglicans. Pope Benedict is extending a hand, or as I read elsewhere – sending them a rescue boat. The Anglican Church is imploding over women’s ordination and openly homosexual bishops, and yet Gibson is claiming it’s the Catholic Church that’s softening on these issues. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

What the liberals call ‘ecumenism’ is what normal people call ‘compromise’. To them, reaching out to our separated brethren means acquiescing on contentious doctrine in order to make the others feel happy and good about themselves, thus considering us Catholics as ‘open-minded’ and ‘progressive’. But that’s just a failure to stand on principle – it’s a failure to act as Christ acted. They are extremely miffed that the Holy Father, The Pope of Christian Unity, has shown how theologically vacuous, as well as spiritually dangerous, such thinking is. And I think deep down, they realize the gig is up, and that Pope Benedict has no interest in wasting his time ‘dialoguing’ with them anymore. The liberal Catholics are stuck in a cul-de-sac of stagnation, and the Holy Father has driven on by.

There is no proof that the Church is ceding any doctrine or dogma with this development. In fact, AFAIK, Anglicans wishing to join the Church via this process still have to profess submission to Church teaching. Just because they’ll be able to maintain their liturgical rites and such is not a sign that the Church is beginning to bend on the teachings of the Eucharist, or Mary, or any other doctrine.

Doctrines that include, by the way, the all-male priesthood. As well as the teaching that homosexuality is a disorder.

Nice try, Gibson, and thanks for the laugh!

Holy Father, Meet Daddy Long Legs

From Fox News.com: Large Spider Crawls on Pope During Speech in Prague

PRAGUE — President Barack Obama had his fly. Now Pope Benedict XVI has his spider.

A large arachnid appeared on the pope’s white robes as he addressed politicians and diplomats in Prague on Saturday afternoon. The pope didn’t seem to notice at first — but journalists following the speech on a large screen flinched as the spider inched toward Benedict’s neck.

It disappeared from view for a moment, but then could be seen crawling up the right side of the 82-year-old pontiff’s face.

When it reached his ear, Benedict gave it a swat. But it didn’t go away — it reappeared on the pope’s left shoulder and scampered down his robe.

As the pope left the medieval Prague Castle’s ornate Spanish Hall, the spider could be seen hanging from a piece of web.

In June, Obama now famously swatted and killed a fly that intruded on an interview for CNBC at the White House

AoftheA issued the following statement:

The itsy-bitsy spider
Climbed up the white-haired pope
Down came God’s reign
And gave the spider hope
Out came the Son
And forgave all its sin
And the itsy-bitsy spider
Climbed down the pope again.

PETA has yet to issue a statment applauding the Holy Father’s merciful treatment of the spider.

Setting The Stage

Saw this article over at Overheard In The Sacristy (just added at my sidebar under “The Collared Catablogue”). Here’s a portion of it – click on the headline to read the whole piece.

Pope Benedict to Catholics:
Kneel and Receive on the Tongue Only

Pope Benedict XVI does not want the faithful receiving Communion in their hand nor does he want them standing to receive Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. According to Vatican liturgist, Monsignor Guido Marini, the pope is trying to set the stage for the whole church as to the proper norm for receiving Communion for which reason communicants at his papal Masses are now asked to kneel and receive on the tongue.

The Holy Father’s reasoning is simple: “We Christians kneel before the Blessed Sacrament because, therein, we know and believe to be the presence of the One True God.” (May 22, 2008)

According to the pope the entire Church should kneel in adoration before God in the Eucharist. “Kneeling in adoration before the Eucharist is the most valid and radical remedy against the idolatries of yesterday and today” (May 22, 2008)

The pope’s action is in accord with the Church’s 2000 year tradition and is being done in order to foster a renewed love and respect for the Eucharist which presently is being mocked and treated with contempt. The various trends and innovations of our time (guitar liturgy, altar girls, lay ministers, Communion in the hand) have worked together to destroy our regard for the Eucharist, thus advancing the spiritual death of the church. After all, the Eucharist is the very life and heartbeat of the Mystical Body around which the entire Church must revolve.

Kneeling also coincides with the Church’s centuries old ordinance that only the consecrated hands of a priest touch the Body of Christ in Holy Communion. “To priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist.” (Council of Trent) This teaching is beautifully expressed by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica: “Because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.”

It is for reason that Pope Paul VI in his May 1969 pastoral letter to the world’s bishops reaffirmed the Church’s teaching on the reception of Communion, stating that: “This method on the tongue must be retained.” (Memoriale Domini) This came in response to the bishops of Holland who started Communion in the hand in defiance of the centuries old decree from the Council of Rouen (650 A.D.) where this practice was condemned as sacrilegious. “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layperson, but only in their mouths.” To date this prohibition has never been overturned legally.

[...]

Today Communion in the hand is carried on illegally and has become a major tool of the enemy to destory the Faith throughout the world. For this practice serves no other purpose than to warp our conception of Jesus Christ and nourish a contempt for the sacred mysteries. It’s no wonder St. Basil referred to Communion in the hand as “a grave fault.”

Hence, the Holy Father is doing his part to try to purge the Church of abuse and we as members of Christ are called upon to assist him. For your encouragement we include the following quotation from Cardinal Llovera, the new prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments speaking to Life Site News on July 22, 2009: “It is the mission of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments to work to promote Pope Benedict’s emphasis on the traditional practices of liturgy, such as reception of Communion on the tongue while kneeling.”

Also worth considering is the recent decree from Cardinal Caffarra, the Archbishop of Bologna Italy, forbidding the practice of Communion in the hand: “Many cases of profanation of the Eucharist have occurred, profiting by the possibility to receive the consecrated Bread on one’s palm of the hand… Considering the frequency in which cases of irreverent behavior in the act of receiving the Eucharist have been reported, we dispose that starting from today in the Metropolitan Church of St. Peter, in the Basilica of St. Petronius and in the Shrine of the Holy Virgin of St. Luke in Bologna the faithful are to receive the consecrated Bread only from the hands of the Minister directly on the tongue.” (from his decree on the reception of the Eucharist, issued April 27, 2009)

Technically all bishops and clergy are bound to follow the Holy Father’s directive on this issue, but in the meantime the faithful are not obliged to wait for the approval of their bishop in order to kneel for God. The directives of the Holy Father are not subject to the veto or scrutiny of the bishops and therefore all pastors and laity have a right and duty to put these directives into practice for the edification of their communities.

Our Lady’s Workers of Southern California”

David Martin

More evidence that the Holy Father is determined to restore authentic Catholic identity, primarily through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and our disposition to the Blessed Sacrament. Imagine the miracles that would take place if more Catholics came to believe what transpires during the Mass, and developed a greater reverence for the Eucharist. I believe it would be beyond our ability to comprehend.

Time To Grow Up

Rich at Ten Reasons put up a post yesterday highlighting some of the Holy Father’s homily from the vespers Mass celebrating the Solemnity of Ss. Peter & Paul.

When we hear someone refer to an “adult faith” or use the term “thinking Catholic,” we instinctively reach for our catechetical revolvers, for as often as not what follows is a soft-pedaling of embarrassing doctrines on birth control, abortion, and marriage. In his vespers homily for the Solemnity of Ss. Peter and Paul, Pope Benedict explains an authentic adult faith:

In his Letter to the Ephesians, the Apostle says that “with Christ we must reach adulthood, mature humanity. … Paul wants Christians to have ‘responsible’ faith, ‘adult’ faith. The phrase ‘adult faith’ has become a common slogan over recent decades. It is often understood as the attitude of those who no longer listen to the Church and her pastors, but autonomously choose what they wish to believe and not to believe: a sort of ‘do-it- yourself’ faith. This is also presented as the ‘courage’ to go against the Magisterium of the Church. The truth, however, is that it requires no courage because one is always certain of garnering public sympathy.

“What does require courage”, he added, “is to adhere to the faith of the Church even if this contradicts the blueprint of the modern world. It is the ‘non-conformity’ of faith that Paul calls ‘adult faith’. What he considers childlike is to charge after all the winds and currents of the age”.

The Holy Father went on: “Part of adult faith, for example, is commitment to the inviolability of human life from the very first moment, thus radically opposing the principle of violence by defending the most helpless human creatures. Part of adult faith is recognising lifelong marriage between a man and a woman, as ordained by God and re-established by Christ. Adult faith does not allow itself to be blown here and there by the slightest breeze”.

Numerous times I’ve heard people tell me “oh, I’ve matured in my faith – I go to Mass when I feel like it”; or “you really believe everything the Church teaches? Don’t you think for yourself?” Christ exhorts us to have the faith of a little child, but not the brains of one. What progressives fail to realize is that I (and many other Catholics like me) have made the choice to follow the Church in all Her teachings – just as they’ve made the choice not to.

And in so doing, they resemble the obstinate child disobeying their parent. Thus, they thrash about in their theological tantrums, and have fooled themselves with false bravery and perpetual immaturity.

Year For Priests

Pope Benedict XVI has declared a Year for Priests, starting on Thursday June 19, 2009. This coincides with the 150th anniversary of the death of St. John Vianney, the Cure of Ars, who is the patron saint of priests.

A Special Indulgence for the Year for Priests has been issued by the Holy Father, a portion of which I’ve cited below:

APOSTOLIC PENITENTIARY

DECREE

Special Indulgence for the Year for Priests

As has been announced, the Holy Father Benedict XVI has decided to establish a special Year for Priests on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the death of St John Mary Vianney, the holy Curé d’Ars, a shining model of a Pastor totally dedicated to the service of the people of God.

During the Year for Priests which will begin on 19 June 2009 and will end on 19 June 2010, the gift of special Indulgences is granted as described in the Decree of the Apostolic Penitentiary, published on 12 May.

Shortly the day will come on which will be commemorated the 150th anniversary of the pious departure to Heaven of St John Mary Vianney, the Curé d’Ars. This Saint was a wonderful model here on earth of a true Pastor at the service of Christ’s flock.

Since his example is used to encourage the faithful, and especially priests, to imitate his virtues, the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI has established that for this occasion a special Year for Priests will be celebrated, from 19 June 2009 to 19 June 2010, in which all priests may be increasingly strengthened in fidelity to Christ with devout meditation, spiritual exercises and other appropriate actions.

This holy period will begin with the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, a day of priestly sanctification on which the Supreme Pontiff will celebrate Vespers in the presence of the holy relics of St John Mary Vianney, brought to Rome by the Bishop of Belley-Ars, France.

The Most Holy Father will likewise preside at the conclusion of the Year for Priests in St Peter’s Square, in the presence of priests from across the world who will renew their fidelity to Christ and the bond of brotherhood.

May priests commit themselves, with prayer and good works, to obtaining from Christ the Eternal High Priest, the grace to shine with Faith, Hope, Charity and the other virtues, and show by their way of life, but also with their external conduct, that they are dedicated without reserve to the spiritual good of the people something that the Church has always had at heart.

The gift of Sacred Indulgences which the Apostolic Penitentiary, with this Decree issued in conformity with the wishes of the August Pontiff, graciously grants during the Year for Priests will be of great help in achieving the desired purpose in the best possible way.

Click here to read the entire document, which includes the conditions for receiving the indulgences.

I love indulgences – they’re a great gift that the Church has not just recently taken off the shelf and dusted off (as some progressives would like to have you believe); nor are they a medieval invention brought back in vogue by Pope Benedict. They have always been a part of the Church’s tradition, part of her Christ-given power to “bind and loose”, and represent God’s great mercy for His people. Shame on us if we don’t avail ourselves of this gift, and mercy on the ‘enlightened ones’ who consider themselves above it.

I’m sure my ‘normal’ parish won’t make any mention of the Year for Priests – our pastor hasn’t promoted indulgences at all. How about where you are?

Happy Birthday Wishes

Today is Pope Benedict’s 82nd birthday. Happy Birthday, Holy Father!

Drink a Fanta today in his Holiness’ honor.

You Know You’re Saying The Right Thing…

…when so many others are claiming you’re wrong.

Catholic Culture: New York Times, Others Blast Papal Comments On Condoms

The New York Times, The Times of London, and others are blasting Pope Benedict for saying that AIDS is “a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems.” A sampling of comments appears below, along with data supporting the papal comments from the National Catholic Register.

American Papist has a good commentary on the Holy Father’s statement as well.

Rich Leonardi at Ten Reasons cites comparative statistical evidence regarding AIDS rates and condom usage in other parts of the world. Good stuff.

The world doesn’t want to hear the truth – especially from the Catholic Church. Pray for our Holy Father as he preaches and teaches throughout Africa.

The Hermeneutics Of Stupidity

Richard McBrien at National Catholic Distorter has penned another editorial of gobbledy-gook and nonsense. This time it’s centered on Pope Benedict’s view of the Second Vatican Council….what a surprise, eh?

Pope Benedict on Vatican II

(just a few excerpts, with my comments)

The controversy generated by Pope Benedict XVI’s recent lifting of the excommunications from the four bishops of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X (also known as the Society of St. Pius X) has given some critics, on both left and right, occasion to question the pope’s commitment to the Second Vatican Council. (it gave the progressive critics night sweats and aneurysms, most likely)

On the left, some voice the suspicion that the pope is really in sympathy with those who question whether the council really changed anything in the Catholic church, even if his views do not exactly match those of the Society of St. Pius X, which openly rejects the council in whole or in substantial part. (partly right. The Holy Father is concerned about the changes wrought by the gross misinterpretations of the Council – and he has little sympathy for their agents.)

Both sides, however, seem to base their judgments on the pope’s previously stated views (especially in his address to the Roman Curia at Christmas 2005) that distinguished between two opposing interpretations of the council: what he called, on the one hand, a “hermeneutics of discontinuity” and, on the other, a “hermeneutics of reform.”

The problem is that both sides, left and right, have interpreted the pope’s own view, not as he actually expressed it, namely, as a “hermeneutics of reform,” but as they assumed he meant it, namely, as a “hermeneutics of continuity.” (McBrien can read minds but not words, because the Holy Father used both terms synonymously, as I will show later, via Fr Finigan’s blog The Hermeneutics of Continuity)

McBrien goes on to cite portions of an article printed in the Feb 2 issue of America, written by Fr. Joseph Komonchak, Novelty In Continuity: Pope Benedict’s Interpretation Of Vatican II. Notice how the author misapplies the Holy Father’s words, and how McBrien readily adopts that position.

The pope had begun his address to the Roman Curia by contrasting two ways of interpreting the council. The first interpretation Benedict did call the “hermeneutics of discontinuity,” which he described as an approach that runs the risk of positing a rupture between the preconciliar and postconciliar church.

According to Fr. Komonchak’s rendition of the pope’s remarks, this approach “disparages the texts of the council as the result of unfortunate compromises and favors instead the elements of novelty in the documents.”

Later in his editorial, McBrien further cites Komonchak: Komonchak suggests that the real target of the pope’s words may have been the traditionalist followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who reject the council because of its perceived discontinuities from church doctrine.

The papal address could be read, therefore, as an effort to persuade traditionalists “that a distinction is legitimately made between the level of doctrine … and the level of concrete application. …”

Sound the Wrong Answer Buzzer. McBrien conveniently assigns the “hermeneutics of discontinuity” tag to the SSPX while omitting himself and other wreckovators like him. Mighty big blind spot, I’d say.

Let’s look at a further reading of the Holy Father’s address to the Roman Curia back in December 2005. I stumbled across a portion of that text at Fr Finigan’s blog, The Hermeneutics of Continuity – in fact it’s the inaugural blogpost of Father’s fine blog, called Pope Benedict XVI On The Hermeneutic Of Continuity. It’s a great read in and of itself, and I’ve pulled several quotes from the Holy Father’s speech.

The last event of this year on which I wish to reflect here is the celebration of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council 40 years ago. This memory prompts the question: What has been the result of the Council? Was it well received? What, in the acceptance of the Council, was good and what was inadequate or mistaken? What still remains to be done? No one can deny that in vast areas of the Church the implementation of the Council has been somewhat difficult, even without wishing to apply to what occurred in these years the description that St Basil, the great Doctor of the Church, made of the Church’s situation after the Council of Nicea: he compares her situation to a naval battle in the darkness of the storm, saying among other things: “The raucous shouting of those who through disagreement rise up against one another, the incomprehensible chatter, the confused din of uninterrupted clamouring, has now filled almost the whole of the Church, falsifying through excess or failure the right doctrine of the faith…” (De Spiritu Sancto, XXX, 77; PG 32, 213 A; SCh 17 ff., p. 524).

We do not want to apply precisely this dramatic description to the situation of the post-conciliar period, yet something from all that occurred is nevertheless reflected in it. The question arises: Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?

Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or – as we would say today – on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarrelled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.

On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform”, of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. (Here’s where the Holy Father has used both terms – reform and continuity – in a synonymous sense) She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless.

However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts. These innovations alone were supposed to represent the true spirit of the Council, and starting from and in conformity with them, it would be possible to move ahead. Precisely because the texts would only imperfectly reflect the true spirit of the Council and its newness, it would be necessary to go courageously beyond the texts and make room for the newness in which the Council’s deepest intention would be expressed, even if it were still vague.

In a word: it would be necessary not to follow the texts of the Council but its spirit. In this way, obviously, a vast margin was left open for the question on how this spirit should subsequently be defined and room was consequently made for every whim.

There’s plenty more at Fr. Finigan’s blog – this speech is yet another unfailing example of the Holy Father’s brilliance and intelligence. While at the same time, this latest editorial of McBrien displays the complete opposite.

The Legend Of Pope Joan

There have been rumors and whispers that a movie will be made based on the fictional legend of Pope Joan.

No, not this “Pope Joan”, progressive ‘Catholic’ and self-pronounced heretic of Erie PA with her entourage of nuns.

No, I’m referring to this story: In the middle ages, there was a “Pope Joan,” a woman who hid her gender and rose through the ranks of the Church, became a cardinal and was elected pope. No one knew she was a woman until, during a papal procession through the streets of Rome, she went into labor and gave birth to a child. She and the baby were killed on the spot by the mob, enraged at her imposture.

Check out Patrick Madrid’s blog for an in-depth post of the legend and refutation, drawn mainly from his book Pope Fiction. The facts will come in handy as the release date for the movie approaches.

Standing With Peter

Now more than ever, we must pray in earnest for the Holy Father. Forces are gathering.

Rorate Caeli Editorial: Standing With Peter

“Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like to whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men’s bones, and of all filthiness. So you also outwardly indeed appear to men just; but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; that build the sepulchres of the prophets, and adorn the monuments of the just, … Wherefore you are witnesses against yourselves, that you are the sons of them that killed the prophets. … You serpents, generation of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of hell? Therefore behold I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you will put to death and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city.” (St. Matthew, xxiii, 27-34)

Shame on you, “Liberal Catholics”, Pharisees of the “New Springtime”! You proclaim to tolerate all, and to respect diversity, but you loathe those whose only wish is to preserve the purity of what was always taught and of the prayers that were always offered, because their continued presence in the Church contradicts the new “house” you tried to build.

Shame on you, “Progressives”, official Scribes of the “Spirit of the Council”! You build monuments to the “Good Pope John”, but reject all that he stood for, in traditional doctrine and in liturgical beauty. You hail Paul VI, but have done all you could to ignore his greatest magisterial document, Humanae Vitae, and discredit him in the eyes of the world. You maligned John Paul II every single day of his pontificate, but now you praise him, for you have found your new scapegoat – Benedict XVI, a man who, as his last work on earth, has accepted the heavy burden of the Fisherman, trying to bring unity to the flock God entrusted him.

You crucify Peter in the global public square. You deliver him to the enemies of the Church of Christ. You hate him for his struggle to rehabilitate what the Church has always believed and the way the Church has always prayed. You persecute him for he removed the scarlet sign of “excommunication”, which you used to despise, but which you now view as good!

You hypocrites! You are accommodating towards abortionists and you pander to politicians dedicated to the culture of death – but you misrepresent Peter’s legitimate gesture of mercy as an act of uninformed weakness. Liberal serpents, pseudo-Conservative vipers, you are “witnesses against yourselves” for your relentless persecution of Peter. Yet, Peter will keep working for unity with charity, charity in Truth.

Those who love the Vicar of Christ will keep praying daily for him, so that he “will not flee for fear of the wolves”, so that he may persevere in the mission he set out to accomplish. What about you? “Your house shall be left to you, desolate.”

Stick salute to Catholic Caveman