Still Little Word About God and His Law, None About His Justice or His Wrath

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Although there is not too much that needs to be added to the brief commentary, To Do The Will Of "The People," Not Of God, leave it to the conciliar revolutionaries to find a way to keep me working when I would much rather be taking several days off from writing. Oh, well, as one of our many legions of former friends, a priest in the Society of Saint Pius X, noted some time ago, "It's rest in peace. Not now. Not now."

The conciliar "archbishop" of New York, Timothy Dolan, continues to refuse invoke the law of God, His justice or His holy wrath when discussing the so-called "law" passed by the New York State Legislature and signed by Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo, who remains in perfectly "good standing" in the conciliar structures despite supporting the execution of innocent preborn children by chemical and surgical means and living in sin with his concubine and having aggressively crusaded in behalf of "marriage" for those engaged in perverse acts against nature, that is really no law at all in the eyes of God and thus has no binding force on men anywhere at any time, including in the State of New York. The "law" passed on Friday evening, June 24, 2011, the Feast of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist, is no law at all. That Timothy Dolan, who has praised the "work" of the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Anti-Defamation League, did not preach about this on what is the Feast of Corpus Christi in the world of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service in the United States of America is a scandal in and of itself:

Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan did not exactly hide his opposition to efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in New York.

Yet on Sunday, Archbishop Dolan made no mention of gay marriage during the 10:15 a.m. Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral. He did not criticize state lawmakers, or offer an impassioned defense of the church’s view of marriage.

It was not until after services when the archbishop tackled the issue, and explained to reporters why he chose not to do so during his homily.

“This is about prayer,” he said inside the cathedral. “I sort of needed a good dose of the Lord’s grace and mercy because I’ve been down a little lately as you can imagine.”

Archbishop Dolan said he was disheartened that the same-sex marriage bill was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo.

“I would have to say I was sad because it’s not good for the common good,” the archbishop said. “I think society and culture is at its peril.”

Archbishop Dolan acknowledged sensing that his efforts to prevent the bill’s passage were not going to be fruitful: “We knew it was an uphill battle.”

He said his opposition was based on a pro-marriage position, not an anti-gay bias. “I tell the gay community I love you very much, and every single morning when I say my morning prayers, I pray for the health of all New Yorkers and they are part of that,” he said. “I am very grateful for the presence of so many gay Catholics who are heroically trying to live their faith.”

Meanwhile, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey said that if he were in Governor Cuomo’s shoes, he would not have signed the bill.

“I believe marriage should be between one man and one woman,” Governor Christie said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I wouldn’t sign a bill like the one that was in New York.” (Archbishop Silent on Gay Marriage.)

 

Not for the "common good"? All right. Why, "Archbishop" Dolan, why?

This is not for the "common good" as that which is in defiance of the laws of God and thus of the eternal good of souls is injurious to the common good. The common temporal good must be advanced in light of man's Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven, as citizens seek to pursue sanctity as befits their state-in-life while they make reparation for their sins as members of the Catholic Church. There is no other way to pursue the common temporal good of men or their nations. None.

Catholics express themselves as Catholics, not as naturalists oozing with "sensitivity" for those who base their human self-identification on inclinations to commit perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that have been responsible for the destruction of men and their cities:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."

And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that "the people's will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right." But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests? (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it (Pope Saint Pius X,, February 11, 1906.)

 

This is how Catholics speak.

Catholics do not speak in the squishy, naturalistic terms of Timothy Dolan, who referred to a "gay community" when no such thing exists. The so-called "gay community" is a collection of unrepentant sinners who are fascists in that they will stop at nothing to convince the rest of society to stop criticizing them. They have been so successful in doing this in many parts of the world that it is considered in some places, such as Canada, to be a "hate" crime to criticize the "gay lifestyle." That day is not too far off here. Indeed, it is a "crime" in the academic and corporate and sports worlds to criticize the sickening, disgusting sins against nature. Such criticism is called "homophobic" and must be punished with various penalties, including monetary fines and, in some instances, "sensitivity training" sessions.

"Archbishop" Timothy Dolan's concern for the "health" of all New Yorkers is touching. Why can't he just say that chastity is the one and only way to avoid being stricken with diseases that are transmitted by sins against Holy Purity? Why? Because he is constitutionally incapable of speaking in this way. That's why.

Those who are unchaste and persist in their unchastity unrepentantly kill their souls and put their bodies at risk. Those who are perversely unchaste carry within themselves the very destruction of their bodies. Is it any accident that the following passage from Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans is omitted from the biennial cycle of Sunday readings and the triennial cycle of weekday readings in the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service?

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them. (Romans 1: 18-32.)

 

Those who are unchaste must be exhorted to quit their immoral behavior, seeking out the Mercy of the Divine Redeemer in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance at the hands of a true priest as he acts in persona Christi as an alter Christus, resolved from thence on to live penitentially as the consecrated slaves of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as their state-in-life permits. You will hear no such exhortations from the lips of Timothy Dolan.

We do not base human self-identification on the basis of an inclination to commit various sins. If we did, of course, perhaps we could refer to the "blasphemers' community" and the "killers' community" and the "thieves' community" and the "adulterers' community" and the "gossipers' community" and the "enviers' community." (Well, come to think of it, the counterfeit church of conciliarism is a collection of blasphemers, isn't it?) Human self-identification is not based on the inclination to commit any sins, and for Timothy Dolan or anyone else, including the conciliar 'bishop" of Brooklyn, Nicholas Anthony DiMarzio, to refer to the "gay community" is an affront to God, Who abhors the sin of Sodom.

How do Catholics speak to sinners? How did Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ speak to sinners whilst He walk the face of the earth?

Our Lord did not reaffirm Saint Mary Magdalene in her sin of adultery. He did not applaud her. He did not excuse the gravity of violating the Sixth Commandment. He did not explain away her sin by saying that she was genetically-predisposed to commit it or that it was "impossible" for her to keep from committing it. Our Lord, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man in His Most Blessed Mother's Virginal and Immaculate Womb by the power of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, said the following to her:

Go, and now sin no more. (John 8: 11.)

 

Our Lord told His friend from Bethany to reform her life, to quit her sins once and for all. He tells us, each of whom is a sinner (and I am one of the worst and most miserable, truth be told) the same thing in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance as we resolve to amend our lives as we pray the Act of Contrition as a true priest administers Absolution upon our immortal souls, thereby applying the merits His own Most Precious Blood upon them.

And just as an aside to Christopher Christie, the Governor of the State New Jersey, it matters not what you believe about marriage. It's what God has defined. End of argument. You are unafraid, Governor Christie, to take on the thugs in the state employees' labor unions. Why be afraid to state the truth that sins against nature are repugnant in the sight of God and destructive of entire civilizations, that no kind of "special rights" can be conceded by the civil law to those to engage in such sins?

Not to be outdone in all of the naturalism, however, is the aforementioned conciliar "bishop" of Brooklyn, Nicholas Anthony DiMarzio, who wrote the following that appeared in the online edition of the New York Daily News yesterday, Sunday, June 26, 2011, the Sunday within the Octave of Corpus Christi (and the External Solemnity of the Feast of Corpus Christi here in the United States of America where this great feast has, most tragically, never been a Holy Day of Obligation):

The children of our state deserve the best. We put in place public policies to ensure that children have the proper nutrition, the best education available and are safe from harms way.

There is no question that our society genuinely values the young. Yet, despite these efforts, the number of young people suffering from emotional disorders is disconcerting and our teen suicide rate is alarming.

Sociologists and psychologists agree that stable families where a mother and father live together in a loving union are a key predicator of a child's future health, well-being and success.

In other words, this is the best or ideal circumstances for our children for which we should all strive. This arrangement just seems to be built into our DNA.

Tragically, we no longer understand the primary purpose of marriage as the institution by which a man and woman bring new life into the world and teach the child to become a productive citizen.

In striving for that end, the man and woman discover their own mutual consolation. Tragically, we somehow have come to view marriage as legitimizing our individual need for love and affection.

As a consequence we have all witnessed the surge in numbers of divorce, single parenthood and cohabitation outside of marriage. Not even thirty years ago this would have been almost unthinkable and certainly scandalous.

I believe the passage of same sex marriage is another "nail in the coffin" of marriage.

It is destructive because we fail to view marriage in the context of a vocation: a calling to participate in the great enterprise of forming the next generation.

Marriage is reduced to an empty honor.

We who opposes Same-sex Marriage are not callous to the very real human longings for friendship, affection and belonging that proponents of this legislation espouse as the rational "Marriage Equality".

Indeed, we like other New Yorker discuss these issues with our friends, family, co-workers and loved ones who have same-sex attractions. We have in part failed as the proponents of the historical understanding of marriage as that between a man and a woman precisely because we have sought to be sensitive to those who have same-sex attractions. Perhaps we must now speak more forcefully and clearly.

As the chief shepherd of the Catholics in our City's two most populous boroughs, Brooklyn and Queens, the decision of our Catholic Governor and State Legislature to overturn the common understanding of marriage that, despite many developments over thousands of years, has always been understood between a man and woman. That there was virtually no public debate on the issue and that the entire matter was concluded in just over thirty-minutes late on a Friday evening is disgraceful.

As a protest, I have asked my collaborators not to bestow or accept honors, nor to extend a platform of any kind to any state elected official, in all our parishes and churches for the foreseeable future.

Our children in NY State deserve the best and unfortunately there seem to be very few if any "Profiles in Courage." (Brooklyn Bishop calls gay marriage law sinful; the title of this article is inaccurate as there was no reference whatsoever made to sin in its text.) 

 

Stable families? Keeping children safe? What about pleasing God? What about His justice? What about His holy wrath?

While "Bishop" DiMarzio is correct in stating that the primary end of marriage is to bring new life into the world, he is quite wrong in stating parents do so in order to teach their children to become "productive citizens." Parents are called to welcome children generously to prepare them to be citizens of Heaven by living as saints here on the saint of this earth as members of His Catholic Church. And it is the consciousness of our membership in the Catholic Church that impels us to live as good citizens here on earth as seek admission as citizens of Heaven for all eternity.

No talk of this, though, from "Bishop" DiMarzio.

"Bishop" DiMarzio is also as incorrect in accepting the propaganda of "same-sex attractions" as his provincial superior across the Brooklyn Bridge, Timothy Dolan. Those are inclined to commit perverse sins against nature acquire this inclination, which is why there must be such propagandizing in its behalf in the concentration camps known as public schools, propagandizing that is also to be found throughout the so-called "religious education" programs within the counterfeit church of conciliarism, especially in its high schools and universities and colleges and many, if not the lion's share, of its seminaries and religious communities.

"Bishop" DiMarzio seems to be ignorant or dismissive of the good work that has been done by the Catholic Medical Association debunking the propaganda of the allegedly "innate" nature of "same-sex attractions" (HOMOSEXUALITY AND HOPE: Statement Of The Catholic Medical Association). The contention that perverse inclinations are something that people are "born with" is asserted in the Catechism of the Conciliar Church, to be sure. However, this assertion is without scientific foundation. 

The conciliar "bishop" of Brooklyn is just as much of a naturalist as Timothy Dolan in speaking of our "common understanding of marriage" as though any reference to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as Our Lord entrusted them to His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication did not matter in public discourse.

"Bishop" DiMarzio, please consider these words of our true popes:

The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. So soon as Catholic truth is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

As with individuals, so with nations. These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree, and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded, both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow nor end to aim at. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)

 

No conciliar "bishop" anywhere on the face of this earth speaks in such terms. Such is the extent of the state of apostasy to be found within the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Such words are anathema to men who dare to speak in ways that have been anathematized by the Catholic Church.

Common understanding? What about the Order of Creation (Nature) and the Order of Grace (Redemption)? Did not God Himself ordain the male and the female to be complementary to each other as man and wife?

The Brooklyn "bishop's" public musing that he has been "too sensitive" to the concerns of  those who have "same-sex attractions" is laughable. Forceful? Is he serious? Look at how the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, inspired Moses to refer to the effects of this contemptible sin on the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha in the Book of Genesis:

And when the men rose up from thence, they turned their eyes towards Sodom: and Abraham walked with them, bringing them on the way. And the Lord said: Can I hide from Abraham what I am about to do: Seeing he shall become a great and mighty nation, and in him all the nations of the earth shall be blessed? For I know that he will command his children, and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord, and do judgment and justice: that for Abraham's sake the Lord may bring to effect all the things he hath spoken unto him. And the Lord said: The cry of Sodom and Gomorrha is multiplied, and their sin is become exceedingly grievous.

I will go down and see whether they have done according to the cry that is come to me: or whether it be not so, that I may know. And they turned themselves from thence, and went their way to Sodom: but Abraham as yet stood before the Lord. And drawing nigh he said: Wilt thou destroy the just with the wicked? If there be fifty just men in the city, shall they perish withal? and wilt thou not spare that place for the sake of the fifty just, if they be therein? Far be it from thee to do this thing, and to slay the just with the wicked, and for the just to be in like case as the wicked, this is not beseeming thee: thou who judgest all the earth, wilt not make this judgment.

And the Lord said to him: If I find in Sodom fifty just within the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake. And Abraham answered, and said: Seeing I have once begun, I will speak to my Lord, whereas I am dust and ashes. What if there be five less than fifty just persons? wilt thou for five and forty destroy the whole city? And he said: I will not destroy it, if I find five and forty. And again he said to him: But if forty be found there, what wilt thou do? He said: I will not destroy it for the sake of forty. Lord, saith he, be not angry, I beseech thee, if I speak: What if thirty shall be found there? He answered: I will not do it, if I find thirty there.

Seeing, saith he, I have once begun, I will speak to my Lord. What if twenty be found there? He said: I will not destroy it for the sake of twenty. I beseech thee, saith he, be not angry, Lord, if I speak yet once more: What if ten should be found there? And he said: I will not destroy it for the sake of ten. And the Lord departed, after he had left speaking to Abraham: and Abraham returned to his place. (Genesis 16: 16-33)

And he said to him: Behold also in this, I have heard thy prayers, not to destroy the city for which thou hast spoken. Make haste and be saved there, because I cannot do any thing till thou go in thither. Therefore the name of that city was called Segor. The sun was risen upon the earth, and Lot entered into Segor. And the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrha brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. And he destroyed these cities, and all the country about, all the inhabitants of the cities, and all things that spring from the earth.

And his wife looking behind her, was turned into a statue of salt. And Abraham got up early in the morning and in the place where he had stood before with the Lord, He looked towards Sodom and Gomorrha, and the whole land of that country: and he saw the ashes rise up from the earth as the smoke of a furnace. (Genesis 19: 21-28.)

 

Forceful? "Bishop" DiMarzio should familiarize himself with these words of Pope Saint Pius V concerning how this sin was dealt with by the authorities of the Catholic civil state during the era of Christendom:

That horrible crime, on account of which corrupt and obscene cities were destroyed by fire through divine condemnation, causes us most bitter sorrow and shocks our mind, impelling us to repress such a crime with the greatest possible zeal.

Quite opportunely the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] issued this decree: "Let any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature . . . be removed from the clerical order or forced to do penance in a monastery" (chap. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a grave offense may not advance with greater audacity by taking advantage of impunity, which is the greatest incitement to sin, and so as to more severely punish the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime and who are not frightened by the death of their souls, we determine that they should be handed over to the severity of the secular authority, which enforces civil law.

Therefore, wishing to pursue with the greatest rigor that which we have decreed since the beginning of our pontificate, we establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime, by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss. (Pope Saint Pius V, Horrendum illud scelus, August 30, 1568)

 

Mind you, I am not suggesting the revival of this penalty in a world where it would not be understood and where the offender would be made a "martyr" for the cause of perversity, only pointing out the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that clerics and others in ecclesiastical authority who are guilty of serious moral crimes are deserving of punishment, not protection, by their bishops, and should, like any member of the laity, be put to death. Such is the difference yet again between Catholicism and conciliarism.

In this vein, therefore, "Bishop" DiMarzio's order to his diocesan institutions and parishes not to bestow or to accept awards or honors from elected officials in the State of New York is ludicrous. If you believe yourself to be the actual, honest-to-goodness Bishop of Brooklyn and that you are a Successor of the Apostles in the Catholic Church, why not simply excommunicate anyone and everyone in your diocese who voted for the bill in the New York State Senate and the New York State Assembly? Why? Because Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI wouldn't like that. That's why.

Ah, some will say, the eight "bishops" of the New York State "Catholic" Conference issued a "powerful" statement just as the New York State Senate was approving passage of the bill in question? All right. Let's take a look at that statement:

We bishops share with so many of you deep disappointment in the presumption of our state’s elected officials in the radical redefinition of marriage. Yet we are heartened by the vigor with which so many faithful Catholic New Yorkers fought to preserve the true meaning of marriage.

Many surely believed that Catholics would simply shrug their shoulders and go along with this radical act of social engineering. Yet you did not do that. Together with people of other faith traditions, you spoke out. Thousands of you, by phone, email, letter or in-person visits to your legislators, and through social media like Facebook and Twitter, as well as hand-signed petitions in the back of your church, let you convictions be known.

We are grateful to you, as we are to the many legislators in the state Senate and Assembly who voted to reject this bill. We know the pressure that was brought to bear on them, and we admire their courage and yours in attempting to defend marriage and protect religious freedom. Their integrity and yours was called into question by many. Both you and they were accused of bigotry for simply defending the timeless understanding of marriage.

The proponents of so-called “same-sex marriage” portrayed their cause as a matter of “civil rights.” Redefining marriage has nothing to do with civil rights. The Catholic Church has a proud history in this country’s civil rights movement for African-Americans. However, this situation is in no way analogous. In the first case, a race of people was shamefully made to endure hundreds of years of slavery and systemic persecution and discrimination. Today’s debate focuses on a small group of persons, whose human rights must always be respected and defended by us all, but who claim a civil right to redefine marriage for all of society based on a private and personal preference.

As so many of you have let us know, this is not just a “Catholic issue.” Yet for us Catholics, there is particular disappointment with those elected officials who publicly profess fidelity to our Catholic religion but whose public stance is at odds with a fundamental teaching of that faith. The definition of marriage resides in the plan of God for humankind. It is at the very least presumptuous for the state to attempt to redefine it.

From this sad moment in our state’s history, let it be our prayer that we witness a new appreciation for authentic marriage as understood by our Catholic faith and revealed to us by God through nature. We have seen so many threats to marriage in recent years, from widespread cohabitation, to infidelity, to exploding out-of-wedlock birth rates, to pornography and other addictions that undermine family and married life. Sadly, we have even seen rates of Catholic marriages plunge over the last four decades by nearly 60 percent. And now we see the state presume to alter what God already has defined and common sense can recognize as right and true.

While our culture seems to have lost a basic understanding of marriage, we Catholics must not. We must be models of what is good, holy and sacred about authentic sacramental marriage. Let this moment where marriage is being attacked from without become a moment of renewal from within – in our Church, in our communities and in our families – where marriage is indelibly marked by fidelity, sacrifice and the mutual love of husband and wife leading to children.

The Church does not seek to be at odds with the society and culture. The Church welcomes the opportunity to be part of the public dialogue and listens respectfully to all positions. But the Church cannot do otherwise than stand against the claims of any culture and any society that attempts to define a relationship into being what it is not. To that extent we members of the Catholic Church are called to be in opposition to the prevailing culture. And sadly we are called to do so again. We know well that marriage always has been, is now and always will be the life-long, life-giving union of one man and one woman. No act of government can change that reality. With respect for the dignity of every person, we proclaim this truth and we will be faithful to its meaning and to its observance in all that we say and do. (A Message to Catholic New Yorkers from the Bishops of New York State.)

Strong statement?

Take just a closer look at the fine print.

The truth of marriage is not "understood" by the Catholic Church. It has been revealed by God and thus taught by her magisterium, which is infallible. The Catholic Church does have to "understand" anything about marriage. She teaches definitively what has been revealed to her by God Himself.

Words matter. Words count.

I will grant, however, that there is a reference, however fleeting that the true purposes of marriage have been "revealed to us by God through nature," a reference that was nowhere to be found in public utterances of Timothy Dolan and Nicholas DiMarzio in recent days.

The "message" also omits any reference to the rampant rates of divorce extant in this country, less yet to the fact that the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the United States of America has added to this epidemic by its annulment factories that have even made their way into some traditionalist circles, yes, both in the "resist-but-recognize" movement and in a few sedevacantist venues here and there. And it was the Diocese of Brooklyn that served as the prototype for all other annulment factories, earning it the title as the "Reno of the East" as early as the middle-1970s.

Indeed, Father Thomas William Coyle, an elderly Redemptorist who was the chancellor of the Diocese of Fargo when I worked as "Bishop" James Sullivan's Director of Communications from September of 1988 to August of 1989 (continuing in a ghost-writing capacity for another ten years after that via the old-fashioned phone modem and a "dos" matrix dot screen computer), told me a story that had been related to him by the ultra-progressive conciliar bishop of Brooklyn, from September 12, 1968, to February 20, 1990, Francis John Mugavero, under whose insidious watch the lavender crowd made great inroads as he presided over the first true annulment factory in this country.

According to Father Coyle, Bishop Mugavero (who was a true bishop) was walking in "mufti" (lay clothes) with several other priests (also in lay clothing) while on a visit to Spain in the late-1970s shortly after President Francisco Franco had died but before the first divorce law had been passed by the Cortes (the national legislature) and signed into law in 1981 by that Catholic infidel named King Juan Carlos, who also signed Spain's baby-killing law just last year (see King Juan Carlos, Meet Pope Leo XIII). Fluent in Spanish and Italian, Bishop Mugavero encountered the pastor of a small parish in a rural Spanish community. Bishop Mugavero, who did not identify himself as a bishop, asked the priest what married couples did when they wanted to get divorced. "I tell them," the priest explained to Mugavero, "to go to the Diocese of Brooklyn. They can get an easy annulment there." Mugavero was actually proud of the international reputation of his "marriage tribunal."

The counterfeit church of conciliarism has indeed helped to undermine the integrity of marriage by means of its annulment factories and its embrace of much of the feminist agenda and with its inverting the ends proper to marriage. Making matters worse is that married couples have been reaffirmed in their practice of contraception in the confessional by many priests and presbyters in the conciliar structures and that the children that Catholic couples in the conciliar structures have seen fit to welcome into this world have had their innocence and purity undermined by explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Worst of all, though, is the fact that these couples have deprived of the Most Blessed Sacrament and, in at least in most instances, true Absolution administered by a true priest.

The "statement's" claim that the Catholic Church does not "seek to be at odds with society and culture" ignores entirely the fact that contemporary "culture," such as it is, is founded upon a rejection of the Social Kingship of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, a Kingship that is rejected by the conciliar revolutionaries themselves. Culture is meant to be informed and directed by the Catholic Faith, meaning that conflicts between the two, although not impossible because of fallen human nature, ought to be a rarity, not commonplace. It is only because of the Protestant Revolution and its aftermath that helped the forces of naturalism, at work during certain elements of the Renaissance, to organize into a coherent mass as Judeo-Masonry that culture is at odds with the Faith today.

The conciliar "bishops" of the State of New York, who are inheritors of the Americanist heresy that was propagated by their predecessors in the Catholic Church in this country, especially Archbishop John Ireland and Francis Cardinal Spellman and Richard Cardinal Cushing, among so many others, and who are faithful sons of the conciliar revolution, are far, far from the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning her proper relationship to the civil state and popular culture:

That your Republic is .progressing and developing by giant strides is patent to all; and this holds good in religious matters also. For even as your cities, in the course of one century, have made a marvellous increase in wealth and power, so do we behold the Church, from scant and slender beginnings, grown with rapidity to be great and exceedingly flourishing. Now if, on the one hand, the increased riches and resources of your cities are justly attributed to the talents and active industry of the American people, on the other hand, the prosperous condition of Catholicity must be ascribed, first indeed, to the virtue, the ability, and the prudence of the bishops and clergy; but in so slight measure also, to the faith and generosity of the Catholic laity. Thus, while the different classes exerted their best energies, you were enabled to erect unnumbered religious and useful institutions, sacred edifices, schools for the instruction of youth, colleges for the higher branches, homes for the poor, hospitals for the sick, and convents and monasteries. As for what more closely touches spiritual interests, which are based upon the exercise of Christian virtues, many facts have been brought to Our notice, whereby We are animated with hope and filled with joy, namely, that the numbers of the secular and regular clergy are steadily augmenting, that pious sodalities and confraternities are held in esteem, that the Catholic parochial schools, the Sunday-schools for imparting Christian doctrine, and summer schools are in a flourishing condition; moreover, associations for mutual aid, for the relief of the indigent, for the promotion of temperate living, add to all this the many evidences of popular piety.

The main factor, no doubt, in bringing things into this happy state were the ordinances and decrees of your synods, especially of those which in more recent times were convened and confirmed by the authority of the Apostolic See. But, moreover (a fact which it gives pleasure to acknowledge), thanks are due to the equity of the laws which obtain in America and to the customs of the well-ordered Republic. For the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the fecundity with which God has endowed His Church, in virtue of which unless men or circumstances interfere, she spontaneously expands and propagates herself; but she would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority. (Pope Leo XIII, Longiqua Oceani, January 6, 1895.)

 

Pope Leo XIII was warning the likes of John Ireland, the arch-Americanist Bishop and Archbishop of Saint Paul from 1884 to 1918 and James "Cardinal" Gibbons, the Americanist Archbishop of Baltimore from 1877 to 1921 that the growth of the Catholic Church in the United States of America was not the result of the "free exercise of religion" clause in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America but of the graces won for us on Calvary by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross. "Religious liberty" as enshrined in the Constitution of the United States of America was not the reason that the Catholic Church had experienced such growth. God Himself was responsible for effecting this growth in spite of, not because of, the "dissevered and divorced" status of the Church from the civil state in the United States of America. The men who think that they represent the Catholic Church but who are actually heresiarchs do not understand that the conflict that exists at this time between the Catholic Faith and popular culture is the result of the false premises of the American founding that their false "pontiff" views as the model for a "healthy secularity." Some healthy secularity. They are incapable of understanding that the very false premises of the modern civil state that their "pope" embraces and they exalt are responsible, proximately speaking, for placing Catholics into conflict with the popular culture and civil law. They are just incapable of seeing this. Incapable.

The "message" issued by the "bishops" of the New York State Catholic Conference thus errs when claiming that the matter of "gay marriage" is not a Catholic issue. Au contraire It most certainly is. Why? Ah, well, it is the rejection of Catholicism by the lords of Protestantism and the barons of Judeo-Masonry that have brought us to this point, and it is only Catholicism that can get us out of the mess that has been created by the rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King. "Bishops" of the State of New York, meet Pope Saint Pius X:

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.

This being said, what must be thought of the promiscuity in which young Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in a work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous for them than a neutral association? What are we to think of this appeal to all the heterodox, and to all the unbelievers, to prove the excellence of their convictions in the social sphere in a sort of apologetic contest? Has not this contest lasted for nineteen centuries in conditions less dangerous for the faith of Catholics? And was it not all to the credit of the Catholic Church? What are we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may express themselves openly and in complete freedom? For the Sillonists who, in public lectures and elsewhere, proudly proclaim their personal faith, certainly do not intend to silence others nor do they intend to prevent a Protestant from asserting his Protestantism, and the skeptic from affirming his skepticism. Finally, what are we to think of a Catholic who, on entering his study group, leaves his Catholicism outside the door so as not to alarm his comrades who, “dreaming of disinterested social action, are not inclined to make it serve the triumph of interests, coteries and even convictions whatever they may be”? (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

The "message" of the conciliar "bishops" of the State of New York, each of whom is a faithful son of the "Second" Vatican Council and its false ethos, ignores these plain words of Pope Benedict, Benedict the Fifteenth, that is, who explained what happens when men and their nations separate themselves from the true religion:

Let the Princes and Rulers of peoples remember this truth, and let them consider whether it is a prudent and safe idea for governments or for states to separate themselves from the holy religion of Jesus Christ, from which their authority receives such strength and support. Let them consider again and again, whether it is a measure of political wisdom to seek to divorce the teaching of the Gospel and of the Church from the ruling of a country and from the public education of the young. Sad experience proves that human authority fails where religion is set aside. The fate of our first parent after the Fall is wont to come also upon nations. As in his case, no sooner had his will turned from God than his unchained passions rejected the sway of the will; so, too, when the rulers of nations despise divine authority, in their turn the people are wont to despise their human authority. There remains, of course, the expedient of using force to repress popular risings; but what is the result? Force can repress the body, but it cannot repress the souls of men. (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914.)

 

The inability of the conciliar "bishops" and their chancery factotums to speak to think and to speak in clear, precise and bold terms as Catholics is, of course, because they are not members of the Catholic Church, having defected from the Holy Faith on numerous points that have been explained on this site to the point of exhaustion. The vipers who run the chancery office in the Archdiocese of Boston had the unmitigated gall to denounce the "vitriol" of "bloggers" who denounced the rescheduling of a Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service heralding the "gay" lifestyle by having a spokesflack, Terence Donilon, write as follows to a man who had complained about this travesty:

'May I ask what you have done today to build up our Church? To serve the poor, evangelize the faith, spread the beauty of our Church? I'm concerned that you have joined a cooperative of anonymous bloggers and critics who are more interested in spreading vitriol in the name of 'defending' the Church. Do you honestly think we in the leadership are out to do harm to the teachings of the Church? If you feel that way I want to say in the strongest terms that you insult our faith and our Church with such vitriol.

'I hope and pray you find some peace in the fact that the cardinal has brought us back from some of the darkest moments in the history of the archdiocese. These attacks remind me of my days in politics when anyone could say anything as long as it got into the public arena and harmed your opponent. The one difference is we are not opponents. We are part of one, true Catholic family. Please think about these attacks and the harm they are causing to our faith.' (see a "conservative" Catholic columnist's article about this at: Boston Archdiocese Attacks "Vitriol" of Bloggers.)

 

Behold the fruit of Americanism! Those who seek to prevent a tragedy are denounced as the "troublemakers" while those who are promoting it believe that they are "building up the Church." Americans are so filled with the emotionalism and sentimentality that is so much a part of Americanism that those who see travesties and call them by their proper names are said to be the ones causing problems. Imagine what Terence Donilon would have said about Saint Jerome (Putting Love of God Above All Else) or Saint Nicholas of Myrna or Saint John Mary Vianney or Padre Pio, each of whom denounced sin and error in completely unsparing terms. Would have have denounced them as spreading 'vitriol"?

It is, when all is done and said, impossible for men who commit blasphemies against Christ the King by praising false religions and having participated in "inter-religious" prayer services and by accepting each of the conciliar errors (the new ecclesiology, the redefinition of the nature of dogmatic truth, religious liberty, false ecumenism, separation of Church and State, episcopal collegiality, etc.) to defend a Catholic Faith from which they defect on numerous points. It is impossible for men who are at work with God by means of false doctrine and hideous "worship" to retard social evils that are accelerating precisely because of their apostasies, blasphemies, sacrileges and other abominations.

As I note all of the time on this site, each of us has much for which to make reparation, which is why we must live more and more penitentially as we seek to fly unto the tender mercies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Most of us have, if we are truly honest with ourselves, been rather callously indifferent about sin at various times in our own lives and, very likely, in the lives of others. We must indeed embrace a spirit of true penance for those sins as we accept the Adorable Will of God however He manifests it to us, especially when He asks us to carry our crosses as we remember that nothing we suffer--not one little thing or one great thing--is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Lord to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death. We must always say "Blessed be the adorable Will of God" when we are afflicted, recognizing that our sins deserve far, far worse than we can ever suffer in this passing, mortal vale of tears.

We must, therefore, make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, recognizing as well that we have indeed perhaps been accessories (by counsel, by command, by consent, by provocation, by praise or flatter, by concealment, by partaking, by silence, by defense of the ill done) to the sins of others, including the sins of the conciliar revolutionaries against the First Commandment,the gateway to all of the heresies of conciliarism and to all of its false pastoral practices, if we have been silent in the wake of these grave sins that offend God so gravely and mislead souls so severely.

Our goal in life is to praise the Most Blessed Trinity for all eternity in Heaven. We can only do that, however, if we please God here on earth by cleaving to the truly good shepherds who make never mix truth with error and who never make any compromises with the ethos of conciliarism that has suborned grave sins against the First Commandment on a regular basis.

Father Benedict Baur, O.S.B., wrote the following meditation in The Light of the World for Trinity Sunday, which we observed on Sunday, June 19, 2011, that should serve as an inspiration to us:

Today's feast is celebrated in honor of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, the Triune God, in thanksgiving for His eternal mercy, because of which He has created us, redeemed us, and sanctified us.

"O depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God" (Epistle). With St. Paul and Holy Mother the Church we stand in awe at the depth of the divine mercy, of the divine wisdom, and of the divine knowledge. We are amazed at the great wisdom and love of God as manifested in His selection of men, particularly in His selection of the Gentiles in preference to the chosen people of Israel, as the recipients of His grace and redemption. The heathens were the first to wander away from God, and God selected the Israelites as His chosen people. But Israel in turn rejected Christ and salvation, and because of the infidelity and the unbelief of the Jews, the gospel was given to the Gentiles. "For God hath concluded all in unbelief (both Jews and heathens) that He may have mercy on all" (Rom. 11:32). At the end of time both the Jews and the heathens will belong to Christ. "O depths of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God. How incomprehensible are His judgments, and how unsearchable His ways! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been His counsellor? Or who hath first given to Him, and recompense shall be made him? For of Him and by Him and in Him are all things to Him be glory forever" (Epistle). "Blessed be the Holy Trinity and undivided unity; we will give glory to Him because He hath shown His mercy to us" (Introit.)

This is the God to whom we are consecrated. He has in His infinite mercy made us sharers of His divine life. We have been baptized "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" (Gospel), and we share in the inexhaustible riches of the life of the Holy Trinity: we have even been made"partakers of the divine nature" (II Pet. 1:4). Therefore by virtue of our baptism we belong, not to ourselves, not to created things, not to men, not to the world nor to Satan, but to God. At the time of our baptism we renounced all these things, and since then we believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. We have been consecrated to Them, and we belong entirely to Them. Anything less than God is unworthy of us, and God alone can satisfy us, not only during our earthly sojourn, but also in heaven, where we shall one day share the inexhaustible riches of the holy and blissful life of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. This life comes to us entirely through the mercy of God. "Blessed be the Holy Trinity and undivided unity; we will give glory to Him because He hath shown His mercy to us" (Introit).

This is a day for giving thanks to the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. During the course of the Church year we have been made aware of the innumerable blessings of love and mercy conferred by God on us, on the Church, and on all mankind. "For God so loved the world as to give His only-begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in Him may not perish, but may have life everlasting" (John 3:16).

This is a day for renewing our consecration to God. We should renounce the world with our whole heart, and break away effectually from all that can be displeasing to Him. As on the day of our baptism, we should repeat: "I believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy ghost." This belief implies more than the admission that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost exist and constitute God in three persons. It implies that I live for the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, by whom I have been sanctified, and to whom I have been consecrated by my baptism. This consecration we renew again today, and we should ratify it daily and make it more effective through the devout participation in the Mass. When we say the preliminary prayers at the foot of the altar, we rid ourselves of all attachments to the world, reject all infidelity, and renounce all that is alien to our state as creatures consecrated to God. At the Offertory we lay our hearts at the side of the bread and wine that we may make a new consecration and dedication of ourselves to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost. During the Consecration of the Mass, the sacrifice fire of our Lord and Savior will descend from heaven upon our offering, enkindling it with the fire of His love, and He will bear it up to heaven. We, too, are consecrated and offered up to the Father. We live, now no longer for ourselves, but for God alone.

The dedication of ourselves to God is strengthened and sealed by the Lord at the time of Holy Communion. This earthly consecration extends through Holy Communion to the eternal communion in Heaven, where we shall enjoy the companionship of God the Father, God the Son, and of God the Holy Ghost. Then we shall see Him just as He is, face to face. For all eternity we shall share His life, His glory, His divine knowledge, and the mansions of His eternal love. This glorious reward the Son of God earned for us while on earth, by His life, His suffering, and His death. "We bless the God of heaven, and before all living we will praise him: because He hath shown His mercy to us" (Communion). (Father Benedict Baur, O.S.B., The Light of the World, Volume II, pp. 6-8.)

 

"We should renounce the world with our whole heart, and break away effectually from all that can be displeasing to Him." We have displeased God many times by means of our own sins. In his ineffable Mercy, Our Lord sent Our Lady to Saint Dominic de Guzman so that we could be given her Most Holy Rosary to be chief means after Holy Mass and Eucharistic piety by which to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world.

Shouldn't we want to the console the good God by our Rosaries as we seek to make reparation for our sins and as we pray for the day when everyone in the world will start and end their days with the very Sign of our salvation, the Sign of the Cross, as they say reverently and devoutly the Name of the Most Holy Trinity in which we were Baptized and thus had Original Sin flooded out of our immortal souls as the very inner life of that Most Blessed Trinity was flooded therein:

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

 

May Our Lady help us to persevere as we seek to save our souls under the yoke of good shepherds who care about our salvation and not about their privileges, conscious of the necessity of fulfilling her Fatima Message as best we can in our homes that are enthroned to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!

Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints