Let's stop the hand-wringing and be frank: Yes, he deserved to die, and no, the cause wasn't served by having him die THAT way. The last thing we needed was some sort of diabolical martyrdom. If the blood of the [true] martyrs was the seed of the Church, we can only expect the Evil One to try and turn that on its head and use Tiller's blood as seed for his garden of wickedness. Obviously the shooter didn't read observation #3 in my post below on Lincoln and the pro-life movement.
Now, I'm not saying that I doubt the sincerity and passion of the guy who did it, no more than I doubted the sincerity and passion of Timothy McVeigh, nor I doubt the sincerity and passion of Guy Fawkes. But (as the evidence shows in the Gunpowder Plot, which happened at a most convenient time to consolidate public feeling behind King James and permit him to expand an ungodly government's control over the populace ... and the evidence may someday show in the Oklahoma City bombing, which happened at a most convenient time to consolidate feeling behind the Clinton Administration and expand an ungodly government's control over the populace) the coincidence of this finally happening just a few months into the Obama regime is uncanny. What better way to create good cover for an assault on people like us?
Certain shadowy operatives for the protestant regime found in Guy Fawkes a man whose anger at injustice overwhelmed his reason, and pushed him under the parliament building with kegs of explosives. It has been posited that certain shadowy operatives found in Timothy McVeigh a man whose anger at injustice overwhelmed his reason, and drove him to the OK Federal building with a Ryder truck of explosives. Some future historian (certainly not our coopted contemporary press) may learn that certain shadowy operatives encouraged this Tiller killer guy in a very similar way. The Obama Justice Department goons will be swarming the state to find evidence of a conspiracy, and I wonder if they'll be really careful not to find evidence of that sort.
So I guess we brace ourselves to feel the boot from the Daley machine thugs in Washington and vermin in Kansas politics (the ones that didn't follow Kathleen Sebelius to DC). I'm sure that pro-death shill Dan Watkins in Lawrence (who abandoned the Catholic faith to ride Sebelius's coattails and Tiller's money to the US Attorney nomination) can't wait to get confirmed into his office at the Dole Courthouse so he can ramp up the persecution.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Decree from Pope Roger on the Williamson Affaire
The Remnant linked today to an important announcement in the Observatore Silicano. From the Taj Mahoney in Los Angeles, Pope Roger (in a declaration signed by himself and two officials of the American Jewish Committee) decreed that Bp. Richard Williamson was banned from Catholic facilities in the Archdiocese. So what? I can't imagine any member of, or lay adherent to, the Society, much less Bishop Williamson, spending a whole lot of time on Pope Roger's property. The whole point and beauty of being SSPX in L.A. is that you can ignore Pope Roger!
But his Holiness further declared as follows:
Hmm. So Bp. Williamson isn't a member of the Catholic Church and may never become one? It seems that crazy Kraut antipope Ratzinger has it all wrong, huh, your Holiness? We're so glad we have you could take time from your liturgical dancing at the annual Religious Education Conference (and your federal grand jury investigation) to declare what Bp. Williamson's status is and to do so jointly with two Jewish guys who themselves aren't members of the Catholic Church.
I guess this is just one of the next logical steps after setting up your own liturgical rules contrary to Roman authority...to declare for yourself who is and who isn't Catholic, even if you don't have territorial jurisdiction over such persons.
Then again, wouldn't it be cool if Bishops could do such things? I can't imagine it would be difficult to find some Bishop somewhere to declare Pope Roger to be forever and irreconcilably outside the Church.
But his Holiness further declared as follows:
"Holocaust deniers like Williamson will find no sympathetic ear or place of refuge in the Catholic Church, of which he is not—and may never become—a member," said a commentary signed jointly by Mahony, head of the nation's largest archdiocese, and two officials of the American Jewish Committee.
"The cardinal wishes to send a clear signal to the Jewish community that Williamson is not a member or even welcome in the Catholic Church until he renounces his views," said Tod Tamberg, spokesman for the archdiocese.
Hmm. So Bp. Williamson isn't a member of the Catholic Church and may never become one? It seems that crazy Kraut antipope Ratzinger has it all wrong, huh, your Holiness? We're so glad we have you could take time from your liturgical dancing at the annual Religious Education Conference (and your federal grand jury investigation) to declare what Bp. Williamson's status is and to do so jointly with two Jewish guys who themselves aren't members of the Catholic Church.
I guess this is just one of the next logical steps after setting up your own liturgical rules contrary to Roman authority...to declare for yourself who is and who isn't Catholic, even if you don't have territorial jurisdiction over such persons.
Then again, wouldn't it be cool if Bishops could do such things? I can't imagine it would be difficult to find some Bishop somewhere to declare Pope Roger to be forever and irreconcilably outside the Church.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Lincoln and the pro-life movement?
On this President's Day, observing (among other silly things) Lincoln's 200th birthday, shall we consider what the pro-life movement can learn from Abraham Lincoln?
1. Never let your movement be coopted by someone with a different agenda. The abolitionist movement gave itself over as a vehicle for the agenda of an ambitious man who, when it played well, decried the injustice of Negro slavery, but really was out to centralize power in Washington and replace a federation of sovereign states with a single central ... even imperial ... government, and who made it clear that if he could "save the Union" without freeing a single slave, he would do so.
Everything worked out fine for his cabal of generals and railroad owners and other industrial interests, which within a few years were pushing the Indians out of (or underneath) the western territories. But for the southern Negros, slave and free, the result was resentment and racial tensions which are a political factor to this day, and which contrast to the relative racial harmony which one finds in the dozens of countries Western Hemisphere which simply ended slavery peacefully, without an internecine war.
And today, we have seen the Bushie neocons use pro-life voters and pro-life election manpower to launch their own agenda of building a new empire of coerced global democracy. The pro-lifers should wonder if they've been had like the abolitionists, in that the neocon politicians and their war profiteering backers paid their lip-service and got what they want, but abortion on demand is still the law of the land, and the pro-lifers must now operate in the Obama backlash.
2. Read the Fine Print. It's commonly believed that Lincoln freed the slaves. Nonsense. He simply pulled a propaganda stunt by purporting to free slaves in unconquered Confederate territory. If you'll read the Emancipation Proclamation, you'll see he didn't free a single slave in territory Northern invaders controlled.
Likewise, pro-lifers today should pay attention to what really was written, in Roe and Doe, and their precedents, as well as what has happened since (and didn't happen) in Casey and other cases. Pro-lifers should also be sensitive to the federal Constitution. Justice Scalia is constitutionally correct, even as he's pro-life: this is not a federal issue. The way these cases are most likely to get rolled back is to establish that the subject of abortion, like almost all other regulatory and criminal matters, is properly the business of the states, which have plenary power.
If some post-natal person is chopped to pieces, it's a state crime, not a federal offense. So it should be. And so it should be, if some pre-natal person gets chopped to pieces.
Some dream case which rules a fetus has "personhood" will be no more sound Constitutionally than Roe or Doe (however morally sound). It will be a house built on the sand of inconsistent and incomprehensible due process jurisprudence, certain to be washed away by the next leftist wave. Pro-lifers should understand the constitutional issues, and be prepared to take their battle out of Washington to their own statehouses and state courts, where it properly belongs.
3. Don't turn monsters into martyrs. Before John Wilkes Booth's appearance, the balcony at the Ford Theatre was occupied by a man whose refusal to abide by the 10th Amendment to the Constitution caused over 600,000 deaths, who burned and looted massive swaths of his supposedly-beloved nation, and who destroyed a humane and thoughtful form of government that was founded on the Catholic notion of subsidiary (albeit by Protestants and Deists). With the pull of a trigger, Booth had suddenly created the secular saint we see in that hideous William Chester French sculpture.
And a few years ago, some loner idiots--not the organized movement--were popping off abortionists. Even if there's no sin against justice in using all necessary means, including deadly force, to stop the murder of an innocent, more harm than good is done when one raises such a vile person to to the altars of the pro-death crowd. Even for the organized movement that abhors such tactics, though, there's still a lesson here: Should we gain victories here and there, we must treat the vanquished pro-aborts with care, lest we cause a backlash and undo what we've accomplished.
1. Never let your movement be coopted by someone with a different agenda. The abolitionist movement gave itself over as a vehicle for the agenda of an ambitious man who, when it played well, decried the injustice of Negro slavery, but really was out to centralize power in Washington and replace a federation of sovereign states with a single central ... even imperial ... government, and who made it clear that if he could "save the Union" without freeing a single slave, he would do so.
Everything worked out fine for his cabal of generals and railroad owners and other industrial interests, which within a few years were pushing the Indians out of (or underneath) the western territories. But for the southern Negros, slave and free, the result was resentment and racial tensions which are a political factor to this day, and which contrast to the relative racial harmony which one finds in the dozens of countries Western Hemisphere which simply ended slavery peacefully, without an internecine war.
And today, we have seen the Bushie neocons use pro-life voters and pro-life election manpower to launch their own agenda of building a new empire of coerced global democracy. The pro-lifers should wonder if they've been had like the abolitionists, in that the neocon politicians and their war profiteering backers paid their lip-service and got what they want, but abortion on demand is still the law of the land, and the pro-lifers must now operate in the Obama backlash.
2. Read the Fine Print. It's commonly believed that Lincoln freed the slaves. Nonsense. He simply pulled a propaganda stunt by purporting to free slaves in unconquered Confederate territory. If you'll read the Emancipation Proclamation, you'll see he didn't free a single slave in territory Northern invaders controlled.
Likewise, pro-lifers today should pay attention to what really was written, in Roe and Doe, and their precedents, as well as what has happened since (and didn't happen) in Casey and other cases. Pro-lifers should also be sensitive to the federal Constitution. Justice Scalia is constitutionally correct, even as he's pro-life: this is not a federal issue. The way these cases are most likely to get rolled back is to establish that the subject of abortion, like almost all other regulatory and criminal matters, is properly the business of the states, which have plenary power.
If some post-natal person is chopped to pieces, it's a state crime, not a federal offense. So it should be. And so it should be, if some pre-natal person gets chopped to pieces.
Some dream case which rules a fetus has "personhood" will be no more sound Constitutionally than Roe or Doe (however morally sound). It will be a house built on the sand of inconsistent and incomprehensible due process jurisprudence, certain to be washed away by the next leftist wave. Pro-lifers should understand the constitutional issues, and be prepared to take their battle out of Washington to their own statehouses and state courts, where it properly belongs.
3. Don't turn monsters into martyrs. Before John Wilkes Booth's appearance, the balcony at the Ford Theatre was occupied by a man whose refusal to abide by the 10th Amendment to the Constitution caused over 600,000 deaths, who burned and looted massive swaths of his supposedly-beloved nation, and who destroyed a humane and thoughtful form of government that was founded on the Catholic notion of subsidiary (albeit by Protestants and Deists). With the pull of a trigger, Booth had suddenly created the secular saint we see in that hideous William Chester French sculpture.
And a few years ago, some loner idiots--not the organized movement--were popping off abortionists. Even if there's no sin against justice in using all necessary means, including deadly force, to stop the murder of an innocent, more harm than good is done when one raises such a vile person to to the altars of the pro-death crowd. Even for the organized movement that abhors such tactics, though, there's still a lesson here: Should we gain victories here and there, we must treat the vanquished pro-aborts with care, lest we cause a backlash and undo what we've accomplished.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
And now back to the outrage...
Pennsylvania Judges lining their own pockets by sending teenagers to jail:
Using the government's monopoly on the use of force to intentionally and wrongfully imprisoning someone is something that deserves summary execution, in the Curmudgeon sentencing guidelines.
But of course, it's really not that big of a deal to the government---a few years at most:
But of course their buddies on the bench will look our for them. Maybe a few hours of picking up trash will be all they get.
But Curmudgeon how can you and a Christian say such things? How dare you suggest we (and the incarcerated kids) do anything but turn the other cheek! Christians are supposed to be merciful and forgiving!
I'm reminded of a scene from Henry V:
Using the government's monopoly on the use of force to intentionally and wrongfully imprisoning someone is something that deserves summary execution, in the Curmudgeon sentencing guidelines.
But of course, it's really not that big of a deal to the government---a few years at most:
Conahan, who along with Ciavarella faces up to seven years in prison, did not make any comment on te case.The only hope is that they get sent to some prison where there's a once-innocent teenager, ruined by these bastards, with an axe to grind (yes, a literal axe).
But of course their buddies on the bench will look our for them. Maybe a few hours of picking up trash will be all they get.
But Curmudgeon how can you and a Christian say such things? How dare you suggest we (and the incarcerated kids) do anything but turn the other cheek! Christians are supposed to be merciful and forgiving!
I'm reminded of a scene from Henry V:
The mercy that was quick in us but late,
By your own counsel is suppress'd and kill'd:
You must not dare, for shame, to talk of mercy;
For your own reasons turn into your bosoms,
As dogs upon their masters, worrying you.
But of course, we aren't governed by a conscience any more...either a good one like Shakespeare's King Henry or a bad one. We're governed by the mob, and by the corrupt men who are its master. So we can expect these guys to get off with a weekend of picking up trash all the same. It will be curious to hear if this gets meaningful attention in this age where government is good.
On the other hand, it would be delightful if perhaps we could imprison 1,000 to 2,000 judges for parking tickets, minor offenses and arrogant behaviour. Turnabout's fair play!
A little break from the outrage....
We're about to go on vacation next week. We've been having trouble with the cassette adapter that we use to get our iPod sound into the radio in our (pre-iPod ready) van. It's cirtical on trips, because otherwise we're stuck listening to Western Kansas radio twang or lugging our CD library with us (if we can find our CD's, of course) We thought it was a problem with the casette adapter, so Mrs. Curmudgeon bought a new one at Target.
$18. Ouch.
Mrs. Curmudgeon suggested that we test to be sure it's the adapter and not the cassette player itself. How? I asked. She suggested I put a tape in and see if the player worked normally.
"Do you have a cassette?" she asked
"Umm of course I do...somewhere."
So I went down to the basement and pulled open a box that has been sealed for years. You know...a box containing remnants of our former worldly life.
The first cassette I pulled out was Van Halen II. One I didn't particularly enjoy even when I bought it in high school, and one which Mrs. Curmudgeon had never even endured. We agreed that it would be no loss if the cassette deck ate it. It was serving no purpose other than waiting for a more dramatic end in an old fashioned book-burning or TV-smashing party.
Well sure enough, there was a problem with the deck. It's stuck.
It won't play...God is merciful. The Curmudgeons wont be listening to "Dance the Night Away" over and over on a 15 hour drive. But it just keeps clicking and clicking.
I could not get the tape out. So, I got on the internet, looking for ideas.
As I searched, I ran across this:
Up until that point, I couldn't imagine anything worse than a minivan with Van Halen II stuck in it. Now I can. An '06 Corolla with Captain Kirk singing "Silent Night."
Beam me up, Scotty!
$18. Ouch.
Mrs. Curmudgeon suggested that we test to be sure it's the adapter and not the cassette player itself. How? I asked. She suggested I put a tape in and see if the player worked normally.
"Do you have a cassette?" she asked
"Umm of course I do...somewhere."
So I went down to the basement and pulled open a box that has been sealed for years. You know...a box containing remnants of our former worldly life.
The first cassette I pulled out was Van Halen II. One I didn't particularly enjoy even when I bought it in high school, and one which Mrs. Curmudgeon had never even endured. We agreed that it would be no loss if the cassette deck ate it. It was serving no purpose other than waiting for a more dramatic end in an old fashioned book-burning or TV-smashing party.
Well sure enough, there was a problem with the deck. It's stuck.
It won't play...God is merciful. The Curmudgeons wont be listening to "Dance the Night Away" over and over on a 15 hour drive. But it just keeps clicking and clicking.
I could not get the tape out. So, I got on the internet, looking for ideas.
As I searched, I ran across this:
$10
Metro on Craigslist. Project car, anyone? - Fuel Economy ...
Radio has "William Shatner Christmas carols" cassette tape stuck in deck, enjoy. ... must tow (preferably on a trailer with a solid deck and sides to avoid ... MPG - 2006
Toyota Corolla automatic. Latest project: pedal power bike 12v ...ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/10-metro-craigslist-project-car-anyone-671.html - 58k - Cached - Similar pages
Up until that point, I couldn't imagine anything worse than a minivan with Van Halen II stuck in it. Now I can. An '06 Corolla with Captain Kirk singing "Silent Night."
Beam me up, Scotty!
Thursday, February 12, 2009
USCCB Collections Plan - sample letters
In yesterday’s post, I raised the issue of the many, many national special collections that the USCCB and our local Bishops subject us to, and I explained how and why we tradition-minded Catholics can be heard by our own Bishop and the USCCB about the importance of spreading access to the traditional Latin Mass. I hope you’ll spread the word (not for promoting my blog…I could care less…but for promoting our common cause).
In that post I went so far as to outline a strategy that readers can use part or all of, and I’ve already received a couple of comments, and a couple of email requests, for sample letters to use in the campaign. So see below, and remember that what matters here isn’t getting into an argument, but in helping the larger Church and getting your Bishop and the USCCB National Collections Office to start thinking about helping our fellow Catholics who are attached to tradition in less-fortunate parts of the world.
Sample Letters:
For the Parish Collection:
(remember to skip this one on subsequent collections if your parish returns it to you the first time. We don’t need to tick off our own pastors and collection counters)
This special collection contribution is to be used solely for the [support of traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolates in Central and Eastern Europe]. Please forward it to the diocese and the USCCB subject to that restriction. If you are unable to do so, please return it to me.
For the Diocesan Letter
(send this one every time unless you are specifically told not to by the Bishop)
JMJ
Date/Traditional Feastday
Most Rev N. [Cardinal] N.
Bishop/ Archbishop of X
Chancery Address
Chancery City, State/Province
Your Excellency (Your Grace, Your Emminence):
Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $____ which I am sending for the diocesan special collection for [the Church in Central and Eastern Europe], which I was unable to contribute in our parish collection last Sunday. I am mindful of our duty to support the wider Church beyond our own parishes and communities, and I want to do so in a way that directs my contribution to an important apostolate that is often neglected by the larger Church.
Therefore I am directing that my contribution be used solely for the support of an a traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolate in Central and Eastern Europe, and for no other purpose.
Please note this purpose as you forward my contribution to the appropriate recipient, in accordance with Canon 1267. If you cannot comply with my these directions, please return the check to me.
You are in my prayers, and in those of my family.
Sincerely Yours,
K.C. Curmudgeon
For the USCCB special collections office
(each special collection has its own director...imagine that bureaucracy. These directors are priests...some even Jesuits. If you want to send one directly to that collection's director, locate the name at this web page. Otherwise, send it to the head honcho below, Mr. Markey)
JMJ
Date/Traditional Feastday
Mr. Patrick Markey
Executive Director, Office of National Collections
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street NE
Washington, D.C. 20017
Dear Mr. Markey:
Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $____ which I am sending for the national special collection for [the Church in Central and Eastern Europe], which I neither my parish nor my diocesan collections office was able to accept. I am mindful of our duty to support the wider Church beyond our own parishes and communities, and I want to do so in a way that directs my contribution to an important apostolate that is often neglected by the larger Church.
Therefore I am directing that my contribution be used solely for the support of an a traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolate in Central and Eastern Europe, and for no other purpose.
Please be sure that my contribution reaches an appropriate recipient, in accordance with Canon 1267. If you cannot comply with these directions, please return the check to me as soon as possible.
Sincerely Yours,
K.C. Curmudgeon
Finally, if the USCCB bureaucracy has fails you, go direct:
(Find an organization with offices here in the US and apostolates in the appropriate place if you can, especially if you want the tax deduction. I’ll make some suggestions in another post.)
JMJ
Date/Traditional Feastday
Contact Name
Organization Name
Address
City State ZIP
Dear X:
Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $____ which I am sending for the support of one of your organization’s apostolates in Central or Eastern Europe. [Here mention the specific apostolate if you know of it]
During the national special collection for Central and Eastern Europe in February, I attempted to make a contribution targeted to traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolates there, but neither my diocesan Bishop nor the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ National Collections Office was willing to accept my contribution.
Therefore, I am sending it to you, knowing that you have apostolates in [______ ]. Please contact me if you have any difficulty in honoring my directives.
We are grateful for the work your institute does here in the US and in Central and Eastern Europe, and you and your priests are in our prayers.
Sincerely Yours,
K.C. Curmudgeon
cc: Your local bishop & the USCCB Collections Person you contacted above.
In that post I went so far as to outline a strategy that readers can use part or all of, and I’ve already received a couple of comments, and a couple of email requests, for sample letters to use in the campaign. So see below, and remember that what matters here isn’t getting into an argument, but in helping the larger Church and getting your Bishop and the USCCB National Collections Office to start thinking about helping our fellow Catholics who are attached to tradition in less-fortunate parts of the world.
Sample Letters:
For the Parish Collection:
(remember to skip this one on subsequent collections if your parish returns it to you the first time. We don’t need to tick off our own pastors and collection counters)
This special collection contribution is to be used solely for the [support of traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolates in Central and Eastern Europe]. Please forward it to the diocese and the USCCB subject to that restriction. If you are unable to do so, please return it to me.
For the Diocesan Letter
(send this one every time unless you are specifically told not to by the Bishop)
JMJ
Date/Traditional Feastday
Most Rev N. [Cardinal] N.
Bishop/ Archbishop of X
Chancery Address
Chancery City, State/Province
Your Excellency (Your Grace, Your Emminence):
Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $____ which I am sending for the diocesan special collection for [the Church in Central and Eastern Europe], which I was unable to contribute in our parish collection last Sunday. I am mindful of our duty to support the wider Church beyond our own parishes and communities, and I want to do so in a way that directs my contribution to an important apostolate that is often neglected by the larger Church.
Therefore I am directing that my contribution be used solely for the support of an a traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolate in Central and Eastern Europe, and for no other purpose.
Please note this purpose as you forward my contribution to the appropriate recipient, in accordance with Canon 1267. If you cannot comply with my these directions, please return the check to me.
You are in my prayers, and in those of my family.
Sincerely Yours,
K.C. Curmudgeon
For the USCCB special collections office
(each special collection has its own director...imagine that bureaucracy. These directors are priests...some even Jesuits. If you want to send one directly to that collection's director, locate the name at this web page. Otherwise, send it to the head honcho below, Mr. Markey)
JMJ
Date/Traditional Feastday
Mr. Patrick Markey
Executive Director, Office of National Collections
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street NE
Washington, D.C. 20017
Dear Mr. Markey:
Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $____ which I am sending for the national special collection for [the Church in Central and Eastern Europe], which I neither my parish nor my diocesan collections office was able to accept. I am mindful of our duty to support the wider Church beyond our own parishes and communities, and I want to do so in a way that directs my contribution to an important apostolate that is often neglected by the larger Church.
Therefore I am directing that my contribution be used solely for the support of an a traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolate in Central and Eastern Europe, and for no other purpose.
Please be sure that my contribution reaches an appropriate recipient, in accordance with Canon 1267. If you cannot comply with these directions, please return the check to me as soon as possible.
Sincerely Yours,
K.C. Curmudgeon
Finally, if the USCCB bureaucracy has fails you, go direct:
(Find an organization with offices here in the US and apostolates in the appropriate place if you can, especially if you want the tax deduction. I’ll make some suggestions in another post.)
JMJ
Date/Traditional Feastday
Contact Name
Organization Name
Address
City State ZIP
Dear X:
Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $____ which I am sending for the support of one of your organization’s apostolates in Central or Eastern Europe. [Here mention the specific apostolate if you know of it]
During the national special collection for Central and Eastern Europe in February, I attempted to make a contribution targeted to traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolates there, but neither my diocesan Bishop nor the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ National Collections Office was willing to accept my contribution.
Therefore, I am sending it to you, knowing that you have apostolates in [______ ]. Please contact me if you have any difficulty in honoring my directives.
We are grateful for the work your institute does here in the US and in Central and Eastern Europe, and you and your priests are in our prayers.
Sincerely Yours,
K.C. Curmudgeon
cc: Your local bishop & the USCCB Collections Person you contacted above.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
USCCB Collections -- A plan of action!
Many of us who are in canonically-regular traddie communities are burdened with almost two dozen extra envelopes in our collection packets over the course of the year. These are "national" collections that are mandated by the Bishops who tow the USCCB boat, and in a couple of cases, they may just be extra diocesan slush fund collections. A PDF file listing the national collections can be found HERE.
They are:
For the Church in Latin America (January)
For the Church in Eastern and Central Europe (Early February/ around Ash Wednesday)
Rice Bowl (mid-February)
For Black and Indian Missions (late February)
Bishops' Overseas Appeal (mid March)
For the Holy Land (Good Friday)
Priesthood - Present and Future (mid-April)
Home Missions Appeal (late April)
Catholic Communications Campaign (mid May)
Peter's Pence (early July)
Mission Coop (mid July)
Catholic University of America (September)
World Mission Sunday (October)
The [notorious] Campaign for Human Development (mid-November)
Retirement Fund for Religious (mid-December)
Most of us ignore these envelopes, because we know we'd be contributing to just another high-overhead USCCB operation and semi-pagan, commie Maryknollers at best, or at worst (in the case of the Campaign for Human Development) directly supporting political organizations which undermine the Church. We think the Bishops and their diocesan and national bureaucacies are just after our checkbooks, as it seems they are. We know that if we give to these collections, even the evil Campaign for Human Development, our pastors and chaplains are bound to transmit the offerings to the diocese (Canon 1266).
But here's a quandry. We really can't just not give anything outside our parish...ever. We do have an obligation to support the wider Church...not just our own community. Many of us do just that...by supporting faithful religious orders, for instance. But is that enough? Canon 1262 provides that "The faithful are to give support to the Church by responding to appeals and according to the norms issues by the conference of bishops."
Now let's acknowledge that checkbooks can be wielded as effective weapons. Wealthy leftist individuals and wealthy leftist foundations often use the checkbook as their weapon of choice. While we can't perhaps write such big checks and wield such big weapons as these guys (they've got .45s; we've got .22s), we can make ourselves heard using our checkbooks.
Think about it. If an average Bishop gets an angry letter from a traddy about waste and corruption and modernism and special collections, what will he do? He'll probably never see it, because his secretary will screen it. If he does see it, he'll probably ignore it. If you're lucky, he might dictate a curt reply to you ... but that's only if you're lucky. I tried that once myself, complaining to Bishop Finn's predecessor about the irresponsible and downright heretical activities that were being funded by the Diocesan appeal. Instead of assuring me he'd clean things up (which I expected him to do...heh...heh), Bishop Boland practically told me to go find a parish in Kansas and hassle Abp. Kelleher instead.
But what if you send the Bishop a check? Even a small check? What will he do then?
If you send a Bishop a check, he'll probably cash it,and he'll probably read the letter it came in...even if it's for $25 or so. In fact, he has an obligation to cash it. Canon 1267, sec. 2, provides that offerings "cannot be refused except for a just cause..."
And what if you send the Bishop a check with specific conditions as to how it's to be used? What will he do them?
If you send a Bishop a check with conditions, he'll have to use it for the purpose stated in giving the gift, or if he can't, he'll return it. Canon 1267, sec. 3, provides that "Offerings given by the faithful for a certain purpose can by applied only for that same purpose."
They are:
For the Church in Latin America (January)
For the Church in Eastern and Central Europe (Early February/ around Ash Wednesday)
Rice Bowl (mid-February)
For Black and Indian Missions (late February)
Bishops' Overseas Appeal (mid March)
For the Holy Land (Good Friday)
Priesthood - Present and Future (mid-April)
Home Missions Appeal (late April)
Catholic Communications Campaign (mid May)
Peter's Pence (early July)
Mission Coop (mid July)
Catholic University of America (September)
World Mission Sunday (October)
The [notorious] Campaign for Human Development (mid-November)
Retirement Fund for Religious (mid-December)
Most of us ignore these envelopes, because we know we'd be contributing to just another high-overhead USCCB operation and semi-pagan, commie Maryknollers at best, or at worst (in the case of the Campaign for Human Development) directly supporting political organizations which undermine the Church. We think the Bishops and their diocesan and national bureaucacies are just after our checkbooks, as it seems they are. We know that if we give to these collections, even the evil Campaign for Human Development, our pastors and chaplains are bound to transmit the offerings to the diocese (Canon 1266).
But here's a quandry. We really can't just not give anything outside our parish...ever. We do have an obligation to support the wider Church...not just our own community. Many of us do just that...by supporting faithful religious orders, for instance. But is that enough? Canon 1262 provides that "The faithful are to give support to the Church by responding to appeals and according to the norms issues by the conference of bishops."
Now let's acknowledge that checkbooks can be wielded as effective weapons. Wealthy leftist individuals and wealthy leftist foundations often use the checkbook as their weapon of choice. While we can't perhaps write such big checks and wield such big weapons as these guys (they've got .45s; we've got .22s), we can make ourselves heard using our checkbooks.
Think about it. If an average Bishop gets an angry letter from a traddy about waste and corruption and modernism and special collections, what will he do? He'll probably never see it, because his secretary will screen it. If he does see it, he'll probably ignore it. If you're lucky, he might dictate a curt reply to you ... but that's only if you're lucky. I tried that once myself, complaining to Bishop Finn's predecessor about the irresponsible and downright heretical activities that were being funded by the Diocesan appeal. Instead of assuring me he'd clean things up (which I expected him to do...heh...heh), Bishop Boland practically told me to go find a parish in Kansas and hassle Abp. Kelleher instead.
But what if you send the Bishop a check? Even a small check? What will he do then?
If you send a Bishop a check, he'll probably cash it,and he'll probably read the letter it came in...even if it's for $25 or so. In fact, he has an obligation to cash it. Canon 1267, sec. 2, provides that offerings "cannot be refused except for a just cause..."
And what if you send the Bishop a check with specific conditions as to how it's to be used? What will he do them?
If you send a Bishop a check with conditions, he'll have to use it for the purpose stated in giving the gift, or if he can't, he'll return it. Canon 1267, sec. 3, provides that "Offerings given by the faithful for a certain purpose can by applied only for that same purpose."
So what's your point?
If we want to be heard in the matter of all these special collections (or if you want to make a point about anything else), you can use your checkbook and canon law to be heard...even by the Bishop.
Nobody notices an envelope that's dropped into a trash can at home. Nobody even notices an envelope that's put into the basket empty (except perhaps the poor old guys that are counting the collection while you're enjoying coffee and doughnuts after Mass). But if there's a check in the Chancery or the USCCB office...eventually someone at the Chancery or the USCCB office has to deal with it.
How would you do it?
The method I'll propose will involve some stamps. You'll have to be willing to spend a couple bucks per collection on stamps, as well as be willing to put out $20 or $50 or more in a special collection.
- Step 1: Write a check and a very short note (not a long missive...less than 50 words) stating that you want your contribution to this collection to be used solely for X, and if it cannot be, it should be returned to the donor. In the case of the Latin America collection, "X" should be "solely for the support of traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) apostolates in Latin America." For the "mission" collections, "X" would be "solely for the support of the missionary activities of institutes regularly providing the traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) to to those they serve." For the Catholic Communications Campaign, it should be "solely for the communication of information and resources on the traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form)." You get the idea. The only problem is the Campaign for Human Development...I'll cover that later.
- Step 2: Put that check and note in your special collection envelope and drop it, like an obedient Catholic, into the basket at the Offertory on the appointed Sunday.
- Step 3: Wait for your chaplain, pastor or parish office manager and call to complain that you're making their job harder, and then have them either forward the check and the note to the Chancery or return it to you so you can direct it to the Chancery yourself. If you get the check back from the parish, skip Step 3 on future collections and go directly to Step 4.
- Step 4: If your chaplain, pastor or parish office manager returns it to you, then mail a check for the same amount, payable to the Archdiocese, directly to your local Bishop with a polite short letter stating that you want to contribute to the collection, but you also want to make sure your gift is targeted to what you see as a critical need in the Church. Don't go beyond that (except perhaps in the case of the Campaign for Human Development, which I'll address below). Don't mention your own community or your own priest. Don't criticize the new Mass or the Vicar General's toupe. Don't even say you're a traddie (trust me...they'll know). Just keep the message focused on how they're to use your check. If you want, you might ask them to confirm with you that the check will be properly directed.
- Step 5: If the Bishop's office calls you (which is unlikely), then be prepared to state your reasons why you did what you did (here, use less candor and more prudence than you would with your own priest, except in the case of the Campaign for Human Development, where you can be candid). Just state that there's lots of money flowing to people who have the New Mass (Ordinary Form), and you want to make sure that those attached to the Extraordinary Form get something, too, because you worry that they might otherwise be neglected by the USCCB. Remind them that it's your right and their obligation under Canon 1267. But I would recommend that you not use the opportunity to bash the new Mass or comment on the Vicar General's toupe. Save that for another letter on another day.
- Step 6: if the Chancery returns the check to you, then send a check directly to the USCCB. I think you can probably get the address from one of the collection links above. The same principles apply to the accompanying letter.
- Step 7: if the USCCB returns the check to you, then send a new check in the same amount directly to an appropriate group (in the case of the Latin American collection, the Campos prelature would be a good one). In the letter, let the recipient know that this is a check you tried to give through a national collection, but that your local Bishop and the USCCB refursed to accept it for the purpose you intended. Copy your local Bishop and the USCCB collections office on the letter.
- Step 8: be happy that you helped the traditional Catholic cause by (a) getting money to a traddie group who can do some good with it and (b) letting the Bishop and the USCCB collections office that you're out there, and you're not stingy...just focused.
What about the Campaign for Human Development?
As for the Campaign for Human Development, I wouldn't use the above strategy at all. In this one case, I would suggest simply returning your empty CHD envelope to the Bishop about a month before the collection, with a polite letter stating that you cannot in conscience provide support to organizations which are enemies of the faith (perhaps enclosing a short, sober article you find online which details CHD wickedness). State that you're giving $x to a specific worthy organization that actually relieves poverty (outside your own parish or community) in lieu of giving anything to the CHD. Also ask him to stop permitting the CHD collection to be made in his diocese.
How's that for a curmudgeonly strategy for dealing with special collections? I'm open to refinements; please comment below, and forward this idea to all your friends (I don't have many readers now that I've quit blogging, so I could use some help disseminating the idea).
If this idea catches on, I'll try to rough up some sample letters for the steps above.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
What's important at the USCCB?
When visiting the USCCB website for information on another post, I couldn't help but notice the LEAD article on the website. Now at a time when lots of important things are going on that will strengthen Holy Mother Church (the potential regularlization of the SSPX and the potential reunion of a large group of Anglicans), the USCCB won't have any of it. Instead, it features this:
(I linked the permanent article, not the front page, above because I assume that it will all change in a day or two when they come up with some other goofy thing to put up.
"Rev Victoria" and "Rev Heng" must be loving all the attention they're getting, as must Sister Mary Ann (Sisters of Charity---surprised she's not an IHM or and RSM). I see we had a Bishop there, too. Bishop Wester of Salt Lake City. Well, I supppose Bp. Wester is used to hanging around people with some really strange religious beliefs, given where he's from.
Aren't you glad our Bishops are paying for this stupid stuff....excuse me...this EVIL stuff....while we're closing parishes and schools and convents around the country?
Ch’an/Zen Catholic Dialogue Spreads ‘Welcome Table’ at Retreat
(I linked the permanent article, not the front page, above because I assume that it will all change in a day or two when they come up with some other goofy thing to put up.
"Rev Victoria" and "Rev Heng" must be loving all the attention they're getting, as must Sister Mary Ann (Sisters of Charity---surprised she's not an IHM or and RSM). I see we had a Bishop there, too. Bishop Wester of Salt Lake City. Well, I supppose Bp. Wester is used to hanging around people with some really strange religious beliefs, given where he's from.
Aren't you glad our Bishops are paying for this stupid stuff....excuse me...this EVIL stuff....while we're closing parishes and schools and convents around the country?
Sign me up!
The Regensburger Catholic theology professor Wolfgang Beinert classifies the SSPX as "reactionary and anti-democratic".
Dow Jones with 15 minutes 'til the bell.
We're gonna spread happineeeeeeeeessssss! We're gonna spread free-ee-dom!
Obama's gonna fix it...Obama's gonna change the world!
^DJI 3:43pm ET 7,872.71 DOWN 398.16 DOWN 4.81%
Seems the stimulous package he rammed through the Senate today is having an effect.
Obama's gonna fix it...Obama's gonna change the world!
^DJI 3:43pm ET 7,872.71 DOWN 398.16 DOWN 4.81%
Seems the stimulous package he rammed through the Senate today is having an effect.
Eurotrash? Euroclerics?
Continually amazed at the nonsense coming from European Bishops these days. Gillibrand at CathCon is doing yeoman service translating it on the fly.
Now we see the fruits of Vatican II, eh? These guys make even Cardinal Roger Mahoney sound Catholic!
Now we see the fruits of Vatican II, eh? These guys make even Cardinal Roger Mahoney sound Catholic!
Monday, February 09, 2009
Doing the right thing
Imagine a Bishop or a seminary rector who said something scandalous to the faithful and harmful to the faith.
Now imagine his superior taking decisive action within a matter of days to distance himself and those under his authority from the source of scandal.
Now imagine the source of scandal promptly and publicly apologizing for all the trouble within a week.
Now imagine the source of scandal dropping into the background, and consistently with his promised apology, letting himself be cast into the sea and surrendering his post.
Also imagine a superior throwing a different, unrepentant source of scandal out of his order entirely....again within a few days of the violation.
Hmmmm. Maybe the "regular Catholics," Jesuits and several U.S. Bishops included (not to mention the entire German episcopate), could take a lesson from all this.
I could be proven wrong over the next few weeks, but at present, it seems that the "disobedient" and arrogant" Society of St. Pius X, from its actions so far, does have something to teach us "regular Catholics" about obedience and humility after all.
Of course the people that would benefit can't hear all this over their own shrill PC screams. But wouldn't it be something if scandal within the institutional Church handled is such a decisive way?
Pray for the Holy Father, that he might overcome his enemies inside and outside the Church, for Bps. Fellay and Williamson, and for everyone in or attached to the SSPX!
Now imagine his superior taking decisive action within a matter of days to distance himself and those under his authority from the source of scandal.
Now imagine the source of scandal promptly and publicly apologizing for all the trouble within a week.
Now imagine the source of scandal dropping into the background, and consistently with his promised apology, letting himself be cast into the sea and surrendering his post.
Also imagine a superior throwing a different, unrepentant source of scandal out of his order entirely....again within a few days of the violation.
Hmmmm. Maybe the "regular Catholics," Jesuits and several U.S. Bishops included (not to mention the entire German episcopate), could take a lesson from all this.
I could be proven wrong over the next few weeks, but at present, it seems that the "disobedient" and arrogant" Society of St. Pius X, from its actions so far, does have something to teach us "regular Catholics" about obedience and humility after all.
Of course the people that would benefit can't hear all this over their own shrill PC screams. But wouldn't it be something if scandal within the institutional Church handled is such a decisive way?
Pray for the Holy Father, that he might overcome his enemies inside and outside the Church, for Bps. Fellay and Williamson, and for everyone in or attached to the SSPX!
Friday, February 06, 2009
Quiz on remission of SSPX excommunications
So much stupidity in the Catholic news these days! Here's a one-question quiz to see if you're keeping up:
Identify the person who published the following statement:
Was it
(a) the Editor in Chief of the National Catholic Reporter?
(b) an anonymous commenter on the "Lost Lambs" blog?
(c) the Roman Catholic Bishop of Buffalo?
(d) internet canonist and anti-SSPX crusader Ed Peters?
(e) Bill Tammeus of the Kansas City Star?
If you picked (c), you win.
Was it because he is ignorant, or because he's devious? Honestly, I cannot bring myself to believe that a sitting Bishop would be so poorly informed about an ecclesiastical matter. Which means I'm assuming the latter.
Shame on me for having so little respect for the man. But if you respect the office, it's that much harder to respect the man.
Identify the person who published the following statement:
A few years after the Second Vatican Council, a French [A]rchbishop, Marcel Lefebvre ... judged that the Council had taken the Roman Catholic Church too far in a progressive direction, so far that no [P]ope since Pius XII has been validly elected and served as [P]ope.
Was it
(a) the Editor in Chief of the National Catholic Reporter?
(b) an anonymous commenter on the "Lost Lambs" blog?
(c) the Roman Catholic Bishop of Buffalo?
(d) internet canonist and anti-SSPX crusader Ed Peters?
(e) Bill Tammeus of the Kansas City Star?
If you picked (c), you win.
Was it because he is ignorant, or because he's devious? Honestly, I cannot bring myself to believe that a sitting Bishop would be so poorly informed about an ecclesiastical matter. Which means I'm assuming the latter.
Shame on me for having so little respect for the man. But if you respect the office, it's that much harder to respect the man.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
The Kansas City Star falls another notch?
From the Kansas City Business Journal (and not the Kansas City Star)
(intro music by Roger Miller:)
Kansas City Star....that's what I are!
Yodileedila-ye ya' oughta see m'car
Drive a big ole' Cadillac with wire wheels
Got rhinestones on the spokes
Got credit down at the grocery store and my barber tells me jokes
I'm the number one attraction in every supermarket parking lot
I'm the King of Kansas City...no thanks Omaha...thanks alot.
(fade)
Ahem, from the Kansas City Business Journal:
No one could miss (at least no one who doesn't work for McClathy could miss) seeing the causes of this: content that is insufficient, poorly selected, poorly written, in a poorly designed paper.
For instance, Inane columns like this one on the Bishop Williamson matter, involving no research and no original thought...and preceded or accompanied by no actual reporting of the underlying news, even on the once-a-week Faith page. In a vaccuum, I might have wondered why there was no report of the lifting of excommunications here in the very newspaper market where the SSPX is headquartered.
But heck, no one even reports for the Falling Star any more. They've laid off all their reporters. If an event isn't reported over the AP wire, or it isn't visible from an editor's window, or it doesn't involve Mark Funkhouser, it doesn't get reported. They just fill the space where the news used to be with graphics and with guest articles that read like the copy came into the place written in crayon.
The only reason to ever buy a Falling Star would have been for packing dishes or lining pet cages or lighting a woodstove. But now that they've skinnied the paper down to pay for their gazillion-dollar presses, and their glass palace, it's not even useful for that.
The days of the Star are numbered. A few weeks ago, I proposed to a journalist/investigative reporter I know that if a guy had a million dollars or so, he could launch a new general circulation paper in town...a tabloid size paper that came out in print once or twice a week with daily email updates to fill in the gaps (like the KC Business Journal), and actually made some effort to provide real news and informed commentary. Something that was fair and balanced, but was edited for consumption by a reasonably informed and educated, commonsense reader with a Western and Christian worldview. I'm not talking about a highbrow publication, or a special-interest religious publication. And no, I'm not talking about a print version of FoxNews (blech~!) I'm just talking about a decent paper with a staff that sifts and reports general news for intelligent people of good will, rather than a mediocre and incomplete leftist rag like we have now.
(intro music by Roger Miller:)
Kansas City Star....that's what I are!
Yodileedila-ye ya' oughta see m'car
Drive a big ole' Cadillac with wire wheels
Got rhinestones on the spokes
Got credit down at the grocery store and my barber tells me jokes
I'm the number one attraction in every supermarket parking lot
I'm the King of Kansas City...no thanks Omaha...thanks alot.
(fade)
Ahem, from the Kansas City Business Journal:
Kansas City Star will cut more jobs
The Kansas City Star will cut more jobs as part of a restructuring plan its parent company announced Thursday. The McClatchy Co. (NYSE: MNI) plans to cut an additional $100 million to $110 million in costs in the next year, starting later in the first quarter.
* * *
Also on Thursday, McClatchy reported that it lost $21.7 million, or 26 cents a share, in the fourth quarter, which ended Dec. 28. This compares with a loss of $1.4 billion, or $17.46 a share, a year earlier. Revenue for the quarter was $470.9 million, down 18 percent from $573.4 million the prior year.
* * *
No one could miss (at least no one who doesn't work for McClathy could miss) seeing the causes of this: content that is insufficient, poorly selected, poorly written, in a poorly designed paper.
For instance, Inane columns like this one on the Bishop Williamson matter, involving no research and no original thought...and preceded or accompanied by no actual reporting of the underlying news, even on the once-a-week Faith page. In a vaccuum, I might have wondered why there was no report of the lifting of excommunications here in the very newspaper market where the SSPX is headquartered.
But heck, no one even reports for the Falling Star any more. They've laid off all their reporters. If an event isn't reported over the AP wire, or it isn't visible from an editor's window, or it doesn't involve Mark Funkhouser, it doesn't get reported. They just fill the space where the news used to be with graphics and with guest articles that read like the copy came into the place written in crayon.
The only reason to ever buy a Falling Star would have been for packing dishes or lining pet cages or lighting a woodstove. But now that they've skinnied the paper down to pay for their gazillion-dollar presses, and their glass palace, it's not even useful for that.
The days of the Star are numbered. A few weeks ago, I proposed to a journalist/investigative reporter I know that if a guy had a million dollars or so, he could launch a new general circulation paper in town...a tabloid size paper that came out in print once or twice a week with daily email updates to fill in the gaps (like the KC Business Journal), and actually made some effort to provide real news and informed commentary. Something that was fair and balanced, but was edited for consumption by a reasonably informed and educated, commonsense reader with a Western and Christian worldview. I'm not talking about a highbrow publication, or a special-interest religious publication. And no, I'm not talking about a print version of FoxNews (blech~!) I'm just talking about a decent paper with a staff that sifts and reports general news for intelligent people of good will, rather than a mediocre and incomplete leftist rag like we have now.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Scranton Bishop Wipes Out FSSP parish?
It appears that the Bishop of Scranton is consolidating the FSSP parish in Scranton out of existence. This is, of course, in the diocese where the FSSP is headquartered. The traditionalist world has been very quiet about this. WHY?
Is there any news to post or print on this development?
http://thetimes-tribune.com/articles/2009/02/01/news/doc4985bcaf3b2a2950235456.txt
http://www.saintmichaelsrcc.org/
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Pope rehabilitates Holocaust denier, angering Jews
Deo gratias!
Our enemies are the principalities and powers, among them the Associated Press and whatever demon got into that devious Swede's and that idiot Brit's heads to try and torpedo a rapprochement.
As for this little complication...the holocaust questioning thing. I'll not comment and reserve judgement on the substance of it, as I really don't have any knowledge of the event beyond the conventional textbook history (which I distrust) and it would seem hard for anybody who did claim some expertise to question it on the larger points, for it's beyond credulity to hold that anybody could pull off a hoax of such magnitude. The substance of Williamson's stupid comments are not germane to the issue.
Let's consider, though, the shrill argument that we're already hearing in online newspaper comment boxes, and by tomorrow, we'll hear from "more respectable" quarters, who will live only in the present, and cannot consider the past.
1. The question of whether or not this bishop is in communion with the Holy Father is based on his current opinions on an secular subject rather than his part in the unfortunate sequence of events in 1988.
2. Williamson holds a crackpot idea about a secular subject.
3. No one who has crackpot views on secular subjects should be in communion with the Holy Father.
Now, I don't mean to keep Williamson out of the Church, but I'm not so sure I don't find that reasoning compelling or useful if it were applied to the Universal Church, and not just to traddies.
I think the Holy Father should reinstate the excommunication declared in 1988 with respect to Richard Williamson, and in the same decree, he should apply this principle to all Bishops.
Anyone with me?
Our enemies are the principalities and powers, among them the Associated Press and whatever demon got into that devious Swede's and that idiot Brit's heads to try and torpedo a rapprochement.
As for this little complication...the holocaust questioning thing. I'll not comment and reserve judgement on the substance of it, as I really don't have any knowledge of the event beyond the conventional textbook history (which I distrust) and it would seem hard for anybody who did claim some expertise to question it on the larger points, for it's beyond credulity to hold that anybody could pull off a hoax of such magnitude. The substance of Williamson's stupid comments are not germane to the issue.
Let's consider, though, the shrill argument that we're already hearing in online newspaper comment boxes, and by tomorrow, we'll hear from "more respectable" quarters, who will live only in the present, and cannot consider the past.
1. The question of whether or not this bishop is in communion with the Holy Father is based on his current opinions on an secular subject rather than his part in the unfortunate sequence of events in 1988.
2. Williamson holds a crackpot idea about a secular subject.
3. No one who has crackpot views on secular subjects should be in communion with the Holy Father.
Now, I don't mean to keep Williamson out of the Church, but I'm not so sure I don't find that reasoning compelling or useful if it were applied to the Universal Church, and not just to traddies.
I think the Holy Father should reinstate the excommunication declared in 1988 with respect to Richard Williamson, and in the same decree, he should apply this principle to all Bishops.
Anyone with me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
