VIDEO: "Credo" - this is what Catholics believe

A man who claims to be the Pope has been quoted as saying that all religions lead to God. He believes in Drawing All Faiths Together (DAFT) into his Church of the New World Order. This is the heresy of syncretism. It is not what Catholics believe. 

Here is the Credo (Creed) as sung (in English) by the faithful at the Ukrainian-Greco Catholic Church of Saint Elias the Prophet in Brampton ON in November of 2022.

In response to the heretical statement of the man mentioned above, Most Rev. Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan, has written this Profession of Faith, read at the Catholic Identity Conference 2024, at Pittsburgh PA, today.

Profession of Faith in Jesus Christ and His Church
as the only path to God and to eternal salvation 

We unshakably believe and profess what the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Church has continuously and infallibly taught since the time of the Apostles, namely, 

That faith in Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God and only Savior of mankind, is the only religion willed by God.

After the institution of the new and everlasting Covenant in Jesus Christ, no one may be saved by adherence to the teachings and practices of non-Christian religions. Because “the prayer, which is directed to God, must be linked with Christ, the Lord of all people, the one Mediator (1 Tm 2:5; Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24) through whom alone we have access to God (Rom 5:2; Eph 2:18; 3:12).” (General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours, n. 6)

We firmly believe that “there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12), except the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead (cf. Acts 4:10).

We believe that it is “contrary to the Catholic faith to consider the Church as one way of salvation alongside those constituted by the other religions, seen as complementary to the Church or substantially equivalent to her, even if these are said to be converging with the Church toward the eschatological kingdom of God” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dominus Iesus, 21).

We furthermore hold that Divine Revelation, faithfully transmitted by the Church’s perennial Magisterium, forbids affirming:

That all religions are paths to God,

That the diversity of religious identities is a gift of God, and

That the diversity of religions is an expression of the wise will of God the Creator. 

We hold, therefore, that Christians are not simply “travelling companions” along with adherents of false religions — which God forbids.

We fervently implore the help of Divine grace for all those churchmen today who, by their words and deeds, contradict the Divinely revealed truth about Jesus Christ and His Church as the only path by which men can reach God and eternal salvation. With the help of divine grace, may these churchmen be enabled to offer a public retraction, required for the good of their own soul and the souls of others. For “not accepting Christ is the greatest danger for the world!” (St. Hilary of Poitiers, In Matth. 18).

By the prayers, tears and sacrifices of all the true sons and daughters of the Church, and especially of the “little ones” in the Church, may the Shepherds of the Church, and first and foremost Pope Francis, receive the grace to emulate the Apostles, countless Martyrs, numerous Holy Roman Pontiffs and a multitude of Saints, especially St. Francis of Assisi, who “was a Catholic and an entirely apostolic man, who set about personally and commanded his disciples to occupy themselves before everything else with the conversion of the heathen to the Faith and Law of Christ.” (Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Rite Expiatis, 37)

We believe and, with God’s grace, are ready to give our lives for this Divine truth pronounced by Jesus Christ: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). 

+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana,

with the Participants of the Catholic Identity Conference 2024, Pittsburgh, September 29, A.D. 2024

VIDEO: Now they're coming for the Catholics... sez who? WHO?!

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— 

Because I was not a socialist. 

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— 

Because I was not a trade unionist. 

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— 

Because I was not a Jew. 

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

(German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller, from a 1946 post-war confessional speech) 

In this video, our old friend Dr Taylor Marshall looks at the testimony of Attorney-General Merrick Garland, when he was questioned by Senator Josh Hawley in the hearings into the weaponization of the FBI. 

Brandon's A-G tried to distance himself from "the Richmond product", a report from the FBI's office in the capital of the Confederacy (and there were others) into the "dangerously extremist views" being expressed in Catholic churches, particularly those traditional Catholic churches which resist secular humanism and the Soros/Francis/Biden New World Order.

Dr Taylor shows and discusses clips from the speech given by President Trump last Saturday in Montgomery AL, at the Alabama GOP Summer Dinner. What the Donald said, very plainly, was that "they" are coming for Catholics, particularly "Rad Trads" like yr obdt servant. . 

 

You don't need to be told who "they" are... right? If you're in any doubt, click on the link above to hear Mr Trump's speech in full starting at the 43-minute mark), before it gets pulled down.

As Dr Marshall (and Fr Edward Meeks, Michael Matt, Anthony Stine, and many others) say, you should take heed and join the resistance, even if you're not Catholic. Because if you believe in the values that built western (i.e. Christian) civilization, you're next!

Let us keep praying to Saint Michael the Archangel: 

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; May God rebuke him, we humbly pray; And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

Footnote: A few hours ago Merrick Garland -- yes, the one mentioned above -- appointed David Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden probe. David Weiss is the federal prosecutor who cut the plea deal with the Boy Hunter which was rejected by the judge as being a sweetheart deal that would never have been given to anyone else. Click here to watch commentary by constitutional lawyer and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley.

VIDEO: Dinesh D'Souza analyzes what happened on November 3rd

Twice last month I mentioned Dinesh D'Souza: political commentator, filmmaker and author Obama's America, from which I quoted in "Kamala Harris: about as Black as Barack Obama", WWW 22/10/20. I also reposted the trailer of his movie Trump Card. 

In this interview with EWTN's Raymond Arroyo, posted two days after the election, Mr D'Souza asserts that Still-President Trump would have won in a walk, were it not for the Dempanic over the Covid "crisis", for which he got blamed, fairly or not. There were other factors, of course, which resulted in the contest being a virtual draw.* It runs just under 20 minutes and is a calm and measured explanation of what happened, well worth watching.

   

* In case you haven't heard, the election is far from decided yet, no matter what the lamestream media tell you! Even the likes of CNN are now admitting that Georgia and Arizona are "toss-ups", too close to call. That explains why the Democrats, not being taken by surprise this time, are busy manufacturing ballots. Stay tuned, and if you bet on President Trump, don't pay up unless and until Sleepy Joe is sworn in! Walt's guess is what Mike Pompeo said today: it's not gonna happen! Lifetime pct .981.

Further reading: "Why Trump Shouldn't Concede", by David Catron, in The American Spectator, 10/11/20. Subhead: "It's a contested election, and neither candidate has been officially declared the winner."

Catholics kneel in Mass protest

Ed. here. Walt telephoned from his self-imposesd exile to say that if we keep reposting such excellent pieces, he may never return. Was that a threat or a promise? Who knows? He did recommend the following piece which appeared yesterday in the Babylon Bee.

Catholics Kneel In Mass Protest,

Then Stand, Then Sit, Then Kneel, Then Stand

In a Mass protest Sunday, Catholics around the world knelt in protest of something or another, then stood up in another apparent protest against the previous protesting, then sat down—the meaning of which is unclear— then knelt again, then stood up again.

It was all very confusing to religion and political commentators.

"Maybe they're mad about Luther still? I don't know," said one Protestant analyst. "It could be racism or something, but Catholics in every country from pretty much every ethnicity are kneeling and standing and sitting, so that can't be it."

"The messaging these days is very unclear. All I know is we are protesting something," said one devout Roman Catholic. "Like, I’m not sure if the kneeling is the protest part or if it's the standing. I know when athletes kneel for the national anthem, that’s a protest, but, then again, just last week one athlete kept standing and everyone else was kneeling and that was considered a protest. It's all very ambiguous."

Unfortunately, Pope Francis added to the confusion when he gave a homily about how brown fragility is contributing to systemic racism, which is then causing both police brutality and global warming. During this time he instructed the Roman Catholic faithful around the world to repeat the cycle of kneeling, then standing, and then sitting, and then kneeling, and then standing again.

Cardinals close to Pope Francis attempted to clarify that the Pope was not saying anything about the sexual abuse scandal in the church at this time and was trying to focus his message on global warming, which he believed needed to be combatted by the repeated kneel-stand-sit protest routine each Sunday.

We trust the good, and very funny folks at the BB won't mind our republishing this. Walt reads their blog every day and recommends it highly!

Even during the "corona crisis" Catholics can't "call in" confessions

A few days ago, Most Rev. Leonard P. Blair, Archbishop of Hartford CT and Chairman of the US bishops' Committee on Divine Worship. ruled that administering the Sacrament of Reconciliation -- the one we Traditionalists call "Confession" -- by cellphone is not permissible according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

In a memo to his fellow bishops, the prelate said he was informed by Archbishop Arthur Roche, secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship at the Vatican, that using a cellphone for the sacrament poses a threat against the seal of confession.

Even the use of a cellphone to help amplify the voices of a confessor and penitent who can see each other is not allowed, the memo said. In this video, Father Mike Schmitz explains why not. It's all about "matter".



In his March 27th memo, Archbishop Blair also said that in regard to anointing of the sick, the duty cannot be delegated to someone else, such as a doctor or nurse. Citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, he noted, however, that when it is not possible for a priest to administer the sacrament of reconciliation, it is appropriate for a someone to seek absolution from sin by offering a "perfect contrition, coming from the love of God."

Such contrition, the catechism continues, "expressed by a sincere request for forgiveness...and accompanied by 'votum confessionis', that is, by the firm resolution to have recourse, as soon as possible, to sacramental confession, obtains forgiveness of sins, even mortal ones." The same standard, he wrote, can be applied to the sacrament of the sick.

VIDEO: Catholics! Let's take our Church back!

The Roman Catholic Church is suffering her worst assault in history. Enemies both without and within are campaigning hard to destroy not just the Church as an institution, but the Christian Faith itself. All sons and daughters of the Church are called to stand in her defence.

But... there are serious issues separating traditional Catholics. Every effort must now be made to unite the Catholic resistance, so the good people at The Remnant have taken a long overdue initiative to get everyone together to discuss a united and principled defence of Holy Mother Church. Next month, for the first time in history, a number of bishops as well as representatives of every major traditionalist priestly fraternity in the world (including the SSPX and FSSP), as well as journalists from both sides of the Atlantic, will come together for a weekend conference to discuss what must be done.

Dear Catholic reader, this short (3:23) video is your invitation to help take our Church back!



For more information, click here to visit The Remnant website.

What's actually in the leaked Clinton e-mails?

Walt (and many others) can't under why the attention of the lamestream media is focused on stories about Donald Trump's alleged locker-room banter and slap-and-tickle which go back decades and have nothing to do with business or politics. Meanwhile, while serious political and moral lapses on the part of Shrillery Clinton and her top campaign staffers are being revealed every day through the e-mail leaked by Wikileaks, and no-one cares.

What's the reason for the media's willing participation in this massive misdirection orchestrated by the Democrats? Could it be that people bust their wrists changing channels to see stories about groping, or avoid stories about serious politics? Or could it be that the pundits who are paid to tell us what to think don't really understand the implications of the e-mails? Assuming the latter, Walt's reposting, below, a useful guide to what's in the Clinton e-mails, originally prepared and published by Canadian Press. [We do this under the "fair use" doctrine. Besides, we don't make any money on WWW. We don't even allow advertising! Ed.]

The emails are being released in batches. So far, they mention:

—President Barack Obama: Obama exchanged messages with Clinton on her private email, according to an email purportedly from a senior aide. Obama has said he only learned the same way everyone else did that Clinton never used government email — in the news. To Trump, this is damning. He alleges, without evidence, that the reason Clinton never got charged by the FBI for mishandling classified information is that the FBI’s boss, Obama, also used to email her now-notorious personal account.

—Foreign lobbyists: The Clinton campaign debated whether to accept donations from Washington lobbyists representing foreign interests. They considered making an exception for friendly countries — they cited Canada as an example. In the end, they accepted everything. An email purportedly from Clinton’s communications director says: “Take the money!!”

—Secretary of State Bloomberg? An aide to Michael Bloomberg responded, when asked by a Clinton friend whether the billionaire-ex-mayor was interested in an administration job under Clinton: “Secty of state. Which ain’t gonna happen.” The friend Neera Tanden, head of a progressive think-tank, forwarded the email to campaign chair John Podesta and said: “Something to know for down the road.”

—Qatar connection: The Persian Gulf state donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation for Bill Clinton’s birthday in 2012. A year later, Hillary Clinton told an audience at Goldman Sachs, according to leaked transcripts, that Qatar and other Gulf states were funding jihadist groups in Syrian’s civil war.

—Primary favours: Leaked emails suggest the Clinton campaign asked the Illinois state government to move back the date of the primary, to hurt Republicans. They feared an early Illinois primary would benefit moderate Republican candidates. A purported email from Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook says the Clintons, “won’t forget,” what friends do for them.

—Obama push poll: Outside groups endorsing Clinton’s 2008 bid conducted a whisper-campaign against Obama. In a January 2008 email, a polling-firm employee tells friends of Clinton that it added anti-Obama questions to a poll “as requested.” The questions refer to his past use of cocaine; his Muslim father; and him not wearing an American flag lapel pin.

—Media relations: A Democratic party official who occasionally comments on CNN told the campaign during the primary that she occasionally gets advance notice of questions for network town-hall events. Donna Brazile now says she never got actual questions. Also, the New York Times went back-and-forth with the Clinton campaign last year over which quotes it could use. In a piece this week, Times writer Mark Leibovich says he’d tried getting Clinton to do an on-the-record interview; she agreed to speak off-the-record; he later convinced her team to let him use some quotes from the off-the-record chat.

—'Get a life,' far left: A transcript says Clinton voiced frustration with her party’s left-wing fringe, in a private event with a union: “They come to my rallies and yell at me.... They say, ’Will you promise never to take any fossil fuels out of the earth ever again?’ No. I won’t promise that. Get a life, you know.”

—'Needy Latinos': Clinton’s campaign chair urged her to call “needy Latinos” who required some attention before endorsing her, include former cabinet secretary and governor Bill Richardson.

—Catholics: Clinton aides are being accused of disparaging Catholics. That’s because an employee at a think-tank emailed Clinton aides disparaging Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch, over baptizing his kids as Catholic; he suggested rich conservatives were attracted to Catholicism’s outdated gender roles. Clinton aide Palmieri replied. She suggested the rich might deem Catholicism more socially acceptable than evangelicalism.

—Collusion: Trump says there’s proof of collusion between Clinton and the Justice Department. That’s because her aide, Brian Fallon, wrote that a department contact informed him of a court date related to a freedom-of-information case on Clinton’s records. Fallon says that doesn’t mean collusion; there were also public records and media reports about the upcoming hearing.

—TPP — policy or politics: Opponents accuse Clinton of a cynical flip-flop over the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal — she worked on it in government, opposed it in her primary. Clinton says she withdrew her support after seeing the final details. An email exchange among campaign staff suggests a political calculus. It shows a conversation right after the agreement was announced. Clinton would oppose it — yet they discuss whether to wait a few weeks until the final text is released, to use that as a pretext.

—Bank ties: In paid appearances at financial institutions, Clinton vaunted her good relationship with banks. She said she represented them for eight years as a New York senator. She got annoyed at campaign staff when they insisted her husband cancel a speech to Morgan Stanley, the week of her campaign launch. Transcripts also show she told bankers they needed to toughen regulations and respond to public anger after the financial crisis.

—Thoughtful exchanges: Clinton offered candid and detailed analysis of world events, in events at Goldman Sachs. According to transcripts, she discussed hearing a screaming match between Chinese and Japanese leaders; the re-emergence of Japanese nationalism; Russian distrust of the Chinese; how a Syrian no-fly zone could kill civilians; and the multiple causes of U.S. legislative paralysis.

Walt was sorely tempted to add emphasis to certain points, but there were so many of them that it seemed like overkill. Please, dear gentle reader... just read this stuff thoroughly and tell me how on earth any patriotic American concerned about the future of the US of A could possible vote for That Woman.

Footnote: Where IS Mrs Bill Clinton, anyway? The Donald is campaigning in WI today -- a hard row for him to hoe -- but Hellery, according to her staff "has nothing planned". You're running for POTUS, with three weeks to go until Election Day, and you have nothing planned??!! Could it be that La Clinton is being hidden from the people, lest her appearance give more clues as to her serious health problems? Just askin'....

NY Times asks: Are Muslims the new Catholics?

The politically correct New York Times ran an unusual op-ed piece on Monday, contributed by Doug Saunders, writing from Toronto. Mr Saunders draws a strong analogy between contemporary "concerns" about Islam and the Islamization of the West, on the one hand, and 20th-century American anti-Catholicism on the other.

He makes the point that as late as 1950, American Freedom and Catholic Power sold nearly a quarter of a million copies in the USA, and was on the Times best-seller list for weeks. earlier feelings of anger and to anti-Catholic sentiments of earlier generations.

"The view that members of a religious minority are not to be trusted — that they are predisposed to extremism, disloyalty and violence; resist assimilation; reproduce at alarming rates, and are theologically compelled to impose their backward religious laws on their adopted home — is not new.... From the 19th century on, distrust, violence and, eventually, immigration restrictions were aimed at waves of Roman Catholic immigrants."


Mr Saunders continues: "Many Americans shunned such views, but some liberals did not. Mr. Blanshard’s book was endorsed by the likes of John Dewey and Bertrand Russell, and respected scholars like Seymour Martin Lipset, Reinhold Niebuhr and Sidney Hook debated Catholics’ supposed propensity toward authoritarianism."

The point Mr Saunders overlooks -- thus rendering his argument specious -- is that the moral and social values espoused by Catholics are virtually identical to the Protestant Christian values on which America was founded and built.

Muslims, however, follow a false prophet and seek to impose on Western society a culture which is backward, barbaric, and alien to our way of life. If we think the Islamists are predisposed to extremism, disloyalty and violence; resist assimilation; reproduce at alarming rates, and are theologically compelled to impose their backward religious laws on their adopted home — we do so with good reason.

Further reading on WWW: "How can we be silent in the face of Islamization of our country?" This post has been in the top five on Walt's "hits list" for weeks now.

Miami archbishop says religious freedom under assault in USA

"America's 'first freedom', the freedom of religion, is under great stress if not under outright assault — and not just for Catholics." So says Very Rev. Thomas Wenski, Archbishop of Miami, writing in the Fort Lauderdale SunSentinel.

The cause of the stress? "...a reductive secularism that has more in common with the French Revolution than with America's founding." Citing recent attacks on religious liberty, Abp. Wenski calls the HHS mandate for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs "even more ominous".

"The Church cannot not oppose this unjust (and we believe unconstitutional) mandate," he writes. "It is not a matter of whether contraception may be prohibited by the government. This is not even a matter of whether contraception may be supported by the government. Instead, it is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide coverage for contraception or sterilization, even if that violates their religious beliefs."

Click here to read Abp. Wenski's article in its entirety.

10 ways the Obama administration offends Catholics

Frankly, I'd lost count of the number of ways in which the policies of the Prez have offended not just Catholics, but Christians of all stripes. But someone -- other than God -- is keeping score!

Writing for Catholic Vote.org, Tom Hoopes lists 10 ways in which the Obama administration's policies have offended Catholic voters. The HHS mandate, he says, is merely the latest. So here's the list.

1. Pro-abortion extremism, attacking the right to life.
2. Forcing Catholic institutions to pay for contraception and sterilization.
3. Forcing Catholics to pay for birth control pills.
4. Breaking Obama's Notre Dame promise to “draft a sensible conscience clause”.
5. Disappointing anti-war Catholics by sticking to the Bush administration’s Iraq timetable, Afghanistan strategy and Guantanamo Bay policy.
6. Ordering US Army chaplains to not read a pastoral letter about forced contraception coverage.
7. Trying (until stopped by the Supreme Court) to insert the federal government in the hiring and firing of civilian ministers of religion.
8. Demonizing Catholics officially as bigots for supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, and refusing to assist homosexual couples in adoptions.
9. “Catholics need not apply” policies, denying Catholics the ability to fulfill certain charitable grants.
10. Anti-immigrant policies, especially targetting Latinos who are predominantly Catholic.

Catholics! Is there some or any of this you didn't know about? Read the article for examples and proofs. And don't forget to vote in November!