Skip to content

Nordus Ordeo (New Order) Catholic

New from RTV: Michael Matt Interviews Father Clovis (London)



Vatican II & Pope Francis: Fr. Clovis Interviewed by Michael Matt

RTV in LONDON: Michael Matt interviews Father Linus Clovis. The conversation covers the question of refusing Communion to pro-abort politicians, the necessity of the TLM, Pope Francis, and Amoris Laetitia, which Father calls a “Trojan Horse.”

Plus, is Pope Francis an anomaly, or did Vatican II make Francis inevitable?

Subscribe to The Remnant YouTube Channel, as this week we’ll be in France doing RTV work for the Chartres Pilgrimage.

Please Share This Video








Michael Matt has been an editor of The Remnant since 1990. Since 1994, he has been the newspaper’s editor. A graduate of Christendom College, Michael Matt has written hundreds of articles on the state of the Church and the modern world. He is the host of The Remnant Underground and Remnant TV’s The Remnant Forum. He’s been U.S. Coordinator for Notre Dame de Chrétienté in Paris–the organization responsible for the Pentecost Pilgrimage to Chartres, France–since 2000.  Mr. Matt has led the U.S. contingent on the Pilgrimage to Chartres for the last 24 years. He is a lecturer for the Roman Forum’s Summer Symposium in Gardone Riviera, Italy. He is the author of Christian Fables, Legends of Christmas and Gods of Wasteland (Fifty Years of Rock ‘n’ Roll) and regularly delivers addresses and conferences to Catholic groups about the Mass, home-schooling, and the culture question. Together with his wife, Carol Lynn and their seven children, Mr. Matt currently resides in St. Paul, Minnesota.



Latest from Michael Matt | Editor





The Church and Islam: Dangerous Illusions



When I first began writing about the Church and Islam, I devoted a lot of space to describing ways that Church leaders could resist the spread of Islam. It seemed only a matter of time until they would wake up to the need to resist. As it turned out, however, that assessment was overly optimistic.

The immediate task, as I soon learned, was not to find ways to counter Islam, but to convince the Church’s hierarchy that Islam ought to be resisted. There’s no use talking battle strategies to people who won’t admit that they have an ideological enemy.

The enemy is not Muslims per se, but a belief system adhered to by the majority of Muslims, albeit with varying degrees of commitment. Although Islam does not easily lend itself to moderation, many Muslims manage to practice their faith in peaceful ways. Others merely give it lip service, and still others are on fire with a passionate zeal to spread it—by fire and the sword if necessary.

The idea of opposing dangerous ideologies is not foreign to Americans, but the idea of opposing an ideology that is also a religion is more problematic. It has become increasingly problematic now that we live in an era in which merely disagreeing with another’s opinions is tantamount to a hate crime. So, just for the record, critiquing Islam does not mean that one hates Muslims. Criticizing Islam is not the same as criticizing Muslims, any more than criticizing communism is equivalent to criticizing Soviet-era Russians. One can acknowledge the humanity and good intentions of others without having to endorse their ideology. And if their ideology or belief system presents a grave danger to others, it would be wrong not to criticize it. Of course, one should employ tact and prudence when offering such criticism.

The distinction between Citizen X and his beliefs is a simple one. You do not have to respect his beliefs, but you should try to respect him as a fellow human being. Many Catholic leaders, however, have difficulty making this distinction. Rather than try, they have, in the case of Islam, simply declared it to be an upstanding fellow religion with many similarities to Christianity. That way, no one’s feelings are hurt. The problem of Islamic terrorists and extremists is handled in the same way: they are assumed to be a small minority who have misunderstood the peaceful nature of their religion.

By the same token, it stands to reason that critics of Islam have also misunderstood Islam, and need to be set straight. If they persist in their obstinacy, they are dismissed as bigots and “Islamophobes.” Likewise, Church officials assume that opponents of Muslim immigration must be poorly informed, or else racist and xenophobes. If they loved their neighbor, they would not challenge his beliefs or question his religious practices

Under Pope Benedict XVI there were signs—such as his Regensburg Address—that the Church was developing a more realistic view of Islam. But whatever ground was gained by Benedict was given up by Francis. Indeed, it seems fair to say that under Francis, the Church’s understanding of Islam regressed. Perhaps the most glaring example of this regression can be found in the Pope’s assertion that “authentic Islam and a proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.” It’s hard to imagine any of his predecessors or any of their advisors making a similar claim.

Unfortunately, very few churchmen have taken issue with Francis’s profoundly flawed view of Islam. Instead, many have joined the chorus—some out of naiveté, some out of misplaced sensitivity, and some, perhaps, out of cowardice.

Several decades have passed since the emergence of worldwide Islamic terrorist networks, and Church leaders are still clinging to a fantasy-based view of Islam. In their defense, it must be admitted that other world leaders have also been in thrall to the cult of sensitivity, and have been equally slow in giving up their dreamy narratives. For a long time, Western leaders kept repeating the mantra that Islamic terror had nothing to do with Islam. But now their tune is beginning to change. The Austrian prime minister has threatened to close one of Vienna’s largest mosques, the French have shut down numerous mosques and deported several radical imams, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic have effectively closed their borders to Muslim migrants, and Hungary’s prime minister has unapologetically defended the Christian identity of his country.

It’s strange that the Church which, because of its history, ought to be the first to know, appears to be among the last institutions to grasp that Islam is not really a religion of peace.

Or, perhaps, Church leaders do understand the dangers of Islam and have adopted a strategy of silence to protect potential victims of Islam. That’s one plausible defense of their inaction. Perhaps they fear that any criticism of Islam will bring harsh reprisals against Christians living in Muslim lands. During World War II, Catholic leaders quickly learned that denunciations of Nazism brought swift and deadly reprisals against both Jews and Christians. As Nazi power increased, the Vatican developed more covert tactics for helping Jews to escape, and Catholics to resist.

One might argue that today’s Catholic leaders are following a similar strategy in the hopes of mitigating the persecution of Christians and other minorities. But there’s a difference. If the Church simply maintained a prudential silence about Islamic aggressions, that argument might make sense. But Church leaders have not simply refrained from criticizing Islam. Instead, they have taken every opportunity to praise Islam, to declare their solidarity with it, and to join in various Islamic initiatives, such as the campaign against “Islamophobia.” Judging by the Church’s great solicitude for Islam, one would think it was the most persecuted faith on earth, rather than one of the chief persecutors.

The Church’s current Islam policy does not look like the cautious approach of one who is dealing with a dangerous enemy. It looks more like the trusting innocence of one who thinks he has no enemies. Pius XII may have maintained a prudential silence about Nazi evils once it became apparent that many innocent people would pay the price, but he never praised Nazism as a force for peace, and he certainly never declared the Church’s solidarity with it.

By contrast, Church leaders and Pope Francis in particular, have become, in effect, enablers of Islam. Pope Francis has denied that Islam sanctions violence, has drawn a moral equivalence between Islam and Catholicism (“If I speak of Islamic violence, I must speak of Catholic violence”), and has campaigned for the admittance of millions of Muslim migrants into Europe. Moreover, he has criticized those who oppose his open borders policy as hard-hearted xenophobes. In return for his efforts, he has been publicly thanked by several Muslim leaders for his “defense of Islam.”

One might be tempted to use the word “collaborator” instead of “enabler.” But collaborator is too strong a word. In its World War II context, it implies a knowing consent to and cooperation with an evil enterprise. It seems clear to me that the pope and others in the hierarchy are enabling the spread of an evil ideology; however, it’s not at all clear that they understand what they’re doing. Francis, for instance, seems to sincerely believe that all religions are roughly equal in goodness. Thus for him, the spread of any religion must seem like a good thing. It’s an exceedingly naïve view, but one that seems honestly held.

But one can’t plead ignorance forever. Eventually, the reality of the situation will become plain to all but the most obtuse. At that point—at the point the threat is undeniable—we assume that the people in power will wake up and take the appropriate actions. But what if the awakening comes too late? The pope, for one, has shown little evidence that he will change his views on the subject. If anything, he has doubled down—recently going so far as to say that the rights of migrants trump national security. We should not look to the pope to lead the way on this issue. He seems constitutionally incapable of entertaining doubts about his Islam policy. It looks like the impetus to change course will have to come from bishops, priests and Catholic laity. They had better get busy. There is no time to waste.

Originally posted at

Professor William Kilpatrick, who taught for many years at Boston College, is the author of several books on cultural and religious issues, including Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad. His articles on Islam have appeared in FrontPage Magazine, JihadWatch, Crisis, Catholic World Report, National Catholic Register, Aleteia, and other publications. He is also the founder of Turning Point Project, an initiative dedicated to educating Catholics and other Americans about the threat from Islam.




By the way, Katy Perry’s breakout song, I Kissed A Girl, was nominated for the Kids Choice Award in 2009, and after her visit with Francis she announced the celebration of the 10-year anniversary of the song’s release.

And finally, did you hear that Katy won her case against the two little old nuns out in California who were being forced to sell their convent to the raunchy pop star? Yep, Katy got the convent and the audience with Pope Francis. She’s had a good month!

Michael concludes with a suggested strategy all Catholics can get behind.

Please Share this video:


To Support The Remnant Underground Please CLICK HERE

  • Avatar

    I muse whether God is testing the Vatican machinery before calling for a full overhaul…..
    Shock waves were the result of the woman sinner brought to Jesus when He rebuked the Pharisees who tried tricking Him, forgave the woman, and LOVED her enough to warn her to sin no more.

    Now a great sinner has been brought to the Vatican, someone who does not even realize how deep into the demonic she has fallen, and what do they do? They give HER the podium to teach others about how to call up demons. (And she’s not the first–recall Jeffrey Sachs, Emma B., etc.)

    Just meeeting the Vicar of Christ can be a powerful, disarming experience, why stop there? Give the Holy Spirit a voice, speak a phrase of hope, love, warning, anything at all from the mouth of Christ. Has he completely lost all fear of God?

  • Avatar

    Tell me who thou goest with…. and I’ll tell you who thou art.

  • Avatar

    Anyone notice the theme of the Met Ball idiocy this year? Heavenly Bodies and The Catholic Imagination. Fr James Martin and Cardinal Dolan were consultants in this travesty. Katy Perry had the gall dress as an angel, supposedly St Michael. Madonna was in pseudo Franciscan habit…I can’t go on. They are mocking us with this spectacle. I am so disgusted. Sweet advocate Mary, pray for us. St. Michael, defend us.

  • Avatar

    I’m unclear as to what a ‘personal meeting’ actually entails? Did he meet her ‘privately’ i.e., an official diary appointment, one to one? Or did he meet her while he was walking among a group of visitors to the Vatican?
    I have never heard of this young woman , and I try to keep up with what’s happening. So there’s a good chance, if it was the latter, he was equally clueless.

  • Avatar

    Imagine anything you like, Martin. At this point, imagining the current pontiff with a Margarita in a swimming pool, while Katy Perry is ranting “Hot ‘N Cold” in front of him clad in a cardinal’s cassock with nothing underneath it, is as much valid now to me as seeing the two of them holding hands looking in sheer adoration at a Madonna of El Greco in the Vatican Museum. At this point, nothing is beyond the possible.

  • Avatar

    When you have no substance, you need to rely on flash. This is what the Church is reduced to.

  • Avatar

    I used to regard the Catholic hierarchy as the church’s version of RINOs. I was wrong. They are outright sellout liberals.

  • Avatar

    I was going to say that the people running the Vatican are the biggest buffoons on earth. Then I heard Dr. Robert or “Robby”, as Katy Perry called him speak. A “Doctor” groveling at the feet of a pop singer and proclaiming her wisdom on the basis of Twitter followers was astounding. Then Katy Perry spoke and she always speaks condescendingly while uttering phrases that are profoundly sophomoric and moronic.

    What a perfect match of venue, Doctor and resident moron.

  • Avatar

    “If you’re the Pope why wouldn’t you…….?” Hmmm. Yet another unbearable shock to the Body of Christ with this honoring of Katie Perry. Or do we have the first anti-pope or impostor in many centuries?

  • Avatar

    Meanwhile, the Catholic clergy — cardinals, archbishops, bishops, priest — continue to do nothing about anti-pope Francis….

Join the discussion…
  • Avatar

    I muse whether God is testing the Vatican machinery before calling for a full overhaul…..
    Shock waves were the result of the woman sinner brought to Jesus when He rebuked the Pharisees who tried tricking Him, forgave the woman, and LOVED her enough to warn her to sin no more.

    Now a great sinner has been brought to the Vatican, someone who does not even realize how deep into the demonic she has fallen, and what do they do? They give HER the podium to teach others about how to call up demons. (And she’s not the first–recall Jeffrey Sachs, Emma B., etc.)

    Just meeeting the Vicar of Christ can be a powerful, disarming experience, why stop there? Give the Holy Spirit a voice, speak a phrase of hope, love, warning, anything at all from the mouth of Christ. Has he completely lost all fear of God?

  • Avatar

    Tell me who thou goest with…. and I’ll tell you who thou art.

  • Avatar

    Anyone notice the theme of the Met Ball idiocy this year? Heavenly Bodies and The Catholic Imagination. Fr James Martin and Cardinal Dolan were consultants in this travesty. Katy Perry had the gall dress as an angel, supposedly St Michael. Madonna was in pseudo Franciscan habit…I can’t go on. They are mocking us with this spectacle. I am so disgusted. Sweet advocate Mary, pray for us. St. Michael, defend us.

  • Avatar

    I’m unclear as to what a ‘personal meeting’ actually entails? Did he meet her ‘privately’ i.e., an official diary appointment, one to one? Or did he meet her while he was walking among a group of visitors to the Vatican?
    I have never heard of this young woman , and I try to keep up with what’s happening. So there’s a good chance, if it was the latter, he was equally clueless.

  • Avatar

    Imagine anything you like, Martin. At this point, imagining the current pontiff with a Margarita in a swimming pool, while Katy Perry is ranting “Hot ‘N Cold” in front of him clad in a cardinal’s cassock with nothing underneath it, is as much valid now to me as seeing the two of them holding hands looking in sheer adoration at a Madonna of El Greco in the Vatican Museum. At this point, nothing is beyond the possible.

  • Avatar

    I was going to say that the people running the Vatican are the biggest buffoons on earth. Then I heard Dr. Robert or “Robby”, as Katy Perry called him speak. A “Doctor” groveling at the feet of a pop singer and proclaiming her wisdom on the basis of Twitter followers was astounding. Then Katy Perry spoke and she always speaks condescendingly while uttering phrases that are profoundly sophomoric and moronic.

    What a perfect match of venue, Doctor and resident moron.

  • Avatar

    “If you’re the Pope why wouldn’t you…….?” Hmmm. Yet another unbearable shock to the Body of Christ with this honoring of Katie Perry. Or do we have the first anti-pope or impostor in many centuries?

  • Avatar

    Meanwhile, the Catholic clergy — cardinals, archbishops, bishops, priest — continue to do nothing about anti-pope Francis….






      She is certainly not a christian SHE IS A SATANIC WITCH ! Life Site News had a clear article about it and even non-believers figured out she was doing witchcraft (Grammy 2014, I think; singing Dark Horses). How can the Vatican be so blind, so naive and so stupid? Faith seems to have been lost at the higher level indeed. Thanks for beeing there.


      How do you answer family members (elders whom you must respect) when they rabidly defend Francis? For example, my pious in-laws staunchly support not just Francis but all the post-conciliar popes. They think Francis is humble for living in the Vatican hotel and consider him practically a saint. Anyone else in this uncomfortable situation?
      Of course by comparison with the terrible apostasy and suffering afflicting Holy Mother Church, my petty complaint is infinitesimal. Still, peace and strength through prayer and family life are great supports during this maelstrom; I don’t want to upset my family members BUT can’t lie or pretend to approve of these infamies. Just wanted to hear some thoughts on this question. It must be pretty common.
      Nam ejusmodi pseudoapostoli sunt operarii subdoli, transfigurantes se in apostolos Christi.



      Yes, I, too, was in the same situation. The peace and strength you mentioned above, find with God, with Mary and Joseph, with all the saints, not with family and friends. It is a sad predicament, my prayers are with you.

    • Avatar

      many of us are in this very very painful situation all over the world…..

      such darkness right from the heart of our Church.. but Jesus has overcome the world! Let us remember that. Today is Ascension Thursday – 40 days after He Rose …. !!
      We are an Easter People – but we have to also carry our Cross .. and this is our Cross today… The holy Eucharist, Confession and the Rosary are our weapons!





      Do you ever feel as if you are in a sinking submarine, and the depth gauge has long since pegged in the red, the hull is groaning, rivets are popping, the faces of your shipmates look drained and hollow from the stress, and you are wondering if you’ll hit bottom before you reach crush depth, and if so, then what?




      Brace yourself for reaching ‘crush depth’. That eventuality is actually preferable to the Church being transformed into a working and compliant subsidiary of the NWO. For Christianity to survive it appears we will have to endure the collapse.


      Well… least Francis is against the Mafia (sarcasm). I think he was remembering jp ll’s denouncemrnt of it.


      Being so pro LGBT was her main credentials to be invited and so, promoting a pagan agenda. If not the abomination of desolation in the Holy Place, tell me, please, what is this?



      In fact we are seeing Revelations 18:1-3 fulfilled to the letter. The abomination of desolation described to detail in that same chapter and mentioned in Matthew chapter 24 is about to come with the introduction of the Bergoglian New “Mass” and the rumored abolition of Latin in the liturgy. THEN it will take place.



      There is a time for outrage: when the outrage will be heeded and in turn effect change. But we are way beyond that point, outrage means nothing to the pope or his entourage of atheist homosexuals.

      Now it’s time to laugh and make the change happen yourself.





      Remant Moderator.

      I suggest that laity who wish to give themselves to God.. as lay consecrated or Third Order,or simply believers – start uniting their forces and building next to Monasteries or helping Monasteries to be built … or at least get into the same area—

      In other words we the Catholic Laity who are not being fed as we should must act… the time for shock is over – by now we have seen and we know what is happening.

      We must raise up new communties and move to them… and in that community with either an authentic Bishop at the centre of priest…
      who will still celebrate the Mass the way he should… and give the Sacraments — it will be the way forward to strengthen us with The Lord…



      Well, maybe if enough folks got serious with their hatha yoga, and really buckled down their pranayama breathing, maybe, just maybe…
      Or, the Rosery.
      Other than that, it seems Francis is on an unstoppable roll.


      The Pope, putting her in high profile in The Vatican, is scandal as well as inappropriate, to say the least. When will he be removed from His Chair! BTW: if God cast The Devil into Hell, what makes her think she will reach “The Pearly Gates?” People will do anything for attention; but what’s Pope Francis’ excuse? Katy Perry will be very surprised when she reaches Hell if she does not repent.


      Tell me I didn’t see what I saw, Katy Perry(whoever that is) was giving a talk in the hall where the pope, cardinals and other bishops gather for various meetings, and was sitting in the seat the pope sits in.


      Didn’t Pope Benedict XVI condemn TM as being dangerous?




      That Katy Perry supports LGBT pales in comparison to her proud and defiant practice of cannibalism, although cannibalism is not the word she, nor her elite friends, use to describe this practice. But no matter the culinary degrees possessed by the Chef, no matter the skill-set the chef has with the skillet, consumption of human flesh is, and always will be, cannibalism. Katy Perry brags about this “special dining experience,” and is shocked that it is out-lawed in America. In France, she says, sensible people are smart enough to eat what they choose. This information about Perry’s devilish dining fetishes did not happen under a bushel. Certainly the Pope knew this.



      Sounds like diabolical possession to me. Do we still believe in that? We used to hear that the greatest triumph of the Devil was in convincing people that he doesn’t exist.



      Stay in the Church? Which one, the one you go to, with a Traditional Latin Mass, or the one with the silly middle age folk (and old) playing tambourines and guitars with the altar girls. The latter is the only option available to many us. How can that even be the same Church as the one you attend? Splain that.



      I don’t know what is going on in the US (assuming you are from the US). In my Archdiocese of Vancouver it is very unusual to find a NO Mass that is not conducted with reverence and devotion. Granted, not every parish has the most uplifting music – have yet to see “silly middle age folk (and old) playing tambourines” – but, for the most part I have little to complain about. Am sorry to hear things are so bad in your area. PS One parish in Vancouver offers the Traditional Latin Mass.


      Its not only the US … it is very much in the western nations of the world…
      ….. we must support our good Bishops and priests and that means also talking clearly….



      The Japanese Catholics went centuries, often with no priests at all. Yes, stay in the Church. And if you have nothing but heretics offering sham Masses, then do as Bishop Schneider advised: Move to where the Mass is or at least drive great distances every Sunday to find one.





      Might not be worth offering, but there are really great Catholic resources on the computer. Type in Catholic Mass, or Catholic homilies, or better yet, Fulton Sheen. There is no shortage in available quality uplifting material. Alas, confession and Mass
      partication is only done in person.





      I understand that it is not a flippant response. It’s just that for some individuals, such as me, moving is more or less out of the realm of possibility. And for some people in some localities, the TLM is not drivable in practice.


    • Avatar

      We have a right to the true Mass. There is no law or precept which forces us to attend an illicit Mass. If you live too far from a TLM, it might be once, twice, or four times per year, whatever you can reasonably manage. On the Sundays when you can’t attend the TLM, sanctify the Sunday by saying the Rosary. If you normally say the Rosary every day, then say the full 15 decades on the Sunday. Spend an hour praying the Rosary or reading religious material.

      In the above situation, the challenge is really and truly sanctifying the Sunday and not sliding into a pattern where Sunday becomes just another day of the week. Unfortunately, the current crisis presents us with many challenges for the sanctification of our souls.








    Cardinal Dolan: Met Gala was not ‘offensive or blasphemous at all’

    met gala, timothy dolan

    NEW YORK, New York, May 9, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Timothy Dolan has defended the controversial 2018 Met Gala as “a celebration of what we call the evangelization of culture.”

    “I did not find the spirit of the evening to be offensive or blasphemous at all,” the cardinal told Crux of the event where a Victoria’s Secret model dressed as a sexy cardinal alongside dozens of other celebrities in sultry Catholic-themed outfits.

    “Was some of it edgy? Yes, but I never met any person that seemed to be snippy or snotty about the Church, or who intended anything to be offensive,” said Dolan.

    He continued:

    “We could have had a lecture at the museum on the Catholic imagination and not too many people may have showed up, especially the crowd from last night. But when you do an evening like that, you get everybody.”

    “Boy, you talk about the public square – with some of the movers and shakers who were there – and they’re reminded of positive memories of the Church and of devotions, prayers, traditions, and liturgies, as many of them told me they were. This could only be for the good of the Church.”

    “I was really happy to have been there. If this helps people rediscover those roots, then hallelujah, it’s a winner.”

    Other celebrity costumes at the Met Gala included a sexualized Blessed Virgin Mary, Rihanna dressed as a pope, and “flesh-flashing” outfits adorned with Christian symbols, as Piers Morgan put it.

    All LifeSiteNews coverage of the 2018 Met Gala can be viewed here.


    Article comments can be found here!


    Author blog notes:

    This is repulsive and is not the true catholic or Christian way.  Nordus Ordeo and not catholic more-less Islamic..

    The Traditional Catholic law forbids this!!  He’s not a “True” Cardinal-Bishop of Christ!

    Horrable how Nordus Ordeo has been rewritten to suit the Islamic formulas !!  :'(  :'(





    The Post-Vatican II Church of Materialism



    The shift began with the Second Vatican Council, which produced “Gaudium et spes,” a pastoral document concerning economics and politics in the modern world, particularly regarding the poor. In the preface, the council, “proclaiming the noble destiny of man and championing the Godlike seed which has been sown in him, offers to mankind the honest assistance of the Church in fostering that brotherhood of all men.”

    Statements from other sections reinforce that emphasis.

    “Never has the human race enjoyed such an abundance of wealth, resources and economic power, and yet a huge proportion of the world’s citizens are still tormented by hunger and poverty, while countless numbers suffer from total illiteracy,” from the introduction.

    “According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown. For by his innermost nature man is a social being, and unless he relates himself to others he can neither live nor develop his potential,” from Chapter I, “The Dignity Of The Human Person.”

    “Therefore, there must be made available to all men everything necessary for leading a life truly human, such as food, clothing, and shelter; the right to choose a state of life freely and to found a family, the right to education, to employment, to a good reputation, to respect, to appropriate information, to activity in accord with the upright norm of one’s own conscience, to protection of privacy and rightful freedom even in matters religious. Hence, the social order and its development must invariably work to the benefit of the human person,” from Chapter II, “The Community of Mankind.”

    Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, dean emeritus of the Pontifical Lateran University’s theological faculty, sharply criticized “Gaudium et spes” for its fundamentally anthropocentric approach, ambiguity and sloppy theology in his 2012 work, Vatican II: At the Roots of an Equivoque, written in Italian. “The whole document is a sequel of shocking proclamations, whose sheer number makes exemplification a difficult choice,” wrote Gherardini, who worked at the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries during the council.

    Gherardini concluded by warning about an excessively intimate relationship between Catholicism and the world: “The frontiers have come so close and to such an extent, that they have become welded. What the Church says and does, she says and does it for the world; and what the world is doing in its drive toward progress, is to the advantage of the Church.”

    Pope Paul VI amplified “Gaudium et spes’ ” approach in his encyclical “Populorum Progresio,” which announced the formation of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and solidified the Vatican’s commitment to the material development of poorer nations through international cooperation. But the encyclical addressed more than immediate logistics.

    “The ultimate goal is a full-bodied humanism,” it stated. “And does this not mean the fulfillment of the whole man and of every man? … True humanism points the way toward God and acknowledges the task to which we are called, the task which offers us the real meaning of human life. Man is not the ultimate measure of man. Man becomes truly man only by passing beyond himself.”

    Achieving that goal would mean using existing international agencies — or creating new ones with overarching power — to manage the world’s economic and political development.

    “Such international collaboration among the nations of the world certainly calls for institutions that will promote, coordinate and direct it, until a new juridical order is firmly established and fully ratified,” the encyclical said. “We give willing and wholehearted support to those public organizations that have already joined in promoting the development of nations, and We ardently hope that they will enjoy ever growing authority.”

    Pope Benedict XVI took that concept to its logical conclusion in another encyclical, “Caritas in Veritate,” which advocated giving the United Nations power to direct both international and domestic economic policies:

    “In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need … for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. … To manage the global economy … to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority…”

    This authority, the encyclical stated, must “observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity,” “seek to establish the common good” and “have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums.”

    What is this authority’s ultimate mission? A “directed” global economy designed to “open up the unprecedented possibility of large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale,” stated the encyclical — including “a worldwide redistribution of energy resources, so that countries lacking those resources can have access to them.”

    In promoting such an agency, “Caritas in Veritate” subtly redefines the Catholic Church’s primary role from proclaiming the Gospel to ensuring economic benefits for all — or, at least, redefining the Gospel in materialist terms. Benedict’s encyclical cites “Populorum Progresio” often and refers to Paul VI’s ideas in this statement:

    “(T)he whole Church, in all her being and acting … is engaged in promoting integral human development. She has a public role over and above her charitable and educational activities: all the energy she brings to the advancement of humanity and of universal fraternity is manifested when she is able to operate in a climate of freedom.”

    Benedict’s encyclical even presumes that global economic management through a “true world political authority” can achieve at least partial spiritual harmony:

    “When animated by charity, commitment to the common good … has a place within the testimony of divine charity that paves the way for eternity through temporal action. Man’s earthly activity, when inspired and sustained by charity, contributes to the building of the universal city of God, which is the goal of the history of the human family.”

    Thus does “Caritas in Veritate” solidify the materialist transformation of Catholic identity. Independent Catholic journalist Lee Penn described the encyclical’s magnitude:

    “Caritas in Veritate should be seen as what it is: a theological and political earthquake. The Roman Catholic Church, which was once a guardian of tradition worldwide, now wishes to use radical means (a ‘true world political authority’) for its own ends. It is as if Benedict wishes to mount and ride a wild beast, and imagines that he (and those who believe as he does) will be able to direct that fierce beast’s course. Ordinary prudence – even without reference to the dire symbolism of Revelation 17:3-18 – should have warned the Vatican against such folly. Europeans have already tried using radical means to support conservative goals; the results of that 20th century experiment in Italy, Portugal, Germany, Spain, and Vichy France are written in letters of blood and fire.

    “Seeking a world government that is governed and limited by natural law and Christian tradition is akin to seeking dry water or square circles. Lord Acton, a Catholic historian in 19th Century England, made a warning that the Vatican ought to have heeded: ‘Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority.’ Humanly speaking, no power could be more absolute than that of ‘world ruler,’ and such is the post which (despite the fig-leaf invocation of ‘subsidiarity’) Benedict proposes to create (all parentheses in original).”

    But how do the ideas expressed in “Gaudium et spes” and the two encyclicals work when practiced?


    Latin America, with its long history of Catholicism and mass poverty, would seem to provide the ideal environment. In 2010, 39 percent of the world’s Catholics lived in Latin America. Yet even as a counterweight to Liberation Theology, Catholicism’s economic modernism not only fails to solve intractable social problems but contributes to massive conversions to conservative Protestant denominations, especially Pentecostal ones.

    A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2014 showed that 69 percent of Latin Americans considered themselves Catholic, compared to 92 percent in 1970. Meanwhile, the proportion of Protestants rose from four percent in 1970 to 19 percent in 2014. In 1970, Catholicism claimed at least 90 percent of the population in all but five of the 19 countries surveyed. Yet by 2014, the percentage of Catholics fell by double digits in all but one country, with 11 reporting declines larger than 20 percent.

    Central America reported the most dramatic descents: 41 percent in Guatemala, 43 percent in both Nicaragua and El Salvador, and 47 percent in Honduras — by far the largest in Latin America.

    Catholic author Leon Podles, after reading Jon Wolseth’s Jesus and the Gang: Youth Violence and Christianity in Urban Honduras, offered these reasons for the massive decline:

    “Progressive Catholicism emphasizes community and solidarity with the poor and blames the problems of the poor on structural inequities, especially economic oppression.  Catholic youth groups in the barrio follow this analysis and try to identify with the poor. But they are fearful of identifying with the poor who are gang members. Catholic youth blame gangsterism on social inequities, but do not explain why they themselves have not followed the path of the gangsters.

    “Pentecostals set up a harsh dichotomy between the world ruled by Satan and the church ruled by Christ.  Young men who want to give up the destructive and self-destructive life of the gangs can have a conversion experience and dedicate themselves to a new life, totally rejecting the old one and separating themselves from it. They have to change their lives to convince both the church and their old gangs that they are cristianos. If a man leaves a gang, he is killed by the gang, unless he becomes a cristiano. Gangs usually let Pentecostal former gang members alone if the former members demonstrate that their lives have really changed.

    “Catholics, with their rhetoric of solidarity, do not offer gang members the opportunity for a clean break that Pentecostals offer. Catholics blame society for individual problems; Pentecostals stress individual responsibility.”

    Not only gang members face the demand for personal accountability.

    “As a Baptist who has traveled to Guatemala on four mission trips, I can tell you that one reason evangelical churches are growing there because they take alcoholism seriously (which is a huge problem in Mayan communities),” Ryan Booth wrote to Rod Dreher’s blog at The American Conservative in 2013. “While Baptist attitudes in the U.S. toward alcohol continue to relax, Baptists in Latin America don’t drink at all.”

    A Brazilian named Alat explained the evangelicals’ appeal on Dreher’s blog:

    “They are very, very morally strict, which is why they grow so fast in the poorest areas: they give order to the disordered lives of the very poor, who come from generations of poverty and broken homes and have never known anything better. They take a huge portion of the poor’s meagre income in tithes and ‘gifts’… and even then the poor are better off in these churches, because the order the church gives, much like a military boot camp, helps them to plan for the future, educate themselves, not fall into drugs, not have multiple children out of wedlock, etc.

    “And this is not just inwards. The politicians elected by the Evangelicals are at the forefront of the resistance to homosexual ‘marriage,’ to abortion, and most of the left’s culture war agenda. In my own country, abortion would have been legalized a few years ago if not for the resistance organized by the Evangelical politician-preachers across almost all parties – a fight in which, by the way, the Catholic hierarchy was entirely silent. (emphasis added) If the Church retreats from these issues, the pull of the Evangelical Protestant churches will only INCREASE throughout Latin America (capitals in original).”

    Alat concluded with a statement that represents, if not the epitaph for Latin American Catholicism, an indictment of Catholicism’s economic modernism.

    “To sum up,” Alat wrote, “as we say here, when ‘the Church chose the poor, the poor chose the Protestants.’ ”



    But don’t worry, the Church is learning from them! (Heinrich Bedford-Strohm and Reinhard Kardinal Marx)

    More in this category: « I’m Afraid of Martyrdom

    EVOLUTION: Is It Catholic? (The Great Debate of 2018)



    Written by  Remnant TV

    New from Remnant TV…. 


    Has the entire Catholic Church gone Darwin? Everyone else has. Even a brilliant guy like Jordan Peterson! Cardinal Pell thinks Adam and Eve didn’t actually exist. Pope John Paul ‘The Great’ said Evolution is more than a hypothesis. Of course, Pope Francis is an evolutionist. But what about you? Are you ready to throw Genesis under the bus, just to accommodate a theory called ‘Evolution’? Come to St Paul on May 8, 2018 for the AOTM season finale: Chris Ferrara vs. St. Thomas University’s Dr. Peter Distelzweig – “EVOLUTION: At War with Church Teaching, Or Not.”



    This Tuesday only at the Argument of the Month…

    Are there no Christian men left who are willing to fight for the Word of God?


    Register for this event HERE 


    Published in  Remnant Articles


    • Avatar

      Dear Remnant!
      I agree — is there not some way that so many of us might watch this important debate and gain from it — and use it in our work with others?!!! We do so need the clarity and good teaching & reasoning that we can gain from this AOTM debate!!! Why keep it from us? We need good, solid food!!!! PLEASE get the AOTM folks to reconsider their decision in this regard!




      Mr. Matt,

      Please, cannot the Remnant Newspaper do something to stop AOTM burying the evolution debate “for ever”. It’s the most sought after program for Catholic everywhere, and AOTM have just made a headline news item that it will never be recorded.



      Believe in evolution and you deny the Immaculate Conception. Even if you believe in original sin, if Adam and Eve were “conceived” in an animal then they were conceived without original sin. So Our Lady is not THE Immaculate Conception. Ergo evolution is heresy.


      Why oh Why is this so rare program on evolution not being recorded???



      I was going to ask if Remnant could record this discussion at the AOTM.
      We could all pay a fee to watch, just like the Remnant did for the Catholic Conference.
      I would chip in gladly.





      Father Ripperger has a fine little book out called “The Metaphysics of Evolution.” He demonstrates how this foolish theory violates some First Principles. Not an easy read but Father shows that there are gaps in the logic of evolutionary theory that cannot be overcome.

    • One other person is typing…

      There is an excellent Documentary on Netflix right now “Is Genesis History?” It proves scientifically the Bible is true History.


      The second law of thermodynamics is one of the most fundamental laws of nature, having profound implications. In essence, it says this: The second law – The level of disorder in the universe is steadily increasing. Systems tend to move from ordered behavior to more random behavior.


      Of course I believe in some evolution but I do not believe in macro-evolution. If you can explain to me how the mammalian blood-clotting system could evolve in a series of fortuitous steps by ‘lucky accidents’ without the ‘subject’ not bleeding to death… I am willing to listen.

      Darwinian descriptions of how the eye ‘could’ have developed from a ‘sensitive spot’ are unintentionally hilarious exercises in magical thinking.


      One of the best rational critics of Darwinsm is mathematician David Berlinski. I suggest reading his book, ‘The Devil’s Delusion.’



      Agreed! We had David out to speak at John Rao’s Summer Symposium in Italy some years ago and, to this day, his remains one of the most memorable presentations ever. He positively destroyed Darwin.


      Actually; you can download The Devil’s Delusion free in several formats Eub, and PDF to name a few. Dr. David Berlinski describes himself as a secular Jew so I would take it at the very least he has some sense of the fear of God. His book is a great testiment against New Age scientific Creationism & Evolution that dominates modern New Age Catholic rationalists; including Pope Bergoglio.




    • Avatar

      I was trained as a biochemist and biophysicist. I cannot comprehend how even the most primitive forms of life that we know, and that are all around us, could have come from just matter alone. The more I read and understand (somewhat) how living forms work, the more it awes me. Let alone the chemistry, mechanics, mental and spiritual attributes of a person.
      It really does not make any sense that all this just happened. The radical evolutionists are simply the deniers of God, The Supreme Maker.
      And Descartes got it completely backward…”I think therefore I am,” is BS. Pure narcissism.
      You are a human with a soul, therefore you can think. Made in His image… and that is why you are a human being.


      Theistic evolution is not within the “boundaries” of what Catholic Christians can believe.

      Scripture is higher than popes.
      Popes answer to Scripture – not the other way around.

      Genesis clearly cannot be read in an evolutionary way.

      To do so is to read evolution ‘in’ to Scripture.

      This is impermissible.

      Charles Darwin’s grandfather was a man called Erasmus Darwin.
      He lived in Edinburgh, Scotland.

      He wrote a book called Zoonomia – proposing evolution.

      He was a member of the Lodge.


      The theory of evolution is illogical. It is easily disproven on first principles: there must be a first cause and mover and, also, what is created cannot be greater than the creator. Can a train move itself without a locomotive? Can a rat grow wings become a bat? A child would say no!
      Once people see through the charade of evolution the secular world will collapse.


      1 Timothy 4;1


      To believe in evolution is to call Jesus a liar and the apostles dupes. There will be no Catholic church because the Bible will be destroyed for science, and the supernatural will be lost. Who wants to live in the Brave New World of 1984? I don’t!!!


      Anyone know who is chanting at the beginning and what they are chanting? Marvelous in its power.


      The scientific method has become a stevedore for the theory of evolution lugging it into law, religion, and philosophy.


      Do you know why many people believe in dinosaurs, even though the word “dinosaur” was invented in the 1800s? We have train loads and train loads of dinosaur bones. We still dig them up…sometimes on accident. So, where are the train loads of ape-man bones to support Darwinism v1.0 of 1859? The big joke in the 1970s was that all the ape-man bones will fit into a box the size of a coffin. This is why Steven Gould, the Harvard paleontologist “pope of evolution”, launched Darwinism v2.0, a.k.a. Punctuated Equilibrium. Clever, v2.0 does not require ape-man bones. What a waste of scientific money and time. 160 years chasing a unicorn.


      Evolution, old age Earth and Universe, Heliocentrism, ect… are faked materialistic sciences! The only reason people believe in them is because they are taught by (gnostic or atheist) scholars (or their fellow travellers) that control the purse (and issuing of diplomas)! All our modern sciences are under the control of secret societies who created the Royal Society of London and use all means (such as lies, faked experiments, destroying, hiding or simply ignoring evidences against their faked theories!


      By definition, evolution states that all living species on earth developed from other more primitive species, and originally from a single cell, solely through natural processes. That means that no supernatural involvement occurred at any time. So, theistic evolution is a contradiction in terms, and we must logically rule it out immediately and forever. Meanwhile, the remaining “pure” evolution theory, to be credible, must clearly describe the processes by which many transitions occurred, such as those listed below. (These descriptions will, for the moment, be accepted even thought they have never been observed.) 1) The transition from non-life to a living organism. 2) Individual cells living autonomously developing into cells that “decide” to live in clusters. 3) Clusters of identical cells cooperatively acting like a single large organism. 4) Small groups of cells within a larger cluster of identical cells developing into a separate organ for the good of the cluster. 5) What kind of organ would that smaller group of cells within the larger cluster develop into? Where would the design for that new organ come from, having never existed before? 6) The transition from a pair of aquatic living organisms, through small accidental mutations over many generations, into an air-breathing organism. 7) Transition from a fully functioning reptile pair, to a self-preserving flying bird. 8) The development of two sexes from a population without two sexes. This list is far from exhaustive, but it’s a start.


      “Philosopy” ?


      actually the JPII never said ‘Evolution is more than a hypothesis’. This was a speech written by someone else for him to deliver. He never got around to delivering it.


      If we define ‘evolution’ as simply change through descent, there’s no argument since this is an observable fact. Everything changes. But if we expand the definition to include life spontaneously appearing, one thing changing into another thing or explaining the origin of life on earth (atheistic materialistic evolution), then this belief no Catholic may hold.

      This second definition, which defies scientific evidence to the contrary, obliterates original sin, is comfortable with non-being magically becoming being, and is perfectly comfortable with a universe without a cause, is a sin for a Catholic to hold as this definition of evolution is clearly at odds with Catholic doctrine, especially on the creation of the universe by God and original sin. This should be an interesting debate.



      Yes, Pete, we can use the term evolution for change through descent as you say, but this is only change within a species or kind, not from one species or kind to another. We have bred dogs over the years to become very tiny ones to very large ones, but they are still dogs. Plant breeders have all kinds of fun too. God allows us to explore and make some changes to our liking within species.





      I think one thing I have not heard anyone mention in discussions I have heard in the past is that in evolution it is the survival of the fittest (he who dies with the most reproducing offspring wins).
      That word survival means there was sickness, death, violence (think T. rex) and corruption. So if God created all these evils and especially death, how does that make death the wages of sin? (Romans 6:23, Gen. 2:17), I’d say that really messes with not only original sin but Who God is.



      Well, OK, so what do you say about T. Rex?
      a) He did not actually exist. In fact, God put the so-called fossils into the rocks in order to test our faith. (Back when I was growing up, the nuns tried to tell us that one.)
      b) He really ate vegetables, despite those “toofers” that were suitable for biting off chunks of meat, but utterly unsuitable for chewing plant matter.
      c) He got left out of Noah’s Ark, even though Genesis seems to say that Noah get at least a mating pair of EVERY living thing into the Ark.
      d) ??????
      If we stick to pointing out the real and demonstrable problems with Evolution, we have a good case. Why weaken it, in disputations with non-theists, with arguments that appeal only to (some of) those already on our side and which raise questions that we cannot answer to the satisfaction of anyone except possibly our own selves?


      So did Mr Rex exist or not? You listed some intriguing possibilities but didn’t indicate which you believe.
      In the Anti-Evolution museum in Branson, Missouri, Adam is depicted riding a dinosaur. Why can’t Catholics be this bold? Sometimes cowardice is wisdom in disguise.
      Finding mistakes in the theory of evolution doesn’t disprove it after all. The bones are still there, mocking us? Or challenging us to come up with a better theory? Our choice. Argumentation can be done in good faith or bad. There is morality in the search for knowledge after all. And trying to derail the search is always wrong.


      I’m tempted to just say “I don’t know” when I’m asked to explain some things that evolutionists throw in the ring as a defence. But of course they must be challenged in turn because of their indefensible lack of LOGIC in thinking that is the basis for their theory. They “don’t know” either but push a nonsense theory instead of being honest about it.


      Is all Socialism Marxist? No. Is all Evolution theory Darwinian? No. Look into intelligent design. You Assumed I was supporting a mechanical model of evolution devoid of God’s guidance and loving hand.



      Although I don’t know whether to believe the theory of evolution, I wonder what its Catholic critics will think of something I’ve learned because I study Thomism. St. Thomas believes that no philosophical argument can prove that the universe began to exist. So he says that creation out of nothing is compatible with the belief that the universe has always existed. God creates by causing everything and each thing to exist while it does exist. Even if the universe has always existed it still needs Him to sustain it. So for anyone or anything besides him to last, it needs Him to sustain it because if He stopped sustaining it, that would annihilate it. For you to survive, He keeps giving you existence in something like the way an electrical outlet keeps electricity flowing through a string of Christmas light, so it’ll stay lit. Just as the lights will go out when you unplug them, the universe will stop existing if He stops giving it existence.

      Say that I’m right and that the theory of evolution is true. Then that theory of evolution is true. Then theory presupposes that God exists because everyone and everything, including each nature process, needs him to preserve it. That’s why I doubt that fossil record gaps undermine the theory of evolution. If there were no God, there would be no one at all and nothing at all. If there were nothing, there would be no fossil record gaps, since a fossil record gap is something.

      To see that the Catholic Encyclopedia supports what I’m telling you, please follow this link.…




      I think there may be no scientific proof that the universe began to exist but there is philosophical proof.

      If you think of infinite regression, for example, you can see that you can’t push the creation of ‘something’ back and back and back forever. There would have to be a start. So before this ‘start’ the thing did not exist. For something to begin to exist it has to have someone to begin it. So there must be someone outside that thing, not in time or space, to be the one who begins it. That’s God and that’s the Creation.


      So the first generation of humans with souls had monkey parents without souls? Must’ve been awkward..



      St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that although people have immortal souls, animals, plants, and other earthly living creatures have mortal ones. Read Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani generis because you’ll know that pope thinks it’s okay for experts to study the evidence that the human body has evolved. A human person is made up of a human body and a human soul and your human soul is what makes you a human person. Since a gorilla, say, has a gorilla soul, he’s not a person.

      Pius XII writes, “. . .the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that,
      in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred
      theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in
      both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as
      far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from
      pre-existent and living matter – for the Catholic faith obliges us to
      hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be
      done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those
      favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with
      the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that
      all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ
      has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred
      Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.[11] Some however,
      rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the
      origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were
      already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been
      discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there
      were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the
      greatest moderation and caution in this question.”…

      Maybe I’m wrong and I’m happy to let the Church correct me. But I believe that the creation-or-else-evolution dichotomy is probably false.


      Mr. McEnaney.

      You say you are happy for the Church to correct you. Here is how She explains why evolution is refuted canonically.

      The Church’s teaches magisterially All things were created in their whole substance together at the beginning (simul) from nothing. Lateran IV Here are the texts.

      Deus…creator omnium visibilium et invisibilium, spiritualium et corporalium: qui sua omnipotenti virtute simul ab initio temporis utramque de nihilo condidit creaturam, spiritualem et corporalem, angelicam videlicet et mundanam: ac deinde humanam, quasi communem ex spiritu et corpore constitutam.

      God…creator of all visible and invisible things, of the spiritual and of the corporal; who by His own omnipotent power at once from the beginning of time created each creature from nothing, spiritual and corporal, namely, angelic and mundane, and finally the human, constituted as it were, alike of the spirit and the body (D.428).




      Yes, life is full of awkwardnesses – like a peasant boy who becomes a world famous scholar. How does that effect his relationships with the folks back home? It sure doesn’t improve them, does it? Lacking a soul, the monkey people wouldn’t realize what had changed. Having souls, the poor folks back home would as would the poor boy made good.


      I am very interested in this… too bad I live in Europe. Hope to see it on YouTube at some point!






    Synod on Young People: The Scandal (Vatican Manipulates Data Collected from World’s Youth, Ignores Call for TLM)



    “Progress” along the path to utopia has left a whole generation of young people unsure of which bathroom to use.

    Well played, Enlighted Ones!

    Since this article appeared in The Remnant last month, a recent episode of EWTN’s The World Over has beautifully confirmed all the suspicions presented in this article. It also features a breath-of-fresh-air exception where the millennials are concerned. This articulate young man offers hope for his entire generation. Watch, then read.

    Most people who are awake know this to be the case—most, except for the ageing gentlemen running the Vatican just now. In fact, Team Bergoglio has spent the better part of the past year polling millennials worldwide for their recommendations on where he should take the Church in the years to come. So crucial is the input of the millennials, in fact, that the Holy Father has agreed to let them dictate the direction of the next Synod of Bishops (Rome, October 2018).

    Outside the Vatican, this is a giant, unfunny joke, since the only real contribution most of these kids could offer is ironclad proof that the Church of Vatican II has failed an entire generation, having dumbed them down so completely that they have no idea what the Church teaches, how to pray the Rosary, what the Mass is all about, etc. And if there was any doubt of this before, it has been officially removed, thanks to the Final Document from the Pre-Synodal Meeting, which was presented by the Youth of the World to Pope Francis at the Pre-Synodal Meeting on March 19-24 in Rome.

    Pope Francis & Co. have reviewed the document and are currently preparing to place the entire Church at the mercy of the most ignorant Catholics on earth. In other words, the shepherd is going to follow his lost sheep all over the pasture…just like a madman.

    So if anyone wants to know exactly where the Francis Revolution goes from here, just Google “Young People, The Faith and Vocational Discernment: Pre-Synodal Meeting Final Document.” Brace yourselves, though—it ain’t pretty.

    The Pre-Synod meeting in Rome involved hundreds of young people as well as thousands from around the world who participated online—all selected by bishops’ conferences and other church groups. They gathered in Rome to, as one reporter put it, give “the older men who run the 1.2-billion-member church a piece of their collective mind.” They presented a list of grievances and demands to the Pope, which included, among other changes, a “more transparent and authentic church, where women play a greater leadership role and where obeying ‘unreachable’ moral standards isn’t the price of admission.”

    Yes, “unreachable moral standards”—otherwise known as the daily duty and faithful practice of the Catholic Faith undertaken by millions and for millennium…before the Second Vatican Council. For progressive modern Catholics who can’t possibly be bothered to do as Mother Church asks for the salvation of their souls, that’s now quite “unreachable”…just fifty years after Vatican II.

    Whereas at the last Synod—the Synod on the Family—gave us papal permission for public adulterers to return to the Sacraments, this next Synod—the Synod on Young People—will tackle the “big problem” of unequal roles of women in the church. READ: If you don’t want to see all the kids leave the Catholic Church, you’d better start ordaining women deacons, cardinals and eventually priests.

    This next stage of the Francis Revolution will also take on what the young people allegedly called “excessive moralism”, which according to this new document is “driving the faithful away” because “out-of-touch church bureaucrats” refuse to “accompany their flock with humility and transparency.”

    Take that, all you Savonarola priests out there in the Novus Ordo!

    Quite the coincidence, by the way, that this is exactly what Pope Francis has been saying for five years. Enough of the rigorism and sitting in the chair of Moses throwing rocks at sinners. We need mercy. For the God of surprises, all we need is love! Well, wouldn’t you know it, that’s exactly what the world’s young people want, too.

    Well played, Francis!

    The young people—which, by the way, included Catholics, Protestants, Muslims and Atheists—also told Pope Francis that “we, the young church, ask that our leaders speak in practical terms about subjects such as homosexuality and gender issues, about which young people are already freely discussing.” No surprise here. The Synod on Young People must —simply MUST! — tackle the Church’s “mean-spirited” prohibition on so-called “gay unions.” After all, it’s for the children!

    Again, all of this is uncannily convenient for the Vatican, which now simply must address what they wanted to address anyway—making the Church more user-friendly for those “faithful Catholics” in sodomitical relationships.

    The document also claims that at least some young people want the “church to change the Church’s teaching or better explain that teaching on contraception, homosexuality, abortion and cohabitation.” And there’s your Pandora’s Box. We’ll have to wait and see how much the Vatican can get away with from that grab bag.

    And why must these moral questions be addressed, since they are already settled in the binding moral law and catechisms of the Catholic Church? Well because, overall— allegedly, according to the young people—the church often comes off as too severe, and its “excessive moralism” sends the faithful looking elsewhere for peace and spiritual fulfillment:


    “We need a church that is welcoming and merciful, which appreciates its roots and patrimony and which loves everyone, even those who are not following the perceived standards.”

    The young people presented their list of demands to Francis on Palm Sunday, by the way, and this is all on its way to becoming one of the working documents that will guide discussions during the October Synod of Bishops. Stay tuned.

    This is so perfect, isn’t it? Millennials putting together a coherent position paper that’s perfectly in line with Pope Francis’s revolution to change the Church in a way that it can never be changed back. And of course the Vatican’s hands are tied. They simply “must” cooperate with this since children are the ones demanding it, and to do anything less would be to scandalize them and we all know what our Lord says about those who scandalize children…

    See how it works? Pope Francis is taking a page right out of the books of any number of Masonic revolutionary movements of the 1960s, which first separated young people from their parents, then ginned them up on folk music and dance, and finally “listened” to the wisdom-free voice of youth, knowing exactly where that would lead—i.e., to social and moral revolution.

    The hippie movement comes to mind as does the Sexual Revolution, spearheaded by the rock ‘n’ roll industry. Closer to home, the Sillon movement (condemned by St. Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique), and its little brothers and sisters called the Neocatechumenal Way and Focolare, which, by the way, still offers self-promotion material that is virtually indistinguishable from the Vatican propaganda for the Synod on Young People.

    At, for example, we read:


    Young people were always present and actively involved in the Focolare Movement ever since its beginnings. But their specific place in the Movement began to emerge in 1967 when Chiara Lubich launched her motto: “Youths of the world, unite!” that laid the groundwork for the youth movements of the Focolare: the Gen Movement in 1968 and Youth for a United World in 1985.

    Young people between the ages of 17 and 30, scattered across five continents, of different ethnicities, nationalities and cultures have been responding to her call up to the present day. They belong to various Christian denominations, different religions, or do not profess a religious belief, but they all are united by the desire to build a more united world: to make humankind more and more into a single family, where the personal identity of every individual is honored.

    They strive in many ways to build universal brotherhood


    So under the guise of making the Church a safe space for millennials, Pope Francis is engaging in revolution against what is left of the old Catholic order.

    And the silver lining? Well, it’s apparently never dawned on our friends inside the Vatican that all this is a tacit admission of the colossal failure of the Second Vatican Council, which has now left the Catholic Church incapable of even keeping her own young people engaged and frequenting the Sacraments.

    But wasn’t the whole point and purpose of Vatican II to “update” the Church, to make it sufficiently “groovy” to keep the young people engaged? Wasn’t that what all the hip music and hippie liturgy was about—the young people? Wasn’t a generation of World Youth Days guaranteed to keep all the kids Catholic?

    So what happened?

    When even the Vatican admits that millions of young people have simply left the Church since the close of the Second Vatican Council, isn’t it time for the rest of us to admit that Vatican II was colossal failure? If not, why not? And if not, why do we need an entire Synod of Bishops to try to find out why the young people are leaving the Church in droves?

    And what about the priests…the pastors to all these young people? If everything is so hunky-dory in the Church of Vatican II, wouldn’t the hip young priests be able to keep the kids coming to Mass? Wouldn’t they at least have a pretty good idea of what’s missing from the lives of the youth that stray? They baptized these young people. They watched them grow up. They heard their confessions…presumably.


    If Vatican II was such a smashing success, shouldn’t the Vatican just be polling pastors to see what adjustments the Church should make in order to be more relevant to young people? No?

    Could that be because the Spirit of Vatican II has driven half the priests out of the Church and left the others struggling with their own sexuality?

    Could it be because the Spirit of Vatican II has blown families apart, destroyed the traditions that held parent and their children together, and driven whole generations of young people out of the Church?

    And, finally, aren’t we forgetting something? This is the modern Vatican we’re talking about here—the overseers and cover-up agents of one of the largest child abuse scandals in history. These guys have suddenly figured out how to reach out to the kids? Are they kidding?

    As my friend the late John Vennari once observed: “I wouldn’t trust Pope Francis to teach my kids their catechism lessons.”


    No thank you, Holiness. As a practicing Catholic who’s never missed Sunday Mass in his life and who’s obliged to home-school his seven kids because diocesan schools have become dens of theological iniquity, I think I’ll pass on the Vatican’s Synod on Young People.

    In fact, if anyone wants to know my opinion on the Synod on Young People, I’d say that Francis and Company need to stay away from the kids and to stop polluting them with their Modernist rot. They have no solutions. They have no answers. They are the very last people on earth who should deem themselves qualified to address the needs of young people.

    But, what do I know…. I’m just another a self-absorbed promethean neopelagian trying to keep the Faith despite the current occupant of Peter’s chair.

    From the Synod on Young People, libera nos, Domine (that’s Latin, Millennial friends–not Elvish)


    • Avatar

      Mr. Matt, I just want you to know….that as unfunny as all of this is. In fact, through the horror of what we are seeing and learning about in the Vatican… make me laugh. You make me chuckle in your articles and in the Remnant Underground. I have three millennial children….20, 19 and soon to be 18. They were well formed in the Catholic Faith. I homeschooled them through 8th grade…..but the internet has “dummied” them down. What an Awesome God we have! For I know that somehow, someway He WILL resurrect their sleeping souls to bring Him Glory…..You and I, Mr. Matt will be His witnesses!

    • Avatar

      Great article.

      There is this satanic thing about Bergoglio, though:

      If satan had the whole world following him except just one person, he would not be happy that he had billions. He would be consumed in anger and resentment at the ‘slight’ of one soul resisting him.

      Likewise, the whole world, catholic and the rest, is modernist, hates truth and loves lechery, so one should think Bergoglio would be pleased at how the world chimes with his ideas.

      But no, oh no – no, he is bitter at those few Pelagians who hold out.
      They must be crushed with more synods.
      Synods employing collectivist preparation methods to stifle resistance.

      Bergoglio is hate-filled like his master.

    • Avatar

      One word has summed up the whole Francis Effect for me – cringeworthy.

    • Avatar

      “Francis and Company need to stay away from the kids.” If put in place 6 decades ago, you would have saved the faithful $4,000,000,000,.00 in the USA alone.By the way, did I miss the Capital Campaign To Pay For Pederast & Pedophile Bishops & Priests Engaging In Homosexual Sex With Minors? I sure didn’t miss the unending campaigns for social justice. Guy McClung, Texas TBFC
      Truth Blogger For Christ

    • Avatar

      Speaking of money, I’ve given up contributing to the “second collections” at Mass because I can’t figure out anymore where the money’s going. On Mother’s Day there was a 2nd collection “for Mother’s Day”. Huh? There was no Mother’s Day event held, no money spent on mothers for flowers or anything so where the heck did the money go? Don’t ask, right? Last week they didn’t even give a reason – just said there was going to be a 2nd collection. The reason we had them way back in the 1950’s was for the poor of the parish and coins were put in that one instead of the envelopes that went in the first collection. Now it’s for causes with mystifying titles or for holidays – would someone explain why we need to give money for secular holidays? – or just because they want money for “whatever” and think we’ll be dumb enough to keep handing it over without any accountability. Peter’s Pence was the last straw for me. Second Collections are given now to those who further the legitimate aims of the Catholic Church (like the Dominican Sisters of Mary).

    • Avatar

      Speaking of educating children in the faith, at a First Holy Communion Mass last weekend the priest told the kids formal prayers are mostly a waste of time. Instead they should talk to God and it’s okay to curse at God if they feel like it. Take a moment to ponder that. Cursing at God is okay. All wasn’t lost, though. The priest told them they probably shouldn’t curse at their parents because the parents might get mad at them. This was their First Communion homily.

    • Avatar

      You would have at least thought the parents listening to that priest giving homilized advice to these childrens First Holy Communion about prayer life, would have criticized the priest later. Effectively what the priest was saying that the formal prayers of the Our Father, Holy Mary and the Rosary had no value. Obviously; a New Age Novus Ordo priest with extremely poor seminary formation. So sad. It might be difficult to ascertain where this priest Faith in the Holy Eucharist remains, when reciting formal prayers from the Sacramentary during the Mass. We all need the humility of reciting formal prayers no matter what our age.

    • Avatar

      Run away as fast as you can.

    • Avatar

      As a completely irrelevant aside, as I looked at that “lets all hold hands, smile at one another knowingly, as we march forward together” hokey staged 70’s kodak moment, I thought the only thing that was missing is Mark Zuckerberg’s face superimposed over one of them like I’ve been seeing in those ads which I find amusing. There are a bunch of other faces that would be a hoot in there as well for someone with the skills. Luther? Henry VIII in “honor” of AL? Not to be unserious about the dangers of this bogus synod (again). But some things absolutely beg to be mocked.

    • Avatar

      What was Vatican II, except a Three Year Convention of Modernists, Freemasons & other Assorted Heretics? It was a time to write a Man Centred Liturgy with a Protestant Orientation, Revision of The Forms of The Sacraments, Revision of Religious Life unto the point of Children never encountering them from Grades K through 12, the Malpractice of teaching children to think of Holy Communion as a Meal instead of as a Sacrament, & utter chaos all around, including Collegiality.

      Since Team Bergoglio looks upon Traditional Catholic Practice with Sheer Contempt, changing the data to fit the Modernist Narrative, is not surprising.

      It is any wonder WHY I prefer both the TLM & The Byzantine Rite Divine Liturgies of St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil The Great(Both Doctors of The Church BTW) & the twice offering of the Divine Liturgy of St. James The Apostle. These Liturgies are offered to The Blessed Trinity, as a Propitiary Sacrifice, re-presenting the Sacrifice on The Cross by Christ, for the Forgiveness of Sin & for Praise & Thanksgiving.

      Many Young People of Roman Rite do go to these Liturgies. The crowd at so called “Folk Masses” with putrid Man Centred Music tends to have Grey Hair. And the crowd at the Modernistic Contemporary Mass is rather small.

      The Young seek to experience Traditional Liturgies. Yet, the “Woodstock Generation”, represented by the Ageing Hipsters of the V2 1960s Generation will have no truck with the New Generation.
      It took Coca Cola about 79 Days to get rid of New Coke. Do these ageing V2 Types understand this?

    • Avatar

      Gosh Mr Matt… That’s pretty mean on the millennials! I personally don’t think the millenials are anywhere near the most dumbed down, stupid bunch of humanity that ever existed. That title goes to that generation now represented by the red and white hats in the Vatican.
      If Young Conner in the video is anything to go by, the Church would be in far better shape if we cleaned out the Vatican and replaced everyone with Conner and his mates!

    • Avatar

      MadMC, they eat Tide Pods… Well, one thing’s for sure–their phones are smart! And the Millennials spend nearly four hours per day on those. So…there’s that? But, yes, they certainly couldn’t do any worse than les enfants terribles currently running the show in Rome. 😉

    • Avatar

      Hilarious. Anytime I hear about the concerns of millennials, I’m going to ask, “Yeah, but how does a Tide pod taste?”

    • Avatar

      Vatican 2 a colossal failure? Maybe the results we see are exactly what those that took over the council intended. It would take 50 years but they knew one day they would have a decatholicized church and mindlessness. Like devout communists (which many of them are) they have been patient knowing victory would not come instantly, but they knew one day their Francis would take the helm and begin dealing the final death blows.

    • Avatar

      The idea of using rhetorical stunts like this is to convince those who are as yet unconvinced. Of course the Modernists had an agenda and were wildly successful in what they wanted to achieve. But we’re not trying to convince them to admit they were wrong. We’re trying to convince those who still believe V2 was good for the Church that it was decidedly not. We’re trying to score points in the court of public opinion, in other words. See the difference?

    • Avatar

      “we, the young church, ask that our leaders speak in practical terms about subjects such as homosexuality and gender issues, about which young people are already freely discussing.”
      – The Young Church of Utopia

      “This vice (sodomy), which surpasses the savagery of all vices, is to be compared to no other. For this vice is the death of bodies, the destruction of souls, pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the intellect, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, introduces the diabolical inciter of lust, throws into confusion, and removes the truth completely from the deceived mind…

      “For it is this which violates sobriety, kills modesty, slays chastity. It butchers virginity with the sword of a most filthy contagion. It befouls everything, it stains everything, it pollutes everything, and for itself it permits nothing pure, nothing foreign to filth, nothing clean.”
      – St. Peter Damian, Doctor of the Church (The Book of Gomorrah)

      St. Joseph the Worker, pray for us!

      St. Peter Damian, pray for us!

    • Avatar

      It’s not a surprise the results may have been manipulated. The purpose of the Synod is to further transform the Catholic Church. Francis and the hierarchy are probably surprised the changes introduced by AL have been mostly accepted with little pushback. While the going is good as they say.
      The purpose of this Synod it seems is to set the stage for the ordination of female deacons (there is already a commission studying it) and the appointment of a female cardinal. The latter will be a first step as I could see Francis or his successor opening up the cardinalate to laypeople. Female priestly ordination is a pontificate or two away but this is the necessary first step. Some “orthodox” apostolates are attempting already to find a theological way in which this would be possible.
      Beyond that a further opening to the LGBT community is likely with gay blessings talked about if not formally endorsed during the Synod.
      This could be transformational in a way that the Church can’t go back from. Francis said something to that effect.
      The guest on Arroyo’s program was articulate and to be admired but, to be honest, most Catholics in their 20s that I know are quite progressive. Just like their parents.
      For the Art Bell types who are into conspiracies, it is plausible that one world Soros type globalists put Francis on the Throne of Peter (much as Obama came out of nowhere to be put into the Oval Office) to completely co-opt the Catholic Church and transform it into the “approved of” world religion. Promoting secularism under the banner of the cross.

    • Avatar

      Not so fast.

      The term “lay cardinal” is not accurate, because prior to Vatican II, many men were in tonsured and minor orders but were not deacons, priests, or bishops. These men were canonically “clerics” and not layman. So there is some confusion on this matter since today we are not familiar with “clerics” that are not deacons, priests, or bishops.
      In years past there were both lay cardinals and true cardinal deacons (men who were deacons and not priests or bishops). Giacomo Antonelli, Pope Pius IX’s Secretary of State, was not truly a “lay cardinal” because he was a deacon at the time of his elevation. The last true lay cardinal that I know of was Teodolfo Cardinal Mertel. He was appointed and elevated as a cardinal on March 15, 1858. He was ordained deacon the very next day on March 16, 1858. So he was only a “lay cardinal” for less than one day. Yet, he was likely a cleric (tonsured) even before this. And so we bump into the problem of defining “lay” in this context.

      The current Code of Canon Law stipulates that all cardinals also be bishops (canon 351§1).

      Pope John Paul II of blessed memory dispensed Cardinal Dulles from being elevated to the episcopate. He is still a priest and not a bishop, i.e a Cardinal priest. Nevertheless, I believe he is allowed to pontificate like a bishop even though he is not a bishop. Moreover, I believe he is a member of the magisterium, even though he is not a bishop.…

    • Avatar

      That’s what they said about communion in the hand and vernacular liturgy, etc.

      Calls for people who are Bishops to be made Cardinals in this day and age will mean female Cardinals almost immediately. The way to get around the heresy or ordaining women as priests and still have females run the Church rather directly is with female Cardinals.

    • Avatar

      Those who consider themselves faithful Novus Ordo Catholics will never revolt, no matter how unrecognizable Francis or anyone else may make this new religion look. They’re quite comfortable believing they are doing what they should, stumbling into the nearest church, semi-dozing for 30-45 minutes, reaching into their wallet when asked to and lather rinse repeat next week.
      Francis and his cabal know this, and see no reason not to go as fast and as far as possible with the changes they have in mind. Questioning the pope is heresy, after all.

    • Avatar

      You may be right for the baby boomer generation, but you can exclude most .”Catholics” born after 1970. They may turn up for baptisms and Christmas , but that’s about it. The church is dying.Who is going to be putting money in the plate in twenty years time ? Very few.

      You would think even those modernist destroyers of faith in charge would face this fact and start trying to evangelize the next generation in the one true faith, but really it is too far gone now. We really do need divine intervention.

    • Avatar

      Given Colin McLaughlin testimony to Raymond Arroyo in the EWTN World Over Report is a big eye opener. I think its terrible that the (“Vatican is Manipulating Data Collected from World’s Youth”) for the upcoming Youth Synod. For what its worth it surely looks as though there a Ravenous Wolves in Sheeps clothing who want to change Church moral practices and teachings while putting on this false cloak of misrepresenting the Young in the Church.
      Why is Pope Bergoglio inviting Non-Catholic Young People from various religions as being part of this Young Synod when they don’t have any iota of reason for being there?
      Gotta shake my head a few times.

    • Avatar

      “Why is Pope Bergoglio inviting Non-Catholic Young People from various religions…?” One important thing to realize about the aging Vatican 2 generation of hierarchy — Catholicism basically bores them. If was true from their first day in seminary when they felt no connection with the Church and refused to attend daily mass because “they didn’t get anything out of it.” They get much more of a thrill from going to Sweden to meet with homosexual Lutheran groups, or inviting Aborigine animists to spice things up at a Youth Synod. (Of course I speak in generalities, and hope it’s less true than I think.)

    • Avatar

      Perhaps; but its looking more and more as though there’s an evil intent with a number ranking clergy under Pope Bergoglio’s camp where upon the Youth Synod is just a directed false facade to make World Catholics look on as though this papacy is doing something positive to move the New Age Catholic Church into some evolving spiritual moral direction. The Synod on Family did nothing to improve the moral cornerstone of society in the Christian roots within family.
      I won’t hold my breath expecting a great outcome when the Youth Synod comes to a close. I could be wrong in all this, but we all have to wait and fervantly pray on this

    • Avatar

      Revolution is never satisfied. It must keep moving forward, because stopping means it could be reversed.

      By their fruits you shall know them.

      Vatican II obviously meant change. The changes that have come have been disastrous. Not merely a bit off, but disastrous. But faith in Vatican II is like opioid addiction in that it is a vicious hamster wheel of downward spiral that if allowed to roll to its end will leave only death and destruction.

      Most junkies must crash hard before they are broken and scared enough to seek treatment; they must know deep in their guts that if they do not make total change, nearly 180 degree change in life they will die – and they must repent and want to live.

      Perhaps the same is true of the Vatican II addicts. They have not totally crashed the Church. It is a partial wreck but not a true train wreck with cars smashed and their cargo ruined and the rails ripped from the ground. Perhaps the Vatican II faithful – the ‘conservative’ Novus Ordoists and JPII devotees as well as the overt Leftists – will keep the foot on the gas pedal until the total wreck occurs, until the entire structure is smashed, assuming that eventually they will be saved by the thing that is necessary to the crash. Addicts are that crazy. The heroin addict comes to feel heroin is necessary to life and so cannot allow himself to hear and see that heroin is killing him.

      The entire Modern world is that way in regard to secular democracy, which necessarily must promote cultural and moral Liberalism. France, for example, has been on a spiritual death march since its revolution, which it essentially sacralized. And France will die a suicide before too long if it does not repent and re-embrace the historic Faith, striving to become once again the Eldest Daughter of the Church. England will die a suicide before too long if it does not repent of the Tudor and Puritan Revolutions and strive to become once again the Dowry of Mary.

      The Catholic Church will suffer much more if it does not repent of the bleeding heart liberalism and Modernism responsible for parts of each Vatican II document and, even more so, central to the implementation of Vatican II. The hierarchy, priests, and laypersons clinging to faith in Vatican II and successful in forcing us to go along will crash the train and leave destruction that will make what the Church suffered in, for example, the British Isles from the 16th through the 18th centuries seem like a bumpy ride.

      This synod could be the crossing of the Rubicon into near total auto-demolition.

      And from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent bear it away.

    • Avatar

      It’s like if you were fighting a war and polling your enemy to see how you can do a better job with the war and taking their advice. I’m one of the so-called millennial generation, and they surely didn’t poll me. Instead, let’s poll people who probably haven’t stepped foot in a church in years (or maybe just on Easter & Christmas), lean left both politically and socially, and probably have very little interest in what the Church has to say anyway. Those who respond do so either through evil intentions or who just want validation of their sinful inclinations, which they probably only care because they feel a tinge of shame since they were raised in the Church, even if just barely.

    • Avatar

      EWTN should hire this young man. He’s a very articulate spokesman for Catholic youth. If the Synod won’t give young people like him a voice, then give him another platform. I’ll be checking out his YouTube channel for sure!

    • Avatar

      Such a nice alternative to that ubiquitous and immensely irritating guy from Florida…

    • Avatar

      Although I may have a suspicious mind, I rather thing that as before the “results” of this so called synod are already prepared. This is a community organizing ploy where it seems that people are being listened to but in reality it is just the few with the agenda who impose a certain agenda. How stupid is this to ask atheists what the Church should do!!! And no surprise that they would want to reverse moral teachings. Only the truths of the Church are the antidote to the evils rampant in the world today. And when the “Church” (many of those in power) fail to faithfully transmit the age old truths and teachings, the whole world suffers as it is now. We await God’s intervention.

    • Avatar

      Well , the closer we get to this modernist gab fest,the more suspicious I am that our Holy Father really has a big surprise for us. After all after AL surely there are just so many rigid church doctrines that should also be up for youthful pastoral discernment. Take your pick. Humane Vitae, homosexual unions,cohabitation, holy communion to one and all ,women priests, or what ever else Kasper and Marx and co may have on their wish list.

      But of course Michael,there can be no discussion of this illogical wish of a disturbingly high number of our youth who wish to return to the TLM, or those who may even just have an uncool attachment to doctrines and dogmas composed by non hipsters centuries ago. He has already told us that we can never go back. Only foward, forward .

      Can’t wait for the post synodal papal exhortation. I wonder if it has already been written?

    • Avatar

      The Chastisement is not far off, I suspect. In this Marian Month let’s keep praying all the rosaries we can! Kyrie Eleison, Christe Eleison!

    • Avatar

      I can’t recall at this moment the exact Saint who said the Great Chastisment would begin on a Solemnity Feast Day beginning on a Thursday at sundown and end on a Sunday morning at sunrise. That feast day is called Corpus Christi echoing in some resemblance to the Sacred Holy Triduum. Like rain that falls on the good and bad only a remnant will survive in God’s Holy Justice.

    • Avatar

      Those aging Vatican 2 hipsters that populate the upper levels of the hierarchy are way too rigid and fanatical in their thinking. They need to loosen up a bit and let some fresh air in. A little Aggiornamento maybe.



    Michael Matt   has been an editor of The Remnant since 1990. Since 1994, he has been the newspaper’s editor. A graduate of Christendom College, Michael Matt has written hundreds of articles on the state of the Church and the modern world. He is the host of The Remnant Underground and Remnant TV’s The Remnant Forum. He’s been U.S. Coordinator for Notre Dame de Chrétienté in Paris–the organization responsible for the Pentecost Pilgrimage to Chartres, France–since 2000.  Mr. Matt has led the U.S. contingent on the Pilgrimage to Chartres for the last 24 years. He is a lecturer for the Roman Forum’s Summer Symposium in Gardone Riviera, Italy. He is the author of Christian Fables, Legends of Christmas and Gods of Wasteland (Fifty Years of Rock ‘n’ Roll) and regularly delivers addresses and conferences to Catholic groups about the Mass, home-schooling, and the culture question. Together with his wife, Carol Lynn and their seven children, Mr. Matt currently resides in St. Paul, Minnesota.



    Christendom and Franciscan Under Fire: The X-Files, or Just Moldy Scuttlebutt?


    However, as accusations of misconduct in the Clinton White House (in which the Lewinsky scandal was just a cover for Chinagate and a mysterious trail of dead bodies that seemed to follow Bill and Hillary wherever they went) and the growing sense that maybe the government, which was growing increasingly totalitarian in scope, was not on the side of the American people, The X-Files’s motto “The Truth is Out There” always nagged at even the most normal American viewer ensconced in front the glowing television during the “Nifty 90s.”

    (As a “crazy but probably true” side note, your author would like to caution that the depiction of demonic activity in many episodes of the show makes the X-Files not so much a near occasion of sin, but a near occasion of demonic oppression, so he is not suggesting that anyone go out and watch the show).

    After the horrors of September 11, a day on which three steel structures collapsed into free fall after a fire had raged in them for a matter of hours and a Boeing 757 flew into the side of the Pentagon but miraculously left practically no debris, a conspiracy culture quickly spread across the internet, ushering in a reign of extreme skepticism that has effected practically everyone who has ever opened up an internet browser.

    However, this conspiracy culture itself has not lasted for long on the internet.

    As the predicted dates of internet doomsday prophecies of nuclear Armageddon, economic collapse, and catastrophic meteor showers have come and gone, a second wave of cynicism and doubt has overcome those who had quickly purchased cases of ammunition and crates of Ramen to outlive the zombie apocalypse but were stuck with concerned neighbors and a hefty monthly credit card payment.

    Rounding the second decade of the 21st century, we are thus all stuck with that old X-Files feeling of being caught between fact and fiction, skepticism and belief, but at the same time nagged by the feeling that “the truth is out there.”

    The X-Files feeling has recently crept into the current discussion of the crisis of Catholic higher education.

    Earlier this year, two of the flagship conservative Catholic colleges in the United States, Christendom College and the Franciscan University of Steubenville, came under attack from a host of bloggers and journalists who happened upon cases of alleged rape and sexual abuse committed against female students at the school by male students.

    The attacks were first initiated by disgraced blogger Simcha Fisher who transformed her criticism of Christendom College’s alleged mishandling of sexual assault to an attack on Christendom’s allegedly “rigid” policies.

    Fisher’s attack prompted a chastened, hang dog response from Christendom, which, in turn, prompted a demand from Fisher that Christendom College President resign.

    However, Fisher’s attack was merely the beginning of an all-out war on conservative Catholic institutions.

    This war quickly spread to an attack on the second of the two most prominent Newman Guide Colleges, the Franciscan University of Steubenville, as Jenn Morson, a writer for the (of course!) Washington Post, attacked Franciscan for allegedly mishandling sexual abuse claims.

    Upon first glance, these attacks appeared to be from disgruntled Catholic cat lady bloggers who had happened upon genuine instances of abuse, which may have been mishandled, and then used to them to further draw attention to themselves as journalists.

    But then something weird happened.

    Austin Ruse at Crisis Magazine has added a missing element to the saga of “L’Affair Christendom,” which has morphed into “L’Affair Steubenville” as well. It turns out that at least one of the Catholic journalists promoting the stories of young women who claimed abuse at the hands of young men on the campuses of Christendom College and Franciscan University was, in fact, being funded by a James Bondesque former Nazi collaborator, “hit and run” capitalist, and current promoter of “genocide level” migration into the West.

    Who has Christendom and Steubenville in his sights?



    If you guessed billionaire George Soros, then, dear reader, you are correct.

    It turns out that the hit piece against Franciscan University was financed by a group called The Media Consortium which in turn was financed by George Soros’s very own Open Society Foundation (an organization dedicated to both financial looting of the West as well as the active promotion of degeneracy).

    Ruse, thanks to the gumshoe work of Catholic News Agency’s Mary Reznec, notes that National Catholic Reporter’s CEO Caitlin Hendel is even on the leadership board of the Soros Funded Media Consortium.

    But both Ruse and Reznec’s excellent work is not the end of the story, however.

    Doesn’t it seem a little strange that an 87-year-old “Hungarian” (Soros constantly changes his identity) supervillain would seek to upset two humble Newman Guide colleges in the United States?

    George Soros, the perfect super villain, is just too good to be true and has all the qualities that conservatives hate in a bad guy. But that is precisely the problem: Soros, who looks literally like a walking corpse, appears a little bit too much like a bad guy from the X-Files.

    Also, he is really, really old. How much time in his day between naps, giant owl worshipping, and administration of super drugs to keep him going does Soros have to plot the downfall of the Franciscan University of Steubenville, home of Scott Hahn and “the Barons.”

    Is it possible that there is someone behind Soros himself for whom the “Hungarian” arch villain serves as the public face?

    Let’s take a look.

    To find out who Soros is, we simply have to find out who protects our “Hungarian” friend and who finances him.

    Soros began his career in the early 1960s working for the New York bank Arnhold & S. Bleichroeder, which, itself is part of the network of banks tied to the most famous banking family of the past two hundred years: the Rothschild family. In fact, as the mainstream Washington Times reported in 2011, George Soros’s Quantum Fund was kick started in 1969 by Rothschild banker, George C. Karlweis. The Rothschild’s also have the bankers Richard Katz and Niels S. Taub who sit on the board of Quantum Fund.

    Yes, those Rothschilds.

    If anything, George Soros is simply a front for the Rothschild family (and who knows who is behind them).

    Thus, if our Catholic X-Files “mytharc” holds, then The National Catholic Reporter (and, your author is willing to bet, some of the other left wing Catholic platforms attacking Steubenville and Christendom) is ultimately funded by a nefarious banking family that, for all intents and purposes, are the “Illuminati” of the “Illuminati.”

    Or maybe “L’Affaire Christendom et Franciscan” has nothing to do with any of these conspiracies, and it is simply the case that some embittered Catholic bloggers are lashing out at the conservative Catholic institutions that had burned them in the past. Fisher has, for her part, denied Soros funding, and we should give her the benefit of the doubt.



    In the end, we are stuck with several layers of weirdness that the X Files’ own cigarette smoking man would be proud of.

    It certainly is possible that the Church has been infiltrated by agents or at least assets of the Deep State who are gas lighting wounded young Catholics into supporting a coup against the two strongest citadels of Catholic higher education in the country.

    However, the more likely case is that a group of angry, bitter 30-something Catholics never took the “trad pill”, but stayed waffling in the no-man’s-land of loosey-goosey JPII Catholicism and have followed the white rabbit of modernism down into a dark hole of degeneracy, conservative Novus Ordo piety, and Baskin Robbins ice cream cakes eaten alone while watching Game of Thrones.

    The shadowy forces using George Soros’ money and public face as a conduit found these wounded, angry consumers of “Celebration Cookie Cake”, and have been feeding them money and giving them an outlet for their bitterness.

    Whatever the case may be, we know that, in the end, “the truth is out there”.


    • Avatar

      Jorge Bergoglio means that a growing number of both aging 1960s influenced liberal Catholics and JPII younger Catholics, who tend toward a romanticized fuhrerprinzip certainly in regard to JPII but also to the Petrine office, have made hard moves to join the zeitgeist – which today is decidedly farther left into moral and intellectual perversity than it was when JPII was facing the new millennium. That means that we would be seeing things like the raving of a Mark Shea or Simcha Fisher, and attacks on the presumed most conservative/orthodox Catholic colleges, even if there were no George Soroses funding leftist agitation across the globe.

      But there are many such revoltingly rich people getting tax deductions to donate to all kinds of leftist causes. That does include paying people to blog and write articles to promote things acceptable to the current left and to attack things anathema to the current left. And if they are gunning for Franciscan University of Steubenville, then they intend to make all Newman Guide schools bow to them eventually.

      The three goals they have to ensnare the Catholic Church, the 3 they are striving to bring to fruition: ordain women, accept gay sex at least with some kind of blessing for homosexual couples, embrace inter-denominational unity which includes allowing open communion. Pope Francis’s various teachings are laying the foundations necessary for all three to be accepted by a slightly more liberal College of Cardinals. And Pope Francis’s appointments are moving the Cardinals farther leftward.

      This is the most perilous time for the Church since the height of the Arian crisis, and I have little doubt that this is worse.

      And yes, none of this could have come about without Vatican II.

    • Avatar

      As conspiracy theories go, Mr. Matt, that’s not a bad one. Amid the doom and gloom, your little aside that Vice-President-at-the-time Al Gore invented the internet was smooth. You tossed it in there so lightly – gave me a laugh.

      After all, for pew sitters like me it really doesn’t matter who’s doing what to whom. I’m in my mid-70s and thank a loving God my time is limited. So I may not live to see the end of the show.

      Rock on, Michael.

    • Avatar

      The author, Jesse Russell, will appreciate your comment. 🙂

    • Avatar

      Anyone with even a small amount of contact with Christendom knows that the narrative promoted by Simcha Fisher is a false one. Simcha was just a tool, however: really a pawn in the hand of a small group of mostly apostate alumni/ae who were looking for a “Catholic” internet platform from which to launch their attack. I wonder if Simcha regrets being part of it now. Maybe not.

      The goal of the apostates and their allies is to destroy Christendom by transforming it into a secular feminist haven for immorality. The fact that they may have gone and gotten funding from feminist organizations which are themselves funded by Open Society is really not surprising, and hardly amounts to a dubious conspiracy theory. They’re obviously quite well-funded even though few of them have what most of us would call “jobs,” which was mysterious until now.







    Hail Victory! (Alfie Evans, RIP)


    Written by 


    Alfie Evans, 48 hours before his passing


    AUTHOR’S NOTE:  In the hours since I completed this article, the world has learned the heartbreaking news that little Alfie Evans has died.  May his soul, and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. May God also console his parents and, by bringing them into union with Him through the Catholic Church in this life, reunite them with their beloved Alfie in the next.

    Like the whimpering “rabbit” of Eglfing-Haar, Alfie took a few extra days before complying with the wishes of his “caretakers.”  For those of us who are concerned not only about Alfie himself but also about what his case means, news of his passing does not permit us to comply with those wishes ourselves, by “going back to our everyday lives” as the Death Panel of Alder Hey Hospital (by means of the prepared statement read under duress by Tom Evans) commands.  Rather, we must commit ourselves all the more profoundly to the cause of life, which means–as Father Maximilian demonstrated at Auschwitz–to give ourselves ever more entirely to the Mother of the Alpha and Omega of All Life.  Only She has been given by God the promise of victory over Satan.  Only She can crush all heresy in the whole world.  And make no mistake about it; Alfie died of heresy in the end. He died specifically of the heresy which holds that mercy may be untethered from justice; love from truth; and pastoral practice from doctrine.  That heresy is what we who are alive to see him die must commit ourselves to fighting, through the Immaculata, at all costs. HW



    Because of our history in Germany, we have learned that there are some things you just don’t do with severely handicapped children. A society must be prepared to look after (them). 

    –Professor Nikolaus Haas, testifying in the case of Alfie Evans[1]


    According to the Approved Judgment handed down by Justice Anthony Hayden on February 20, 2018, it is in the “best interest”[2] of impaired British toddler Alfie Evans to have his ventilator removed. Contrary to certain expectations, however, following this removal–which took place with the world watching on Monday, April 23–little Alfie did not die on demand. The fact that the child has since been deprived of sufficient oxygen and nutrition, not to mention being refused transport out of the country or release from Alder Hey Hospital at all, handily demonstrates that the verbiage best interest denotes imposed death–nothing else, and nothing less.[3]

    As of this writing, little Alfie is still alive, probably because of his heroic father’s decision to do a complete about-face based upon brutal arm-twisting.[4] Asking assembled protesters to “return to (their) everyday lives,”[5] Tom Evans also issued a plea for privacy which should be respected by each and all. Still, there are a number of compelling reasons why we cannot entirely oblige him, where “standing down” on this situation is concerned.

    After all, as Mr. Evans himself has pointed out,[6] there is more at stake here than only the life of his innocent and vulnerable son–as non-negotiable as Alfie is. There is the precedent that Alfie’s case will set (or arguably, solidify), should he be forced to die. There is the undermining of objective morality inherent in Amoris Laetitia Chapter 8, which will continue marching like Sherman to the sea unless it is confronted and overturned. And there is our civilizational commitment to preventing the atrocities of Nazi Germany from ever being tolerated again.

    Professor Nikolaus Haas is identified in the Approved Judgment as the “Medical Director of the Department of Pediatric Cardiology and Intensive Care at the University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians (U)niversity (LMU), Munich” (p. 7). Considerable prestige, in other words, attaches to his opinion that Alfie’s prognosis is very poor. With clinical bluntness, Professor Haas has stated that (pp. 8-9):

    I do agree with the medical teams involved that there are no useful tests that may be performed to improve Alfie’s condition. The genetic testing (i.e., whole genome sequencing) is performed by blood sampling and without any risks for Alfie. These tests may in certain cases be beneficial to delineate a rare new disease as pointed out by the doctors of Bambino Gesù Hospital. To the best of my knowledge these tests have–even if a new disease is found–never been able to cure a patient with a disease pattern like Alfie’s.

    The doctors from Bambino Gesù, like Pope Francis himself, have rested their case not on Alfie’s inviolable right to life, but on the temporal hope that transporting the child to Italy might open up the possibility of a new therapeutic approach and ultimately bring about significant improvement, or even recovery.

    Professor Haas refuses to don these particular rose-colored glasses. While he concurs with Alder Hey about Alfie’s condition, he refuses to countenance the removal of life support or the denial of life-sustaining care due to that condition alone. Alluding to the horrors of the Holocaust, Professor Haas instead demands that Alfie be cared for not because there is a chance he may get better, but precisely because “a society must be prepared to look after these severely handicapped children and not decide that life support has to be withdrawn against the will of the parents” (pp. 16-7), as heinous eugenic experience has already proven.

    Justice Hayden did not, for his part, take kindly to the reminder. “Notwithstanding that Professor Haas has assessed Alfie’s medical circumstances in terms which are identical to those at Alder Hey,” Hayden writes, rarely in higher dudgeon (p. 16):

    (Professor Haas) has different views as to what he terms ‘withdrawal of therapy,’ and which I shall call end of life plans. It is no part of his function, however, to utilize the case as a platform for his own personal beliefs. I found the . . . paragraph (about child euthanasia in Nazi Germany) to be inflammatory and inappropriate, not least because the views expressed bear no relationship to and do not engage with the facts of this case.

    According to the individual who has attempted to seal Alfie’s fate at the judicial level, in other words, it is a matter of mere private opinion whether Aktion T4 is even to be deplored or not. At the same time, we are expected to swallow the implication that Justice Hayden himself, bastion of impregnable objectivity that he is, bring no agenda to the table at all–even though he is just as committed to extinguishing the life of little Alfie Evans as Professor Haas is to sustaining it. “But surely, with all this,” noted the Irish Bishops regarding the euthanasia movement as long ago as 1975, “we are in the world of Nazi Germany, not that of Western liberal democracy. Liberal reformers are outraged at the comparison. But it is difficult to see how it can be avoided.”[7]

    Picture, if you would, a visit to a state hospital in Germany in the autumn of 1939. As reported by an actual observer, in the children’s ward:

    were some twenty-five half-starved children ranging in age from one to five years. The director of the institution, Dr. Pfannmueller, explained the routine. We don’t do it, he said, with poisons or injections. “Our method is much simpler and more natural.” With these words, the fat and smiling doctor lifted an emaciated, whimpering child from his little bed, holding him up like a dead rabbit. He went on to explain that food is not withdrawn at once, but the rations are gradually decreased. “With this child,” he added, “it will take another two or three days.”[8]

    This revolting vignette, so eerily comparable to what Alfie Evans is going through right now, was far from a singular occurrence. “Thousands of children were disposed of,” Fredric Wertham, author of A Sign for Cain, goes on to explain (pp. 159-60):

    A special agency existed for them, consisting of a commission of three experts: one a psychiatrist and director of a state hospital, the other two prominent pediatricians. The children came from psychiatric hospitals, institutions for mental defectives, children’s homes, university pediatric clinics, children’s hospitals, pediatricians, et al.

    And in actual practice, “the indications (for killing) became wider and wider” (Wertham, p. 159), not more carefully scrutinized and circumscribed. The process itself was simplistic as well: questionnaires were submitted to “experts” who would mark people with a plus sign (+) if–in their considered, professional, and unemotional judgment–that patient should still live; or with a minus sign (-) if not. To save time, the “experts” typically submitted these determinations concerning patients they had never even examined (Wertham, pp. 169-70).

    These facts are superabundantly documented to the point of being uncontested, for the Nazis were scrupulous record keepers. There is no excuse, in other words, for Pope Francis–who refers to situations like Alfie’s as “delicate,” “painful,” and “complex,”[9] along with the members of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales which affirms its collective “conviction that all those who are and have been taking the agonising (sic) decisions regarding the care of Alfie Evans” are acting “with integrity and for Alfie’s good as they see it,”[10]–to remain so culpably obtuse regarding the practical dynamics of the Culture of Death. As Wertham specifies, we can learn from the commission of child euthanasia in mid-twentieth-century Germany that (p. 155):

    there (is) nothing individual about it; it was a systematic, planned, massive killing operation. . . . What a physician does or should do with a special individual patient under special circumstances had absolutely nothing to do with those mass exterminations. The greatest mistake we can make is to assume or believe that there was a morally, medically, or socially legitimate program and that all that was wrong was merely the excesses. There were no excesses.

    But where did it all begin? Surely, this was all Hitler’s fault–and, since Hitler is dead and gone, we no longer have to consider ourselves as being in that kind of danger any more. Right?

    Wrong. Wertham debunks this myth as well, arguing that (pp. 164-5):

    (i)t has been stated that the psychiatrists were merely following a law or were being forced to obey an order.   . . . According to that view, everything was fine until that order was given and became fine again when the order was revoked. The reality was very different. There was no law and no such order. The tragedy is that the psychiatrists did not have to have an order. They acted on their own.

    Is this not what the medical personnel at Alder Hey Hospital, not to mention their collaborators in the judiciary, are doing this during this exact historical moment? The questions currently circulating at the popular level, regarding Alfie’s case–“But why are they doing this? Why don’t they let him go to Italy, or at least let him go home? It wouldn’t cost the British anything, so their stubbornness doesn’t even make financial sense!”–have no other answer than the recognition that this is the way practical eugenics always works.

    From “one note, not on official stationery but on Hitler’s own private paper,” it was a quick descent into killing helpless people with “both curable and incurable conditions, psychopathic personalities, epileptics, encephalitics, neurological cases, mental defectives of both severe and mild degree, arteriosclerotics, deaf-mutes, patients with all kinds of nervous diseases, handicapped patients who had lost a limb in the First World War . . . et al.” (Wertham, p. 159).   Furthermore, the note signed by Hitler only says that doctors are to be named (Wertham, pp. 165-6):

    so that a mercy death may be granted to patients who according to human judgment are incurably ill according to the most critical evaluation of the state of their disease.

    So the watershed turns out to be affording legal and moral approbation for the elimination of the patients who aren’t likely to get any better.

    This is why it is so disconcerting that Pope Francis is being showered with fawning kudos for a recent of Tweet of his which–far from contradicting the Culture of Death–implicitly affirms it. The news outlets congratulating His Holiness on his “support” of Alfie are too numerous to mention, with pro-life and conservative commentators appearing especially anxious to take advantage of a rare opportunity to sound supportive of the left-leaning religious leader themselves, for a change. Even EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo, during his World Over Live broadcast of Thursday, April 26, put the misunderstood message from @Pontifex on screen, accompanied by lively praise. None of this, however, may be even remotely derived from what the Tweet-Even-Justice-Hayden-Could-Love actually says.

    On Monday, April 23, 2018–the day Alfie was finally extubated–the world was looking to the Vatican for guidance and hope. Many people erroneously believed they had found these things in these words of Pope Francis, who gushed via Twitter:

    Moved by the prayers and the broad solidarity in favor of little Alfie Evans, I renew my appeal so that the suffering of his parents may be heard and their desire to try new possibilities of treatment is fulfilled.

    Then the pontiff went back to his regularly-scheduled activity for that day, which is how he ended up serving gelato to the homeless while Alfie’s food and air were being “rationed” away.



    As slick as the “social media” Pope can sometimes sound, however, there is an ineluctable flipside to the papal point of view regarding Alfie which turns out to be more than blood-chilling. Pope Francis, whose most solemn duty it is to proclaim the truth of Christ, clearly failed in the most critical of moments to identify the child as the possessor of the inviolable right to life bestowed upon him by his Creator; a right which no doctor nor government may infringe upon at all. In this Tweet, the Fifth Commandment is nowhere alluded to, and neither is the CDF’s Declaration on Euthanasia with its detailed exposition of how the Catholic Church understands situations like the one currently unfolding in Liverpool. Instead, declaring himself moved by “prayers” (as if those particular exercises are meant to address . . . Jorge Bergoglio himself), and by “solidarity” (as if such temporal considerations couldn’t just as easily break the other way–an unnerving possibility which Professor Haas staunchly pointed out), Pope Francis begs only for Alfie to be given a chance to try additional treatments. And even that watered-down plea is based not on concern for the handicapped youngster himself, but for the “suffering” of Alfie’s parents, whose “desire” is alleged to merit singular indulgence.

    Pope Francis therefore demonstrates fundamental agreement with the note at the root of the T4 Euthanasia Program, because of his logical implication that “treatability” alone makes Alfie worth keeping alive.   By framing the issue in this way, the Holy Father casts the vulnerable little boy as the untermensch of the scenario, valuable to the extent that he happens to matter to the “real people” involved. This is not Catholicism. It is not even the celebrated merely-human “closeness” which the Holy Father is so fond of extending. It is nothing but Nietzschean predation, at just about its most naked.

    There will be those who wish to cite (in refutation of this conclusion) other pronouncements of the Holy Father as well–pronouncements which, in isolation and rank self-contradiction, do make him sound like he embraces the sanctity-of-life position of which the Catholic Church is the irrevocable champion. But the fact that he has said those things doesn’t mean that he didn’t Tweet this. It is wildly unacceptable for the Vicar of Christ on earth to mouth the verbiage of the Culture of Death even once, not to mention his countless slights to the cause of life, and the uncontradicted outrages which have been stated by his surrogates about Alfie to boot.

    Is one Tweet, however, really worth all this hoopla? If its contents represent even a subtle crossing of the Fifth Commandment watershed, it surely is. Concepts count. Read over, for example, the note from Hitler one more time, looking for the term which the Führer diabolically twisted beyond recognition, and which then became the basis for innumerable atrocities to follow. If this one National Socialist instance of semantic abuse had been detected and opposed effectively, who knows what reprehensible sights this Vale of Tears might ultimately have been spared?

    Curiously enough, the word in question–in case it hasn’t jumped off the page at you already–is mercy.


    [1] Alder Hey NHS Children’s Foundation Trust v. Mr. Thomas Evans et al. (Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 308 (Fam); Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL; 20 February, 2018), p. 16. This document is linked to by Michael Hichborn in “Judge Cites Pope Francis to Justify Ending Baby’s Life Against Parents’ Wishes” (; February 23, 2018; accessed April 24, 2018.

    [2] “The continued provision of ventilation, in circumstances which I am persuaded is futile, now compromises Alfie’s future dignity and fails to respect his autonomy. I am satisfied that continued ventilatory support is no longer in Alfie’s best interest” (Alder Hey v. Evans, p. 22).

    [3] Ertelt, Steven. “Alfie Evans’ Parents Head to Court to Restore Life Support After He Lives for Hours Without Food, Water, or Oxygen” (; April 24, 2018; accessed April 26, 2018.

    [4] “Did Alder Hey Force Alfie Evans’ Dad to Read a ‘Hostage’ Letter to Save His Son?” (; April 26, 2018; accessed April 26, 2018.

    [5] Quoted in Freiburger, Calvin, “Alfie Evans’ Parents to ‘Form a Relationship’ with the Hospital,’ Asking Supporters to Return Home” (; April 26, 2018; accessed April 26, 2018.

     [6] “Alfie’s father also asked the Pope to consider granting his son asylum and told him: ‘Please help us save our innocent child and give us the grace of asylum to keep our family safe and to stop all of this. If (Y)our (H)oliness helps our child you will be potentially saving the future for our children in the UK, especially the disabled.” Quoted in Apen-Sadler, Diane and Martin Robinson, “Pope Francis ‘Looked Me in the Eye and Told Me I was Doing the Right Thing,’ Says Alfie Evans’ Father after He Returns from Rome and Continues Fight for His Brain-Damaged Son” (; April 19, 2018; accessed April 26, 2018. Mr. Evans also expressed the expectation that involving Pope Francis would cause diplomatic troubles for Great Britain, if Alfie wasn’t allowed to depart for Italy. It is unfortunate, if not unexpected, that the same Holy Father who prides himself on “making a mess” in other contexts did not see fit to do anything of the kind when Alfie’s ventilator was removed.

    [7] “Human Life is Sacred,” Pastoral Letter of the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland to the Clergy, Religious, and Faithful (Dublin: Veritas, 1975; reprinted by the Daughters of St. Paul, 1977), no. 53; p. 32.

    [8] Wertham, Fredric, M.D. A Sign for Cain: An Exploration of Human Violence (New York: Macmillan, 1966), p. 180.

    [9] “Pope Francis Prays for Alfie Evans in Sunday Regina Coeli Address,” by Staff Reporters (; April 16, 2018; accessed April 26, 2018.

     [10] Quoted by Dorothy Cummings McLean in “UK Bishops Say Hospital Acting with ‘Integrity’ in Alfie Evans Case” (; April 18, 2018; accessed April 26, 2018.


      Alfie has taught us all to pray like there’s no tomorrow during those last few days of his short life. Let’s not lose that impetus. Keep hammering away at our rosaries.

      I don’t expect Tom Evans would read this, but if he did, thank you for sharing Alfie with us. We’ve come to love him so much. It seems as if the whole world is mourning with you and Kate.


      To the British National Health Service: Doctor Mengele salutes you once again.


      Actually Pope Francis has cholces, always. He could simply say nothing which would be perfectly acceptable – he is never obliged to speak after meeting with anyone in private. Our dear popes in the past did not make statements on every and all topics that came and went.

      The other choice is to make a firm, clear, Catholic statement about the LIFE of the child – Who gave that life and Who takes it away, the RIGHTS of the parents over the rights of anyone else (barring any abuse of the parents).

      When any politician’s picture could be placed over Francis’ statement and have it sound perfectly correct and reasonable we know we’re in big trouble. Isn’t he supposed to say something DIFFERENT from all those blabbermouths in the world?

      As for the so-controversial references to the Nazis – if it walks like a Nazi, talks like a Nazi, and kills innocent people like a Nazi – it’s a Nazi.



    Stop the Ban in France on Public Catholic Images



    React by signing the letter below addressed to the highest authorities of the State. [Click   HERE  to sign the petition]


    Mr. President of the Republic,

    Prime Minister,

    Madam the Minister of Justice,

    As you know, a series of court decisions suggests that the courts have declared war on our Christian roots.

    The banishment of Christmas cribs and the hunting of crosses testify to the installation of a deeply anti-Christian climate in France.

    This is all the more disturbing as Islamic street prayers are tolerated by the Ministry of the Interior and some of the people, notably Mrs. Hidalgo in Paris, celebrate Ramadan in their town halls with complete peace of mind.

    A large majority of French people, including me, are scandalized by this double standard and deeply opposed to putting our Christian heritage under the bushel.

    This situation is all the more worrying since radical Islam is proliferating throughout France, taking advantage of a spiritual and cultural desert that provokes despair and the quest for meaning, especially among the youngest.

    It is national cohesion and the very future of our children that are at stake today.

    With thousands of supporters of Avenir de la Culture, I want to express my just indignation against this anti-Christian climate and ask you to do everything possible to stop it immediately.

    I beg you to believe, Mr. President of the Republic, Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice, to my high and vigilant consideration.

    Click  HERE to sign the petition!


    • Avatar

      Yes,but Les Miserables have elected Macaron the Jupiter for president,so ➡” Let them eat cake.” Yay ! Thank you, Marie !

    • Avatar


      The bells –
      They stopped years ago
      At the Consecration
      Of many a Mass

      Where kneeling down
      Their Savior adore
      The people said “…that
      We’ll pass.”

      And now at six
      The happy-hour
      When the Angelus
      Used to chime

      There are no bells
      To remind the people
      Pray your souls
      To prime.

      And in the night clubs
      Dancing till dawn
      The people sin
      No regret…

      And now at six
      The “mourning” hour
      Bells die with each passing

      see more

    • Avatar

      This is what the “Daughter of the Church” has been reduced to.





    Syriac Catholic Bishop: “The French Revolution Marginalized God”









    One of the reasons why Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election is because many Americans instinctively agree with the sentiments expressed here by Bishop Battah, many of which dovetail with Trump’s campaign promises to bring the troops home and stop playing Policeman of the World. Regardless of which mask it hides behind, Neocon nation-building really doesn’t sit well with red-blooded, patriotic Americans.

    This is why the war hawks must always conjure up a “bad guy” for us to fear and hate before dragging our country into yet another unjust (and unjustifiable) war.

    But what never ceases to amaze me here in this global valley of the shadow of death called the modern world, is that we’re still expected to slog through the sophist revisionism of TV’s talking heads, pony-tailed college professors, Facebook “historians” and the rest– all about how terrible the Catholic Church of the past was, what with her “quintessential” intolerance, trumped-up antisemitism, Crusaders, and all those brutal “wars of religion”.

    Just look at that Spanish Inquisition, for example. I mean that alone may have wiped out HUNDREDS of innocent people! Oh, the carnage! The inhumanity!  

    Yes, thank goodness those barbaric Ages of Faith are behind us now, so that we can all merrily tiptoe through the tulips and lollipops (and No-Go Zones) of the New World Order.

    I realize most moderns haven’t cracked a non-fiction book since high school, but I’m genuinely mystified by how so many can get it so wrong and with such consistency. How, for example, can any moderately literate human being close a blind eye to the string of genocides committed against innocent millions over the past few hundred years by post-Christian nations, while getting all irate over the Crusades some thousand years ago?

    How can anyone decry with a straight face comparative nothing-burgers such as the Inquisition and the Crusades just fifty years after the atheist Joseph Stalin wiped out 50,000,000 people from his own thoroughly Christophobic Empire? Where is the wayward Christian king in history whose alleged crimes are even remotely akin to that?

    Millions upon millions of corpses have been piled in open graves all over the world since the Enlightenment’s very first act of genocide—ordered in the name of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, mind you—that claimed the lives of half a million French Catholics slaughtered in the Vendee by their own “enlightened” countrymen. Those pioneer “champions of liberty” hadn’t even finished mopping up the blood from their ‘reign of terror’ (which included regicide) before they’d moved south to wipe out men, women and children by the hundreds of thousands with whom they disagreed.

    The blood started flowing in Paris, and then it moved down into Brittany and western France, and eventually into the killing fields of Europe manned by Hitler’s Nazis and Stalin’s Communists where the “tree of liberty” still needed to be “refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”  Finally, even China got into the genocide business at the hands of a supremely anti-Catholic madman called Chairman Mao.

    And now all the countries of former Christendom, as well as the New World–once reclaimed from the serpent and dedicated to Our Lady of Guadalupe by “evil” Catholic explorers–are being overrun by the ancient enemies of Christianity, and there’s no secular power on earth that can stand up to them.

    The Enlightenment’s non serviam to Christ the King finally succeeded in plunging the modern world into the chaos of terrorism and unending war, with the anti-Catholic confessional states fixated on developing better war machines and dreaming up horrifically efficient techniques for exterminating millions with the push of a button.  They’re promoting formerly-unthinkable (to the kings and queens of Christendom) concepts such as total war, the bombing of cities, and the chemical extermination of children born and unborn.

    Tell me, how is this the Age of Enlightenment while glorious Christendom must always and forever be the Age of Darkness…the so-called Dark Ages?

    And now with everybody’s favorite whipping boy, the Catholic Church—architect of Western Civilization—assuming the fetal position beneath the jackboots of Lady Liberty, the sons of the Enlightenment rule the world. Their bombs and their guns “make the world safe for democracy”. Their weapons of mass destruction threaten countries hemispheres away who refuse to adopt Enlightenment values which include abortion on demand, gay ‘marriage’, contraception, ubiquitous porn, crappy fast food and the total annihilation of sovereignty, family and God.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, but the Crusaders sacked Constantinople! Sacked it, I tell you…sacked it! 

    Well, you know what?  I’ll take my chances with those guys any day.

    From the tyranny of an enlightened New World Order,  spare us O Lord!