02 October 2015


...and they all proceeded along their ways, oblivious to the fact that soon everything is going to change.

I called out to a man on the street, saying: "Sir, do you not see what is happening?"

He stopped, looked at me with a kind of amusement, gave a minimalistic smile, then walked away.

Then the twilight turned into darkness, a very black darkness, and I saw that there were no stars in the cloudless sky.


20 August 2015


The American Blog for Dallas Area Catholics recently provided expanded commentary on an article in 1Peter5, regarding how Modernist clergy have endeavored to destroy the Faith since Vatican Council II. A good piece, however the most interesting part of the read for this blogger was the comments section. Two Canadian commenters added indicting words to the fray:
I can only speak from my own brother's experience. He attended St Peter's Seminary in London, Ontario in the early 1980s. By then it was a modernist sodo sewer. To make the sign of the cross with Latin was a public scandal. The rector promoted the homosexual seminarians to "come out" with their fellow seminarians and report their reaction back to him. Anyone with a negative response was deemed not pastoral enough and asked to leave. Anyone with conservative let alone traditional theology was asked to take a year off in reflection for being too dogmatic. Needless to say he and a few of the others lasted about a year before finding the SSPX although never became priests. These modernists knew exactly what they were doing including the bishop, Bishop Sherlock. This miscreants destroyed the faith of almost everyone in the London area. They persecuted anything and everything that even hinted at Traditional Catholicism. To this very day these Judas', these vile, traitorous, treasonous dogs in ecclesiastical clothing do everything to keep the Tridentine Mass out of London. Those in control knew exactly what they were doing.
Quite vehement. That is very good. The statement "To this very day" can be confirmed by reference to two, long posts done at this blog last year, see Part 1 and Part 2.

The second commenter responded directly to the one just quoted:
As a former resident of London I can confirm what you say about that seminary, the priests it has produced have all but destroyed the diocese (and many others) and turned it into the most heretical in English-speaking Canada. (Quebec is even worse, I recently witnessed gay pride banners on the walls and disgustingly, hung over the altar in a Montreal Catholic parish.) Ironically, that former rector from the mid 1980s is now one of the VERY few bishops in Canada who ever speaks out publicly against the homosexual and abortion agendas in this country. I don't know whether he has had a change of heart, so to speak, because on the other hand he treats Traditional Catholics in his diocese like garbage, and banned the FSSP from celebrating Mass during so called flu "epidemics" because Communion is received on the tongue. But overall, most of these men knew what they were/are doing and will pursue it to the very end, as we will see this October.
Recall the following facts on two major problems in the Catholic Church presently: (1) the decimation and feminization of the liturgy witnessed today, including the antagonism for the Traditional Latin Mass, is largely attributable to the massive surge in the number of sodomite clergy since Vatican II; (2) the sex abuse scandal is principally attributable to homosexual pederast priests who target young boys, not pedophiles who violate children. Fathers, watch your sons. Be discriminating when looking for a parish to attend Holy Mass. Good priests are out there, it is just that you have to search as they have been silenced, suppressed and exiled by their vulgar chancery office overlords.


11 June 2015


To Indifferentism !
I have been reading the various oh! so woeful reactions to Michael Coren's apostasy by the Neo-Catholic commentariat (thank you, Lord, for this penance). Of course, like clockwork, they make sure to disassociate themselves from the (assumed) extraneous reactions by the Catholic riff raff on "social media". Thou doth protest too much and are too meanly, sayeth the Magic Circle dwellers.

Some samplings:

  • Olson / Catholic World Report: "It's a sad but undeniable fact that some of the criticism aimed at him has undoubtedly been harsh, personal, and even outrageous".[1]
  • Keating / Catholic Answers: "I have seen several calmly-written pieces (my own among them - good for you, Karl, so humble, you're awesome!) that took Coren to task for his lack of transparency. He doesn't allude to any of these. His column refers only to rude comments".[2]
  • Fr. de Sousa / National Post: "Coren, despite his aggressively polemical style in print, radio and TV, constantly complains that people say mean things on the Internet. That too does happen. Most columnists deal with it without public whingeing, as Coren puts it, about "the Church of Nasty".[3]
Read abovementioned columns and notice the "lack of bile", sanctimoniously says another Catholic Register columnist.

So, you see, only our enlightened critiques of Mr. Coren are acceptable and worthy of consideration and rumination, because we are civil and fair and level-headed and charitable and qualified... You can smell the smugness of these self-appointed legates as they attempt to take the high moral ground.

Let it be known: it was the Catholic riff raff on "social media" - bloggers, Facebook, Twitter, e-mails - that spent the last two years or so exposing and criticizing Coren's heteordoxy, challenging him to clarify or justify his shape-shifting views on sodomy and sodomites in the Catholic Church. During this same period, our darlings in the "official" Catholic press were silent as the vacuum of outer space. So far as can be recalled, not one challenge was posed by any "official" Catholic MSM outlet/columnist when Coren started to go pro homo in his commentaries.

Why no objections from Coren's enlightened peers? Was it Martini Hour? Certainly, questions to be pondered.

But now that Coren has publicly apostasized - note that never is the word "apostasy" used, so uncivilized you know (sip vodka martini, one olive, dirty, lemon twist) - these self-appointed legates have suddenly emerged from their plush-carpeted lairs to tell us that, yes, it is unfortunate that Coren "converted"!? to Anglicanism. We are "disappointed" at his duplicity, "hoping" he will once again return to the fold. But now it is safe to speak. After Coren's public admission, no longer are there overseer threats to incoming cash flow nor to club memberships nor to conference invites nor to TV interviews nor to bromances with bishops nor to other myriad forms of self-congratulatory backslapping. What a relief! No risks, no problem, me influential, have pen, get cheque - and it is only us who are entitled the credit, and who possess the accreditation, for weeding out and speaking out against the apostatic likes of Mr. Coren.

Yet during the interim, how many Catholic fans of Mr. Coren were led astray? How many of these people, Catholic or not, trusted his writings on Catholic matters? Perhaps making crucial decisions in their personal lives as an result? Like, maybe, converting to Catholicism? Is it not the responsibility of the "official" Catholic press to keep checks and balances on any influential Catholic personalities who have gone wayward?  Were not these wonderful, charming self-appointed legates - so much "informed" on the internal workings of the Catholic Church - supposed to report Coren's soul-endangering positions to the Catholic riff raff? Why did they not? Where were they? Who knows?

For example, why did the aforesaid Carl Olson, editor of the Neo-Catholic World Report, allow Coren to publish an article with the following nonchalant statement therein:
Of course, lesbian couples can have an obliging friend assist them in having a baby, and gay men can adopt or have some other obliging friend have one for them.[5]
Is this not a red flag? That was written in February 2013, over two years ago. In May 2015, Olson now - as if experiencing an influx of divine revelation - calls Coren a "mediocre theologian".[4] Two things here: First, why hire the guy to regularly write for CWR if he is only "mediocre"? Second, Coren is not a "theologian". He is a journalist. The reader should know that there are not a few writers in the Catholic MSM who, despite the proper education, regard themselves as "theologians", or "lay theologians", a post-Conciliar novelty that has become laughable. Obviously, Olson is concocting excuses after subjecting his readers to Coren's blatant dissent against Catholic teaching.

In the meantime, Coren's articles remained accessible at the Catholic Register website for a full month after publicly apostasizing in late April. And presently Lifesite News is reporting that he just published a pro-abortion article for the notoriously heretical Prairie Messenger, the "official" weekly for three Canadian dioceses out west: Saint Boniface, Regina and Saskatoon.[6] Indeed, now that he is on a roll, Coren is starting get in on the homofascist action on Twitter:

Well, you got your wish, princess. Faggotry triumphant in Ireland. Although I doubt St. Patrick is pleased with the outcome, that "nasty" legalist who insisted on the legality of the Sixth Commandment. Clearly, this wheeler-dealer has swiftly morphed into the classic "useful idiot" of the antinomian Left. Proof positive: The Walrus, that mostly unread magazine with the stupidest of names tailored specifically Canada's limousine liberals (you know, it has that homely, boring CBC feel to it) - just published an article by Coren entitled "Coming Out".[7] Here is the image accompanying the article:

How quaint - burning a sodomite "martyr" at the stake and two others holding hands under the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil. They must be squealing with glee over there. Glitter... glitter everywhere!

So wake up, Catholic riff raff. It's all one big joke. It is a manoeuvre by the Establishment Church to steal the limelight and the credit for disavowing one their own, one of their "friends", who went off the rails, was for a long time running off the rails, under their watch, ever boldly doing so in the public square. These self-appointed legates writing zero about it, not a peep, still letting Coren publish at their respective media outlets. However, it was you... you contemptible Catholic riff raff, with your loyalty to the Magisterium and your devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin and your steadfastness at facing raw, uncomfortable facts head-on, which was chiefly responsible for forcing Mr. Coren to finally show his cards - and do not let the linguistic acrobatics of these self-appointed legates of Nu-Church make you second guess yourselves. Never forget, Catholic riff raff, you have support and corroboration from the popes:

  • Pope Felix III: "Not to oppose error, is to approve it, and not to defend truth is to suppress it, and indeed to neglect to confound evil men, when we can do it, is no less a sin than to encourage them".
  • Pope St. Leo I the Great: "He that sees another in error, and endeavors not to correct it, testifies himself to be in error".
Amongst the menagerie of these responsions to Mr. Coren's apostasy, the one that really smacked of Neo-Catholic claptrap was the column by Peter Stockland, at Toronto's Catholic Register.[8] Behold the bileless pageantry of Indifferentism:
As a result, his decision to trade Rome for Canterbury has been denounced, especially on social media, as everything from hypocritical to traitorous and, perhaps most unkindly of all if entirely predictable, a betrayal by someone who was never a real Catholic anyway.
Consider the words - "denounced", "hypocritical", "traitorous", "betrayal". True, such words were wielded. Why not? They are true characterizations. For goodness sake, Coren penned a book entitled Why Catholics are Right. He made mucho money from writing, broadcasting and speechifying as a "Catholic apologist", for years, for Catholics. Except in the last 1+ years Coren never let the public know he jumped ship while at the same time leeching money from Catholics parishes and organizations. How else were his fans and followers to react? With smiles beaming sunshine, with offerings of daffodils and lollipops? But, you see, according to Mr. Stockland such phraseologies are "unkind". Really? Coren's schtick always has been fierce polemics, starting all the way back from his book Aesthete: The Frank Diaries to Michael Coren (1993), right up to his self-aggrandizing "Corenocopia" spots on The Arena, his TV show which thankfully ended earlier this year. Never read Mr. Stockland writing against this aspect of Coren's mode of presentation. Well, of course, not. Otherwise not anymore would he be invited for interviews on any one of Coren's TV shows (view here). Neither would his colleague Fr. de Sousa be interviewed (view here). Remember: you have to be one of the right people.

Could such a set up as be characterized as hypocritical, incestuous, opportunistic?

You betchya.

Catholics absolutely should be indignant at Coren's apostasy, rightfully they are indignant, and indignation is an expression of zeal. Zeal, say St. Thomas, "arises from the intensity of love".[9] It seeks and wants the good of "the other", and the intensity of opposition to the soul that has gone errant is a direct function of the good desired for "the other". Yes, it is called "love", tough love. Therefore it is not unreasonable to suppose that our newspaper man deems Coren's "critics" on "social media" to be "unkind" because, contrarily, he considers Coren's apostasy not as a tragedy, not as a real loss, where an immortal soul is at stake. It is more of a pragmatic thing, considered principally in a secular context, not theological, definitely not moral. Instead, what we get is this smug "entirely predictable" ascription applied to Catholics on "social media". Yes, we know, just a bunch of  dim-witted vulgarians.

Although they would never admit it, what these self-appointed legates do - by insinuation - is to equate zeal (so-called unkindness, hate, etc.) into fanaticism, psychological instability, uneducated oafs, unqualified buffoons, "Church of Nasty", take your pick. Lounging around high atop their Ivory Towers whilst Rome burns below, this is a standard tactic used by an insulated, disconnected elite that endeavours to wholly dismiss the legitimate protests of normal, everyday Catholics, powerless, dejected by the abysmal state of the Post-Conciliar Church, yet many of whom have an acute sensus fidei. Basically, scoring everything off as a manifestation of the mob mentality. It is important for them to maintain this calumniating narrative because in one swipe it renders any opposing views as irrelevant. Problem is, with the contemporary arrival of those once suppressed Catholic voices on the internet, coupled with the free availability of the Deposit of the Faith online, these self-appointed legates of Nu-Church are less capable at sustaining this narrative. They are being challenged, and they do not like it. "How dare you?", they condescendingly think. "Shoo, shoo away" (sip vodka martini).

Now watch as apostasy begins to be warranted:

What his critics either fail to see, or refuse to accept, is the validity of his statement that the decision was a Christ-centred choice: that he had to move away from the political distractions in which he was enmeshed in the Catholic Church in order to stay in the presence of Christ personally.
Coren made a "Christ-centred choice"? To be specific, this means Christ minus the Catholic Church. That is, a Protestantized choice, which is heresy.
  • Corollary 1: sola fide, sola scriptura.
  • Corollary 2: private judgement, individualism, no objective authority, no Real Presence, self-determination without the external referent of Tradition/Magisterium.
  • Corollary 3: "A personal relationship with Jesus", "Here I stand", and so forth.
It was not a "choice" for Christ so much as a rejection of the Catholic Church (which is Christ's bride) and its two thousand year teaching against the abomination of sodomy, one of the sins that cries out to Heaven for vengeance. Coren explicitly stated so himself: "The change [i.e. apostasy] was to a large extent triggered by the gay issue. I couldn't accept that homosexual relationships were, as the Roman Catholic Church insists on proclaiming, disordered and sinful. Once a single brick in the wall was removed the entire structure began to fall... I felt a hypocrite being part of a church that described homosexual relations as being disordered and sinful. I just couldn't be part of it anymore. I could not do that".[10] Our newspaper man, apparently a Roman Catholic, considers Coren's newly advocated Protestant attitude as having "validity", that (really) his pro-sodomitic views are of no real consequence. That is what is actually being relayed to the reader, and it is atrocious.

Coren apostasized from the Catholic Church because he refuted the Church's teaching on sodomy, a subject bearing on morality. What our newspaper man seems to be doing here is to transform the issue into a "political distraction". Is this to infer that Catholic morality and secular politics are separate? That issues regarding homo "marriage" and its perverted correlates should be left to be decided upon in the public square, in a "democracy", without any input, protest or prevention whatsoever from Catholics? Sure seems like it. No surprise here. This relegation of Church teaching to a partitioned, distant construct relates directly to those precious neo-Catholic (yet non-Catholic) concepts of "religious freedom" and the separation of Church and State. Begone Social Reign of Christ the King. All hail Fr. John Courtney Murray!

Continuing down the rabbit hole:

Seen in the light of rooted faith in Christ, Coren was right to leave the Catholic Church if staying meant attending at Mass with his heart and mind full of the buzz of worldly argument rather than the peace of Our Lord. It is devoutly to be hoped that the peripatetic pilgrim will find his way home to Rome again. In the interim, it's better that his focus is fixed where it should be.
How can it be "right" (inferring true) that someone apostasizes from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church? How can a Catholic claim it is "valid" to have a "rooted faith in Christ" alone, i.e. Protestantism? Does not our newspaper man believe that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church? Evidently not. His justification, utterly bizarre, is that Coren was so much overcome by the secular world's talk and promotion of sodomy, euphemized by "worldly argument". As such, it became an unmanageable hindrance to belief - personal belief, that is, which otherwise licenses "me" to rationalize whatever "I" want to do and whatever "I" want to think as "true".

How many Catholics out there have been daily, monthly, yearly bombarded by the "worldly argument" of Sodomite Propaganda from the culture without, or even from within the Church via, say, the slick and unyielding Jesuit faggotry of Fr. James Martin, but nonetheless remain in the Church and believe what it teaches on this abomination? This, despite family members estranged as a result, ostracization by friends, mockery at the office, opportunities lost, or whatever suffering. Yes, there are Catholics out there with those very experiences, you adorable self-appointed legates of Nu-Church. How many Catholics, who for whatever reason may feel certain moral teachings are difficult (usually out of ignorance), but still believe all that the Church teaches, by trust, by faith, and because they actually assent to the following: "Thou art Peter, and it is upon this rock that I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:18-19).

It is not as if Coren joined that "old time religion" of whatever Protestant sect existent prior to the Lambeth Conference of 1920. Before then, Anglicanism proscribed contraception, abortion and sodomy. Rather, he has enthusiastically shacked up with the newfangled hyper-liberalized version of an ever changing, currently imploding, Anglicanism, with its recent acquiescence to whatever sexual perversion. Let alone its stellar cast of lesbians pretending to be "priests" and, now, "bishops". To say it is "right" to apostasize from Catholicism, whatever the cause, still assumes Indifferentism, which is heresy. To say it is "valid" to dispose of Catholicism for a "Christ-centred" Protestantism, assumes Indifferentism, which is heresy.

Why, then, is such an apathetic viewpoint advocated? Because there is a hushed, unspoken and underlying conviction, deep, deep, way down deep - again, a Neo-Catholic thing - that the immortal soul of a baptized Catholic, latterly apostasized, is not reeeaaallllly in danger of going to Hell (wink wink, nudge nudge). That is an old fashioned notion belonging to the "Dark Ages", long before the shackles of oppression were broken at Vatican II, to which only the contemptible Catholic riff raff on "social media" subscribe. Don't worry about it. Nearly everyone makes it to Heaven, squawk the von Balthasar fanboys. It's the Nouvelle Théologie, bebe. Coren will be fine in some other denomination. He is just a "peripatetic pilgrim" (give me a break) galavanting his whimsical way through the travails of life, just selecting another course of choice fare on the menu of religion. Oh well, let's have another martini and wish him well.

It is so un-Catholic, pathetic, lukewarm, flat, blasé. There's nothing there.

Stockland goes beyond a disguised Indifferentism, however, when he writes that "it's better that his focus is fixed where it should be". Really? It is "better" that Coren "should be" a Protestant promoting sodomy (and now abortion) rather than be a Catholic and witness against it? This is no longer a subtle nod, not an enigmatic wink of approval. No, this is public affirmation, even an encouragement to apostasy. And that this garbage passes off as Catholic journalism is an injustice to those poor pewsitters who think the Catholic Register (funded by them) is an authentic source of Catholic news and views.

Now the reader should understand that this stealth Indifferentism (with the heresy of Universal Salvation looming in the background) is not particular to our newspaper man. It spans throughout the unhallowed halls of CanChurch. They're everywhere. Again, we have Coren for confirmation: "I obviously don't blame the Catholic Church as such for all this, especially as there are myriad good and kind people within its ranks, many of whom sent me delightful letters and were extremely upset and ashamed about what went on".[11] So, it is not just writers for diocesan newspapers. You can include whatever form of Professional Catholic that now plague the Post-Conciliar Church - chanceries office personnel, teacher union members, professors, publishers, so-called liturgists and catechists, including that very high percentage of homo priests and bishops.

Why did they send Coren "delightful letters"? Obviously, they condone his apostasy and, correlatively, support his pro-homo promulgations. What else could it be? Why do you think there are so many faggots and dykes working inside the gamut of Catholic institutions? Why are these Nu-Church darlings "extremely upset and ashamed"? Well, it demonstrates a disdain for orthodox Catholics, particularly those on "social media" and, correlatively, the doctrines of the Church, especially those appertaining to morality. What else could it be? Yes, Catholic riff raff, these people do not like you, to put it mildly. However, they do indeed like their power and influence over the laity. But don't you dare test or provoke them, else the dogs will be sent after you personally - out of the public eye, that is.

It cannot be emphasized enough: within the bubble world of Nu-Church, it's all about personal relationships, emotional attachments, opportunities, administration, maintaining face in the public square - all of these overriding principles of the Faith, despite the unmistakeable fact that the Catholic Church is currently undergoing an unprecedented crisis. For them, it is not a battle for souls, not an endeavor to uphold the truths of dogma, but of maintaining respectability, even loyalty to those who are publicly known heretics, despite the damage these heretics have done, for decades. It is abhorrent to them to even think of "betraying" one of their own. Yet this attitude is so damaging to an already exhausted laity and, yes, to their immortal souls as well. Why? These sins of omission, by remaining silent about their heretic colleagues, these enemies within, they are doing even worse damage to the faithful in that they are effectively licensing the perpetuation of error and, therefore, further loss of faith, more apostasy. Judging by what is now published everyday by whatever "official" Catholic agency, there is absolutely no sign of abatement to the pattern outlined just above.

It is the lesson of Catholic history: when it comes down to the crunch, as in the recent ramping up of Christian persecution (as a prime example), these Nu-Church darlings, these innovators and rebels, will be nowhere to be seen. Gone. Vanished. Unless someone blogs about it. But this invariably occurs after the fact, after the exposition, after someone is caught red handed, just like Coren.

Do not trust these people. Keep your distance. Remain vigilant and pray that God will soon end this scourge.


1. C. Olson, "Michael Coren goes Anglican, denounces Catholic moral teaching", Catholic World Report, May 2, 2015.

2. K. Keating, "Michael Coren sidesteps the real issue in his change of religion", Catholic Answers, May 18, 2015.

3. Fr. R.J. de Sousa, "Michael Coren converts, Michael Coren complains", National Post, May 20, 2015.

4. C. Olson, op. cit.

5. M. Coren, "Great Britain and Gay Marriage", Catholic World Report, February 26, 2013.

6. P. Baklinkski, "'Official' Catholic newspaper defends running pro-abortion piece by Michael Coren", Lifesite News, May 26, 2015. See article M. Coren, "Seamless Garment", Prairie Messenger, May 20, 2015.

7. M. Coren, "Coming Out", The Walrus, May 21, 2015.

8. P. Stockland, "Cold days in hell", The Catholic Register, May 14, 2016.

9. Sum. theol. i-ii, q. 28, art. 5.

10. M. Coren, "How a change of heart led to a backlash from the 'Church of Nasty'", Toronto Star, May 16, 2015; J. Brean, " 'I felt a hypocrite': Author Michael Coren on why he left the Catholic Church for Anglicanism", National Post, May 1, 2015.

11. Ibid.


02 May 2015


The Apostate Michael Coren is now publicly commenting that he has been attending Anglican services for approximately one year. For Catholics monitoring his writings over the last couple of years of so, his apostasy has been self-evident and, really, there should be no surprise at his recent public pronouncement.

He who has ears to hear, let him hear: Corenocopia = Corenocrapia.

Sidebar: public apostasy incurs automatic excommunication (Canon 1364).

Bye bye.

However, what has been lost in all of this is the following: over the course of one year, word must have gotten out. How could the betrayal of a widely known "Catholic" remain hidden for so long? Surely, news of the apostasy must have spread amongst Establishment church ranks, that their very own Neo-Catholic demagogic diva had formally jumped ship. Why, then, was it not reported earlier? Given the Apostate Coren's public prominence as a Canadian "Catholic" commentator and broadcaster, let alone all his connections with the Catholic glitterati, should they have not immediately reported (i.e. warned) the laity? During the course of the past year, Coren - in true parasitical Neo-Catholic style - was raking in the money from his dilettante speaking engagements, doing the lecture circuit at parishes, Catholic groups, organizations, etc. Why no word from the Toronto Diocese? How could it not have known? Is it because chancery office faggots are squealing with joy at Coren's pro-sodomy promulgations? Why did not any of the darlings at the Catholic Register report on it soonafter? And, yes, even perhaps anyone at Catholic Insight or The Interim?

Their silence is itself the answer. To paraphrase what I recently wrote in the com boxes at another blog: Regardless of whether they come across as conservative, traditional or progressive Catholics, "left" or "right" or "moderate" or whatever, they are all "friends" with one another. They affirm one another, justify one anothers errors and heresies, watch out for each others backs - driven by the desire for prestige, career advancement and/or acceptance.

Don't want to spill the Pellegrino!

Canadian Catholics - go elsewhere for reliable Catholic news and views. Do not trust anything that the representatives CanChurch speak or write. Do not be charmed, do not be dazzled by their intellectual acrobatics and, most especially, do not succumb to their sappy, emasculating sentimentalisms.

Given the unprecedented crisis in the Catholic Church, now exploding with the Modernist/Marxist papacy of Pope Francis, it is now time to "click" off switch. It is time to cut the rope. Let them sink.


28 April 2015


Reported here:

"After the farce, comes the tragedy" - Heinrich Heine on Kant's second Critique of Reason


21 February 2015


Once upon a time after Vatican II, bishops, priests and their lackeys in the "official" Catholic media remained silent when the Faithful were attacked by the wolves, sometimes unknowingly facilitating the actions of these wolves, oftentimes covertly supporting these wolves. Now, five decades on, several of these clerics have become full-blown wolves themselves, openly and unashamedly attacking the Faithful, calling that which is good "evil", and transmogrifying that which is evil into "good"...

For Canadian Catholic bloggers, a good proportion of them tending toward orthodoxy and who regularly monitor the deplorable state of widespread apostasy in this nation's Establishment Church, it is common knowledge that Father Thomas Rosica is a power hungry Modernist. The public face is one of a humble and hard-working orthodox cleric, but outbursts and vilifications in response to articles on the internet from Traditionally-minded Catholics betray a hard and fast Progressive agenda at odds with the Magisterium. The same viewpoint, I gather,  applies to other Canadian Catholics of orthodox bent who, while not expressing their viewpoints online for whatever reason, may have had misfortune to transact or communicate with this ladder climbing clericalist.

Fr. Roscia has his hand in every pie throughout the Canadian Catholic landscape - diocesan newspapers, universities, secular media outlets, WYD Toronto, the CCCB, chanceries, advising, writing, lecturing, hosting Church-related events, winner of numerous awards, etc. He is all over the place, a prominent public figure who has lately gone trans-Atlantic, soaring to the very top. Since Pope Francis' election, Rosica has been appointed as - another notch in his long list of accomplishments - English language spokesman for the Vatican Press Office. Or, as I prefer to say in this time of diabolical disorientation in Rome, Fr. Federico Lombardi's pool boy.

So, to demonstrate my solidarity with blogger Mr. David Domet (aka Vox Cantoris), after the threat of lawsuit he received from Fr. Rosica, demanding that posts critical of his public statements removed - even reserving the right to litigate against Mr. Domet "regardless of an apology or retraction"! - this blogger provides various links to his own articles critical of Fr. Rosica's public statements and actions.

So far as I am aware, the reader would be well to note that it is unprecedented for a Vatican official to commence civil legal action against a Catholic layman critical of  the hierarchy. Fr. Rosica is a big time player with many influential "friends", so in all likelihood he consulted with certain individuals at the Vatican before commencing legal action so as intimidate a Catholic blogger into silence. Accordingly, it is not hard to deduce that Rome has declared war on Catholic bloggers - and here we have "the Francis Effect" manifesting in true form.

Below there is a cornucopia of well-referenced articles  (starting in 2010) available for perusal: Rosica's vilification of LifeSite News during the Kennedy funeral affair, his gushing interview with the excommunicated ex-priest Greg Baum, his swooning endorsement and collaboration with liberal Vaticanista John Allen, Jr., his function as mouthpiece for the apostatic Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, including machinations occurrent  at the Salt+Light Media Foundation (of which he is CEO), Catholic-lite par excellence - but most importantly for the current context, Fr. Rosica's views on the role of lay Catholics on the Internet.

Posts devoted entirely to Fr. Rosica public words/actions are these:

Posts with just a few paragraphs critical of Fr. Rosica are these:


07 January 2015