Blessed Anna Maria Taigi: Is her prophecy being fulfilled before our very eyes?

Blessed Anna Maria Taigi was a true mystic.  As Ted and Maureen Flynn note, she "knew with certainty the fate of the dead.  Her gaze traveled to the ends of the earth and discovered there people on whom she had never set eyes, reading them to the depth of their souls.  One glance sufficed; upon whatever she focused her thoughts, it was revealed to her and her understanding.  She saw the whole world as we see the front of a building.  It was the same with nations as with individuals; she saw the cause of their distresses and the remedies that would heal them.

By means of this permanent and prodigious miracle, the poor wife of Domenico Taigi became a theologian, a teacher, and a prophet.  The miracle lasted forty-seven years.  The poor, the great of the world, and the princes of the Church came to her for advice or help.  They found her in the midst of her household cares and often suffering from illness.  She refused neither her last crust of bread nor the most precious moments of her time, yet she would accept neither presents nor praise...She touched the sick and they were cured; she warned others of their approaching end, and they died holy deaths.  She endured great austerities for the souls in purgatory, and the souls, once set free, came to thank her...She suffered in body and soul...She realized that her role was to expiate the sins of others, that Jesus was associating her with His Sacrifice." (The Thunder of Justice, pp. 351-352).

Now it was Blessed Taigi who warned that, "God will send two punishments; one will be in the form of wars, revolutions and other evils; it shall originate on earth.  The other will be sent from Heaven.  There shall come over the whole earth an intense darkness lasting three days and three nights.  Nothing can be seen, and the air will be laden with pestilence which will claim mainly, but not only, the enemies of religion.  It will be impossible to use any man-made lighting during this darkness, except blessed candles.  He, who out of curiosity, opens his window to look out, or leaves his home, will fall dead on the spot.  During these three days, people should remain in their homes, pray the rosary and beg God for mercy...All the enemies of the Church, whether known or unknown, will perish over the whole earth during that universal darkness with the exception of a few whom God will soon convert.  The air shall be infected by demons who will appear under all sorts of hideous forms.  Religion shall be persecuted, and priests massacred.  Churches shall be closed, but only for a short time.  The Holy Father shall be obliged to leave Rome.."

Is this prophecy about to be fulfilled in our own time?  Blessed Taigi spoke of two chastisements: one which takes the form of wars, revolutions and other evils [such as famine?] and the other from Heaven in the form of three days darkness.  Witness the wars and more specifically the revolutions springing up everywhere   And the three days darkness?  Scientists have said that a volcanic eruption, such as this one scientists are currently warning about, could easily blot out the sun for several days* and potentially take countless lives.

Our Lady told Father Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests that there would be various signs indicating that the end of the times and the coming of Jesus in glory would be near.  "The second sign," said the Immaculata, "is the outbreak of wars and fratricidal struggles, which lead to the prevalence of violence and hatred and a general slackening off of charity, while natural catastrophes, such as epidemics, famines, floods, and earthquakes, become more and more frequent.  When you hear of reports of wars, close at hand or far away, see that you are not alarmed; for these things must happen." (December 31, 1992).

The third sign, according to Our Lady, is "the bloody persecution of those who remain faithful to Jesus and His Gospel and who stand fast in the true faith."  And the fourth, "..the horrible sacrilege, perpetrated by him who sets himself against Christ, that is, the Antichrist.."


*  See here for example.

Read More

Signs: Is the world's largest volcano about to devastate the United States

Our Lady told Fr. Stephano Gobbi on November 15, 1990, at Malvern Pennsylvania: "I announce to you that the hour of the great trial is on the point of arriving. The great trial has arrived for your country. How many times, as a concerned and sorrowing mother, have I endeavored to urge my children to follow the path of conversion and of return to the Lord. I have not been listened to. You have continued to walk along the way of rejection of God, and of His law of love. Sins of impurity have become ever more widespread, and immorality has spread like a sea which has submerged all things. Homosexuality, a sin of impurity which is against nature, has been justified; recourse to the means of preventing life have become commonplace, while abortions - these killings of innocent children, that cry for vengeance before the face of God - have spread and are performed in every part of your homeland.The moment of divine justice and of great mercy has now arrived.


You will know the hour of weakness and of poverty; the hour of suffering and defeat; the purifying hour of the great chastisement. The great trial has arrived for your Church. How great is your responsibility, O Pastors of the Holy Church of God! You continue along the path of division from the Pope and of the rejection of his Magisterium; indeed, in a hidden way, there is in preparation a true schism which could soon become open and proclaimed...And then, there will remain only a small faithful remnant, over which I will keep watch in the garden of my Immaculate Heart.

The great trial has arrived for all humanity. The chastisement, predicted by me at Fatima and contained in that part of the secret which has not yet been revealed, is about to take place. The great moment of divine justice and of mercy has come upon the world."

Related reading: The Peshtigo fire: a harbinger?

Read More

Marianne Duddy-Burke: Why isn't the Boston Archdiocese accusing her of causing harm to the community?

As I mentioned in a previous post, "Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of the homosexual Catholic-in-name-only 'DignityUSA,' praised the new policy of the Boston Archdiocese which prohibits "discrimination" against students who come from a homosexual household while stating clearly that it is her belief that, 'As long as the doctrine stands [Catholic doctrine which defines marriage as a heterosexual union and which says that homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity], it makes it really hard for the pastoral and the doctrinal aspects of our faith not to come into a clash...The people of the church are changing, and by and large very affirming of gay people, and the hierarchy and the doctrine are lagging behind.' (See here).


This is nothing less than a call for the Church to abandon its teaching that homosexual acts are intrinsically evil acts.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which was solemnly promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992, teaches that there are explicit kinds of human acts, specified by the object of moral choice, which are always morally wrong because a willingness to choose an object of this kind demonstrates a disordered will (i.e., moral evil).  The Catechism explains that, "A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together.  An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting 'in order to be seen by men').  The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety.  There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil." (1755). 

The same Catechism identifies various kinds of intrinsically evil acts, proscribed by absolute norms.  For example, the intentional killing of the innocent (2273), specific examples of which are infanticide (2268) abortion (2273) and mercy killing or euthanasia (2277); masturbation (2352), fornication (2353) adultery (2380-2381) and homosexual acts (2357).
If one is to be faithful to Christ and His Church, one may not assert that what the Magisterium teaches is false and that the faithful possess a right to reject its teaching and substitute it with their own opinions or those of dissenting theologians.  But this is precisely what Marianne Duddy-Burke is doing.  She is agitating for a change in the Church's teaching while suggesting that the Church needs to "catch up" with those who are "very affirming of gay people," (in other words, who condone homosexual acts). 

But the Church, while respecting the homosexual person (CCC, 2358), cannot affirm acts which are intrinsically evil.  Which is why the Catechism states clearly that, "Homosexual persons are called to chastity." (2359).  In his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, No. 113, Pope John Paul II warns that, "dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God."  In the face of such dissent, a dissent which harms the Church's communion, Pope John Paul II insists that, "the Church's Pastors have the duty to act in conformity with their apostolic mission, insisting that the right of the faithful to receive Catholic doctrine in its purity and integrity must be preserved" (No. 113).

Has Cardinal O'Malley done this?  Has he acted in conformity with his apostolic mission to address Ms. Duddy-Burke's public dissent from the Church's teaching regarding homosexual acts?  How about Father Emile "Mike" Boutin's dissent from Church teaching?  Thus far there has been nothing from the Boston Archdiocese but silence.  But the same archdiocese managed to find the time to accuse Boston Catholic bloggers faithful to the Magisteium of harming the community of the faithful.  Pope John Paul II never said that fidelity to the Magisterium is opposed to ecclesial communion.  But rather dissent.

Why the silence from Cardinal O'Malley?  What do you think?  And more to the point: Why is it that the Church in Boston finds it so easy to partner with individuals who are engaging in intrinsically evil acts but so difficult to partner with Catholics faithful to the Magisterium?  While you wrestle with that, let me finish this post with another quotation from Marianne Duddy-Burke, taken from an article she authored for The Huffington Post:

"We will be looking for someone to fill Senator Kennedy's shoes--and no one will. But perhaps his leadership can give hope to the many Catholics who feel their values on LGBT issues do not agree with what they hear from their bishops. Ted Kennedy confirmed that progressive Catholics can live out their deep convictions and genuine faith even when these convictions differ from those of the church hierarchy."  See here.


God save the Boston Archdiocese!

Read More

A question for Cardinal Sean O'Malley

Your Eminence, as one who was excluded from Catholic schools (even though my parents were cradle Catholics entirely loyal to the Magisterium of the Church who always lived a sacramental life), I find it strange that you now claim that no categories of children have ever been excluded from Catholic schools.  One of your very own Blog readers has admitted otherwise in my previous Blog post dealing with this subject.

But my question doesn't pertain to my being excluded from Catholic schools.  Rather, it has to do with the words Our Lord Jesus spoke in the sixth chapter of Matthew, verse 24: "No one can serve two masters; for he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.  You cannot serve God and mammon."  Now, mammon can represent either money or any other created thing which stands in the way of a total commitment to the Lord Jesus.

My question: By allowing children of homosexual households into Catholic schools, are you not thereby inviting violence and disorder?  After all, how can these children be expected to serve two masters?  Will they not come to hate the one and love the other?  Will they not be devoted to one while despising the other?  Either these children will come to fully embrace Catholic teaching and thereby be set in opposition to their parents illicit sexual behavior, or [and this is the far more likely scenario given that children tend to love their parents or guardians], they will come to despise the Church while condoning intrinsically disordered behavior which have they grown accustom to being exposed to.

Was Our Lord wrong Your Eminence?  Can a kingdom divided against itself (Mark 3:24) really stand?  Can children of homosexual households really be expected to serve two masters?  I apologize if my questions are difficult.  A hazard from studying philosophy.

Read More

"Tradition in Action" trashes Mother Teresa of Calcutta

On October 19, 2003, Pope John Paul II, having waived the customary five-year waiting period which leads to beatification, declared Mother Teresa to be Blessed and allowed the immediate opening of her canonization cause.  What exactly does Beatification mean in the Church?  EWTN has an excellent article which explains its significance here.

On October 20, 2003, Pope John Paul II delivered an Address on the occasion of Mother Teresa's Beatification.  His Holiness said (in part):

"Missionary of Charity: this is what Mother Teresa was in name and in fact". Today with deep feeling I repeat these words that I spoke the day after her death (Angelus, 7 September 1997; L'Osservatore Romano English Edition, 10 September, n. 1).


First and foremost a missionary: there is no doubt that the new Blessed was one of the greatest missionaries of the 20th century. The Lord made this simple woman who came from one of Europe's poorest regions a chosen instrument (cf. Acts 9: 15) to proclaim the Gospel to the entire world, not by preaching but by daily acts of love towards the poorest of the poor. A missionary with the most universal language: the language of love that knows no bounds or exclusion and has no preferences other than for the most forsaken.

A Missionary of Charity. A missionary of God who is love, who has a special preference for the least and the humble, who bends over the human being wounded in body and spirit and pours "the oil of consolation and the wine of hope" upon the wounds. God did this in the person of his Son made man, Jesus Christ, the Good Samaritan of humanity. He continues to do this in the Church, especially through the saints of charity in whose ranks Mother Teresa shines in a special way.

Where did Mother Teresa find the strength to place herself completely at the service of others? She found it in prayer and in the silent contemplation of Jesus Christ, his Holy Face, his Sacred Heart. She herself said as much: "The fruit of silence is prayer; the fruit of prayer is faith; the fruit of faith is love; the fruit of love is service; the fruit of service is peace". Peace, even at the side of the dying, even in nations at war, even in the face of attacks and hostile criticism. It was prayer that filled her heart with Christ's own peace and enabled her to radiate that peace to others.

A missionary of charity, a missionary of peace, a missionary of life. Mother Teresa was all these. She always spoke out in defence of human life, even when her message was unwelcome. Mother Teresa's whole existence was a hymn to life. Her daily encounters with death, leprosy, AIDS and every kind of human suffering made her a forceful witness to the Gospel of life. Her very smile was a "yes" to life, a joyful "yes", born of profound faith and love, a "yes" purified in the crucible of suffering. She renewed that "yes" each morning, in union with Mary, at the foot of Christ's Cross. The "thirst" of the crucified Jesus became Mother Teresa's own thirst and the inspiration of her path of holiness.

Teresa of Calcutta was truly a Mother. A mother to the poor and a mother to children. A mother to so many girls and young people who had her as their spiritual guide and shared in her mission. The Lord brought forth from a tiny seed, a great tree, laden with fruit (cf. Mt 13: 31-32). And precisely you, sons and daughters of Mother Teresa, are the most eloquent signs of this prophetic fruitfulness. Keep her charism unaltered and follow her example, and from Heaven she will not fail to sustain you in your daily journey."

But the Devil hates humble souls consecrated to God.  Which is why he raises others up to attack such souls.  The Devil knows the Sacred Scriptures better than you and me.  Recall how he tempted the Lord Jesus in the desert by quoting from the Scriptures.  And the Adversary knows full well that God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble." (1 Peter 5:5).  Such an attack on Blessed Mother Teresa has been issued by Marian Horvat, in an article published by "Tradition in Action," an anti-Semitic organization which also has problems with Pope John Paul II and the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.

Needless to say (for those who are sane), an attack on the good name of Blessed Mother Teresa is very troubling.  For it would seem to indicate a level of pride which is nothing less than demonic.  It is the Church, through her Supreme Pontiff, which has declared Mother Teresa to be "Blessed."

More on "Tradition in Action" here.

Read More

America Needs Fatima reports: Jesuit run Marquette University to hire former U.S. Senator Russ Feingold to teach

Mr. Robert Ritchie of America Needs Fatima writes, "Catholic and Jesuit run Marquette University will hire former U.S. Senator Russ Feingold to teach a course about law and the US Senate in the spring. Feingold's pro-abortion, pro-homosexual voting record as a US Senator is a public fact. He also approved partial birth abortion and voted against prayer in schools. Is this who we want teaching the next generation of Catholic lawyers at Marquette University? Among other things, Feingold voted NO on: restricting UN funding for population control policies, defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP, prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion, barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions, expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines, notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions, criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime, maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions, banning human cloning

But there's more. According to Pro-life Wisconsin: "Feingold is hardly Marquette's first controversial professor, however. Two current Marquette professors are also on the Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin Board: Jacqueline Boynton and Daniel Maguire."

This is outrageous. It's very troubling that Marquette would hire someone who publicly and consistently opposes Catholic teaching on key moral issues. And it's time we voice our opinion against this scandalous, public and blatant violation of the Catholic sense. So please take a moment right now to send an instant protest message to Marquette University.

Sign emergency e-protest message to Marquette University

Thank you!"


Marquette University Law School

Joseph D. Kearney
Dean and Professor of Law
joseph.kearney@marquette.edu
Phone: (414) 288-1955


Marquette University
Fr. Robert A. Wild, S.J., President
O'Hara Hall, 101
P.O. Box 1881
Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881
robert.wild@marquette.edu
Phone: 414-288-7223

Related reading: A culture of infidelity at Marquette University.

Read More

More questions over Barack Obama's place and date of birth

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States,...shall be eligible to the Office of President.." (Constitution of the United States, Article II, Section I).


Patrick Wood, a global prophecy expert, has said, "As previously noted in Pawns of the Global Elite, Barack Obama was groomed for the presidency by key members of the Trilateral Commission. Most notably, it was Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller in 1973, who was Obama’s principal foreign policy advisor. The pre-election attention is reminiscent of Brzezinski’s tutoring of Jimmy Carter prior to Carter’s landslide election in 1976. For anyone who doubts the Commission’s continuing influence on Obama, consider that he has already appointed no less than eleven members of the Commission to top-level and key positions in his Administration."




Related reading here.

Read More

Peekaboo civility and a definition of what is "rational" from the White House

It was just over a week ago that President Obama and the White House were calling for a return to civility and calm rhetoric in American public discourse.  Now the White House is calling the mental health of those who don't believe Barack Obama was born in Hawaii into question, suggesting that such people are irrational.  White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, during Monday's White House briefing, said, "I think rational people have - have long ago, many when they first saw and heard the president, come to the conclusion of his citizenship."  See here.

But as Dr. Kreeft has reminded us, "Usually, people seem to choose what to believe not by looking at the evidence but by looking at ideological labels, especially 'liberal' or 'conservative,' or by asking which group of people they want to be associated with, or by vague feelings and associations evoked by an idea within their consciousness, rather than by looking at the idea itself and the reality it points to outside their consciousness."  Isn't this exactly what Mr. Gibbs is suggesting happened?  He suggests that many people, "when they first saw and heard the president," came to "the conclusion of his citizenship."

Well gosh darn, that's a really rational approach.  I saw and heard Barack Obama speak and came to the conclusion that he was a U.S. citizen.  And this even though his birth certificate cannot be produced.

Not only does civility come and go at the White House, so does rational thought.

Read More

"If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a slave of Christ.."

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed! Am I now currying favor with human beings or God? Or am I seeking to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a slave of Christ." (Galatians 1: 8-10).

If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a slave of Christ.  How quickly some forget these words. Fr. Felix Sarda Y Salvany, in his book entitled Liberalism is a Sin writes, "Are not your vigorous denunciations, it is urged against us, harsh and uncharitable, in the very teeth of the teaching of Christianity which is essentially a religion of love? Such is the accusation continually flung in our face. Let us see what its value is. Let us see all that the word charity signifies.

The catechism, that popular and most authoritative epitome of Catholic theology, gives us the most complete and succinct definition of charity; it is full of wisdom and philosophy. Charity is a supernatural virtue which induces us to love God above all things and our neighbors as ourselves for the love of God. Thus after God, we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, and this not in any way, but for the love of God and in obedience to His law. And now what is to love? Amare est velle bonum, replies the philosopher: "To love is to wish good to him whom we love." To whom does charity command us to wish good? To our neighbor, that is to say, not to this or that man only but to everyone. What is that good which true love wishes? First of all supernatural good; then goods of the natural order, which are not incompatible with it. All this is included in the phrase "for the love of God."

It follows, therefore, that we can love our neighbor, when displeasing him, when opposing him...If it is shown, that in displeasing or offending our neighbor, we act for his good, it is evident that we love him even when opposing or crossing him. The physician cauterizing his patient or cutting off his gangrened limb may none the less love him. When we correct the wicked by restraining or by punishing them none the less do we love them. This is charity and perfect charity. It is often necessary to displease or offend one person, not for his own good, but to deliver another from the evil he is inflicting. It is then an obligation of charity to repel the unjust violence of the aggressor; one may inflict as much injury on the aggressor as is necessary for the defense. Such would be the case should one see a highwayman attacking a traveler. In this instance, to kill, wound, or at least take such measures as to render the aggressor impotent, would be an act of true charity.

The good of all good is the divine good, just as God is for all men the neighbor of all neighbors. In consequence the love due to a man inasmuch as he is our neighbor ought always to be subordinated to that which is due to our common Lord. For His love and in His service we must not hesitate to offend men. The degree of our offense towards men can only be measured by the degree of our obligation to him. Charity is primarily the love of God, secondarily the love of our neighbor for God's sake. To sacrifice the first is to abandon the latter. Therefore to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a true act of charity. Not to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a sin.

Modern Liberalism reverses this order. It imposes a false notion of charity; our neighbor first, and, if at all, God afterwards. By its reiterated and trite accusations of intolerance, it has succeeded in disconcerting even some staunch Catholics. But our rule is too plain and to concrete to admit of misconception. It is: Sovereign Catholic inflexibility is sovereign Catholic charity. This charity is practiced in relation to our neighbor when in his own interest, he is crossed, humiliated and chastised. it is practiced in relation to a third party, when he is defended from the unjust aggression of another, as when he is protected from the contagion of error by unmasking its authors and abettors and showing them in their true light as iniquitous and pervert, by holding them up to the contempt, horror and execration of all. It is practiced in relation to God when, for His glory and in His service, it becomes necessary to silence all human considerations, to trample under foot all human respect, to sacrifice all human interests, and even life itself to attain this highest of all ends. All this is Catholic inflexibility and inflexible Catholicity in the practice of that pure love which constitutes sovereign charity. The saints are the types of this unswerving and sovereign fidelity to God, the heroes of charity and religion. Because in our times there are so few true inflexibles in the love of God, so also are there few uncompromisers in the order of charity. Liberal charity is condescending, affectionate, even tender in appearance, but at bottom it is an essential contempt for the true good of men, of the supreme interests of truth and of God. It is human selflove usurping the throne of the Most High and demanding that worship which belongs to God alone."

Pope Benedict XVI has said that, "The proclamation of the Gospel requires a communication which is at once respectful and sensitive."  See here.  This is often the case.  But not always.  Sometimes (even very often), more is required.  St. Francis de Sales, a Doctor of the Church, in his Introduction to the Devout Lfe, expresses himself: "If the declared enemies of God and of the Church ought to be blamed and censured with all possible vigor, charity obliges us to cry wolf when the wolf slips into the midst of the flock and in every way and place we may meet him."  Charity obliges us to oppose the wolf, "in every way and place we may meet him."  Both those wolves which attack within the Church.  And those wolves which attack from without.


Why else would Pope John XXIII have said: "...as long as we are journeying in exile over this earth, our peace and happiness will be imperfect. For such peace is not completely untroubled and serene; it is active, not calm and motionless. In short, this is a peace that is ever at war. It wars with every sort of error, including that which falsely wears the face of truth; it struggles against the enticements of vice, against those enemies of the soul, of whatever description, who can weaken, blemish, or destroy our innocence or Catholic faith." (No. 93).

With all due respect to the Holy Father (and he has my full respect and loyalty), sometimes the proclamation of the Gospel must be vigorous as Saint Francis de Sales reminded us.  After all, if we were still trying to please people, we would not be slaves of Christ.

Read More