Concerning Apostolic Authority and Demonic Possession

It’s a very telling sign of the times that in the past year, Satanists are now openly conducting “black masses”. First was the one a few months ago in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and this Saturday there is one scheduled in a civic auditorium in Oklahoma City, where a consecrated host was to be used until the Archbishop filed a lawsuit against the Satanic church to recover it.

A black mass is an “inversion” of the Catholic mass. It should be somewhat shocking to us that some Satanists have more faith in the Real Presence than Catholics do; a black mass isn’t truly one without a consecrated host. The demons who surround these Satanists know what they are doing and they know who and what they attack by what they do.

This should tell us something about Catholicism. When Satan or one of his minions attempts to mock Christ, their primary action is not to take the Bible and stomp on it. They don’t steal water from the Baptist church and pee in it. They don’t abscond with tracts from the Jehovah’s Witnesses and deface them. They don’t sneak into Mormon temples and make off with their special garments for use in Satanic rituals.

Satanists steal the Eucharist, the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, which they desecrate in a variety of ways during their “black mass”. 

Satan, his demons, and those people he imprisons to serve him on earth know that the Church has the authority to send evil back to Hell. Satan and his demons must respect the Church’s authority, because her authority comes from Jesus himself.

14785140495_f9104640ed_oIn Matthew 16:19, Jesus gives authority over his Church to St. Peter, the first pope: “Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Jesus gives the power to all the apostles at 18:18: “Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Jesus “cast out the spirits with his word, and he healed all that were sick” (Matthew 8:16). Sometimes Jesus exorcised from a distance (Matthew 15:22; Mark 7:25). Sometimes the demons recognized Him as “the Holy One of God” (Mark 1:24). He gave the Apostles the authority to cast out demons in His name. (Matthew 10:1 and 8; Mark 6:7; Luke 9:1; 10:17).

Consider this article concerning Tulsa exorcist Monsignor Patrick Brankin, who was appointed the exorcist for the Diocese of Tulsa about four years ago. Before he was appointed, he was asked to investigate a case because the diocese “was unable to find an exorcist to handle it”. Msgr. Brankin went to visit the afflicted person “even though he had not yet been appointed as an exorcist.” On the first visit:

He found the person crouched in a corner of a room.

Brankin said the demon in the person immediately recognized him as a priest, without looking at him, and pronounced smugly that it knew Brankin had not been given the authority to exorcise it.

That scared me,” Brankin said. [I'll bet it did. Imagine sharing a room with a powerful, unknown malevolence that knows there's nothing you can do.]

Months later, after undergoing exorcism training in Rome, working with an experienced exorcist, and being “given faculties” (commissioned) as an exorcist, Brankin returned. This time, he said, the demon said it knew he had been given faculties and feared him.

The victim was successfully exorcised and is living a healthy Christian life, Brankin said.

Demons don’t fear priests on their own; but a priest who acts under the authority of his bishop — a successor of the Apostles — is to be feared, because it is the same authority that Jesus gave and it can send a demon straight back to Hell.

If Authority granted by Jesus to the Church compels obedience by demons and Satan himself, what can we say when tasked with obedience to the Church ourselves? Shall we dissent? Shall it be the same “Non serviam” uttered by Lucifer?

In contrast to angels and demons (i.e., fallen angels), we humans are capable of disobeying God and the authority granted His Church, because God gives us that freedom. But He gives us freedom so that we might “choose the good”; He will hold us accountable for how we use the freedom He gives.

Rather than Apes: “Planet of the Mice”?

Because it’s a totally good idea, and science fiction has never suggested that we need to worry about genetically-engineered mice with human brain genes. I can’t wait for Phase 2, when the super-smart rodents are given cobra genes for venom and eagle genes for flight and talons. And, I’m really looking forward to more of this in real life:


Same-Sex Marriage Violates the Rights and Dignity of Children

As a matter of natural law, a child possesses a right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to one another in marriage. (CCC 2376). No one has a right to a child; rather, “only the child possesses genuine rights: the right ‘to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents,’ and ‘the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception.'” (CCC 2378).

The ubiquity of children born or raised outside traditional marriage is not a valid defense for its legitimacy. Such situations are not optimal for children, although some situations may be better in some fashion than other potential circumstances. 

Same-sex “married” couple Bob and Joe can engage in same-sex activity a million times and will never make a baby. Babies come from a father’s sperm and a mother’s egg. In terms of procreation, “parents” can never be so unless one parent is a mother and the other a father.

Today I received an e-mail alert concerning California Assembly Bill 1951, which is currently sitting on Governor Brown’s desk, awaiting signature. This bill represents an advancement of the euphemistic, erroneous, and illusory claims of those seeking to normalize same-sex relationships in the context of the human family; it is an assault upon the sanctity of the family and the human personLegality is not the same as justice for those affected. 

If signed, AB 1951 will modify gender-specific labeling on every certificate of live birth recorded in the state. Birth certificates will have lines for two “Parents”. Each designated “Parent” will provide a checkbox option to identify if the parent is a “Mother”, “Father” or “Parent”. According to the Legislative Analysis of the Bill (go here and search ‘1951’), the law:

Requires the State Registrar, beginning January 1, 2016, to modify birth certificates to recognize same-sex couples, allowing for a gender neutral option on the certificate
identifying a “parent.”

….the current practice in completing a birth certificate
limits the choices for a same-sex couple, forcing same-sex parents to inaccurately place one of their names in the “Father” or “Mother” field.

….this bill will allow same-sex parents to accurately identify each parent as Mother, Father, or Parent in check boxes, allowing for birth certificates to reflect two mothers or two fathers, as well as a gender-neutral parent option.

Equality California, the sponsor of this bill, writes that it will allow same-sex couples to eliminate inaccurate designations on California birth certificates, stating that the current forms that designate parents as just “mother” and “father,” regardless of the gender of the parent are confusing, often inaccurate, and do not reflect the realities of modern families.

It will therefore be possible and legally permissible for any birth certificate to state that a child is born of two “parents”, but not also a mother and father. This is, of course, something entirely contrary to Truth and the natural rights of the human person.

The basis given for this assault upon the rights of the human person is that this will better “reflect the realities of modern families”, which is a euphemistic way of identifying less than just 1% of the state’s population.

According to 2010 Census data, in California there were 494,058 children age “0” (i.e., newly born) statewide. There were 23,346 children under the age of 18 living in households headed by male same-sex couples in 2010. There were 37,841 children under the age of 18 living in households headed by female same-sex couples in 2010. In total there were 61,187 children living in households headed by same-sex couples.

Assuming an even distribution of ages in those households, and dividing the total by 19, there were 3,220 children “born” to same-sex couples in the same period that there were 494,058 children born statewide, or just 0.65% of the total children born in the state.

This isn’t about fairnessconfusion, or even a proper reflection of the realities of modern family. This is about forcing society at large to affirm and normalize the bad “choices” of a tiny minority of individuals. These choices — and society’s affirmation of them — harm children.

As a result of the passage of AB 1951, any children born in this state will be potentially deprived of official recognition from their government that they have a FATHER and a MOTHER. Further, every child, regardless of the options selected by his or her “parents”, will be deprived of official recognition from their government that they have a right to a FATHER and a MOTHER.

Same-sex marriage affects my marriage. Same-sex marriage affects the rights of everyone. This is just one example.




More Fodder for the Cry Room Debate

I’ve written on this topic extensively, here, here, and I even suggested that Pope Francis might agree with me here. Some people objected. Now the Chairman of the Evangelization Committee for the Church in England and Wales, The Rt. Rev. Kieran Conry, has publicly stated that “sound of children was a ‘really good noise’ to hear in church” (mirroring the Pope’s own comments) and that “Church is not for my generation, it’s for all generations, and I would never comment on children’s noise in church and would discourage any priest to make any comment.” Read the rest here.

Huzzah for His Excellency, Bishop Conry!

Know-Nothing Redux: Catholic Judges should Recuse Themselves

A group called “Fund Education Now” argues that a state court judge presiding over multi-year litigation over school choice in Florida cannot be impartial because of her association with Catholic “interests” and her “relationship with Catholic doctrine.”

Know-Nothings exist. They think that Catholic doctors shouldn’t practice medicine because they won’t prescribe artificial contraception or refer for abortions, and judges shouldn’t be judges because they must be under the influence of Catholic doctrine, and Catholic pharmacists should be fired from their jobs for following their conscience.

A “New Human Species”? Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!

In God we Trust? Source: Wikimedia Commons; Author: NobbiP

In God we Trust? Source: Wikimedia Commons; Author: NobbiP

According to a researcher at the “Global Brain Institute… mankind is undergoing a major ‘evolutionary transition'”.

He says that the shift in human functioning over the next 40 or 50 years will be so dramatic that humanity will “evolve” into a new kind of species.

The hallmarks of this new species (according to the article):

  • A “bigger” brain (through the use of software and computers, not increased learning)
  • Increased hearing (through implants, i.e., Bluetooth or equivalent)
  • Larger guts and butts (less exercise, eating more)
  • A smaller penis (yay, evolution!)
  • Red eyes (from staring at a screen all day)
  • Increased language skills (ostensibly from the “upgraded brain” noted above)
  • Fingers with “smart chip” implants
  • A longer lifespan (at least 120 years) (since we’ll be fatter, eating more, and more sedentary, this longer lifespan will be achieved [again] through technological manipulation)
  • Delayed sexual maturity and extended reproductive age

The theory of evolution is a biological process which, through “natural selection“, leads to changes in inherited characteristics over the course of generations. Adherents of the theory claim that it has been at work for the last 3-4 billion years. The features of this new anticipated evolutionary “species” are not inherited, naturally selected, or generational. Arguably (at least from my perspective), these new traits aren’t even desirable.

So, what’s the “danger” part?

Source: Wikimedia Commons; Author: NobbiP

Source: Wikimedia Commons; Author: NobbiP

Garbage bunk science like this is going to lead to the most powerful eugenics movement the world has ever seen. If the “new” species relies on technology to exist, only the privileged (i.e., the ones who can afford the technology) will attain to the status of being part of the new species.

Meanwhile, the “un-evolved” humans will remain in the world, but their status as not belonging to the new “evolved” species will demote them to existence at the service of the evolved. Only the evolved will possess the top tier of rights in the new society.

Consider this statement from the article:

Global society at the moment is a complete mess, but in crisis there is opportunity, and in apocalypse there can be metamorphosis.

I think the next system humanity creates [as if humanity "created" the current system] will be far more sophisticated, fair, and abundant than our current civilisation.

The Ruling Class awaits that moment in time when it can use human progress to create the machine that will lead to a permanent separation of classesThe lower classes won’t be poor people; they’ll be an inferior species who do not enjoy the same rights as the evolved.

And then the poverty problem will finally be solved.

Post-Canonization: New Feast Days Announced

20140416-235242.jpgOn September 11, Pope Francis added optional memorials to the Roman Calendar for the recently canonized popes:

St. Pope John XXIII: October 11 (opening day of first session of Vatican II)

St. Pope John Paul II: October 22 (anniversary of his papal inauguration)

Sts. John XXIII and John Paul II, ora pro nobis.