Church Militant The Vortex Feed

TRANSCRIPT

Surveying the wreckage that is the Church in the West, a normal person would ask himself, "What's left? Really, is there anything still here?" Well, yes and no.

The Faith as it once was lived out — carried ashore by missionaries and legal immigrants — over the centuries, that's pretty much gone. There are certainly pockets (and they are growing), but at the present moment, the Church of Nice — which is in a death spiral — still has the numbers (not to mention money and buildings) on its side.

It doesn't really have the Faith, but it does have the material wealth needed to hang on for at least the current crop of crooked bishops to go to their graves. How much longer beyond that? Well, good question. Odds are — the smart money says — not too terribly long after they all die; give it five years, maybe 10 on the outside.

Now for the other side of the ledger, the increasing Church — the one that the likes of Bp. Robert Barron mislabel as "traditionalists."

They aren't as much traditionalists as they are orthodox, like Church Militant. We've never claimed to be "traditionalists," but we absolutely stand on (and die on, if necessary) our orthodoxy. In fact, the squishy term "traditionalist" doesn't even seem to have any kind of agreed-upon definition.

To some, it means being a sedevacantist or a member of the SSPX cult, with its ties to Nazism and sex abuse cover-up. Still others think it means simply an adherence to the traditional Latin Mass and nothing more.

So when Barron tries (and fails) to lump all non-Church-of-Nice Catholics into the "traditionalist" basket, he really reveals his complete ignorance of the current landscape in the Church.

But whatever traditional means to whoever, no one is confused over what orthodoxy means. Unlike "traditionalist," orthodoxy actually does have a definition: It means "true teaching."

Church of Nice supporters wouldn't know orthodoxy if it was a dog and bit 'em. Many of them have spent decades at this point being lied to (or actually, better stated, subtly deceived).

It originated with the modernist bishops and their seminary faculty back in the 1960s and 70s and moving forward. Those men — the ones who taught the current bishops when they were just little gay seminarians — those men instilled the corruption we see today now exploding all over the Church, like time bombs going off everywhere.

But just like no explosion wipes out absolutely everything, so too the modernist bomb that went off didn't reach every last soul. Some survived. Some, true, were wounded. Some were deeply wounded, but not everyone was killed in the explosion.

Some of the survivors and their children are now beginning to comb over the wreckage and are finding it has become the haunt for greedy old queens and careerists in miters. Unlike the families they destroyed, they personally profited from the destruction.

In fact, they have deluded themselves into thinking that the Church burning to the ground is actually some kind of improvement, a progressive triumph. Holding hands during the Our Father like half-witted Protestants, that's what these misguided Catholics who don't really know what being Catholic is have been told: Hold hands, wave at each other, enjoy fellowship, have a donut, listen to Fr. Gay tell a stupid joke and then go on about himself (in a womanly voice of course).

This is the Church of Nice on full display: A body of people who don't know what they stand for, so they will fall for anything and accept anything. A recent National Review article last week pointed out this about Kamala Harris:  "She embodies the future of American religion: In a time of expanding religious pluralism, the country's younger generation, many of them children and grandchildren of immigrants, will recognize in Harris a kind of multi-faith and spiritual belonging unfamiliar to the mostly white Christian majority of past decades."

That's true. In fact, the article title called Harris "the future of American religion." Hard to argue with it. In fact, all that nonsense of being spiritual and accommodating of a multiplicity of faiths, that all began in the Catholic Church under the crooked bishops.

It's still carried out and going on now by just the newest crops of crooked bishops. If that's not bad enough (Kamala being the future face of religion in America), the National Catholic Reporter — the heretical paper — went so far as to say that Miss Green New Deal herself, "AOC," is the future of the Catholic Church.

They actually missed the mark. AOC isn't the future, she's the present — a phony Catholic "committed to social justice" but really committed to herself. Again, like Harris, AOC has the U.S. bishops to thank.

None of this would have been possible without the meltdown of the Church. And don't think for a minute the meltdown was by accident. It was deliberate from the very first moment it came into focus. But where we are here is where we are.

All that can be done now is prepare for what's coming. And consider, even if the election swings Trump's way, what do you suppose will be the case in 2024? Trump is a singular force — really unrepeatable. 

He has only slightly more in common with the Republican establishment than he does with the Democratic establishment. Both hate his guts because he calls 'em like he sees 'em. And he's usually right, even if he gets a little Twitter happy. Who cares?

But it's that same resentment against Trump fueling the political left that is fueling the resentment on the theological left against orthodox Catholics. The theological Marxist establishment hates our guts, not really any less than the Church of Nice establishment hates our guts.

To both sides, orthodoxy is the evil that dare not speak its name. The frightening thing is that the Church of Nice and the theological Left (and there isn't a lot of sunlight between them) are pretty closely aligned with the actual Marxist Left. And they too, having Satan as their father, likewise hate orthodox Catholics.

The growing band of orthodox Catholics is going to have to make some choices in a few months or a few years. But the choices are going to have to be made. The world will be less and less hospitable to you and to us, and then it will turn violent against us all.

Who knows how all this will unfold? But you better start preparing. State of grace, prayer life and sacraments. Stop listening to a bunch of crooked bishops who helped rain this evil down on your heads. There's not much left, really. Except you. You can still be pleasing to God. So get on with it.

TRANSCRIPT

So look what we found. This is the party registration information for Scranton, Pennsylvania bishop Joseph Bambera. And there it is, right there: Democrat — also known as "child executioner."

Bambera is a big-time homosexualist — meaning one of the men in miters turning the Church pink as fast as he can. He wants homosexuality normalized, which is one reason he has fellow homosexualist James Martin constantly tromping through Scranton on speaking gigs.

As many of you know, we are going through the country exposing whatever registered Democrat bishops (or self-professed) Democrat bishops we can find. More to come.

But Scranton's gay-friendly Bambera was easy to find because records are so open and easily accessible in the Keystone State. Bambera is a disgrace of a bishop, sitting atop tens of millions of dollars in diocesan endowment yet always poor-mouthing. 

He's also the bishop of whitewashed Msgr. Walter Rossi — on loan to the archdiocese of Washington, D.C. to run the Basilica of Immaculate Conception.

Bambera and Wilton Gregory put their collective heads together earlier this year and produced reports saying Rossi had done nothing wrong — this despite mountains of evidence that Rossi is gay, has had boyfriends (some of whom are fellow priests) and even shared a property with one of them.

But being actively gay (and even if you have a boyfriend) doesn't bother homosexualist bishops like Gregory and Bambera. But when it comes to being registered Democrats (you know, the party that hacks up babies in the womb and sucks their cut-up corpses through razorblade-tipped vacuum tubing those guys), not only is Bambera publicly registered as one, but it's a safe bet that many of his pals are as well.

Given the polarization in America these days, there's not a lot of cross-socializing going on between those with diametrically opposing worldviews. So the old "birds of a feather flock together" slogan is back and stronger than ever.

When Kamala Harris was selected by the people who control Biden as his running mate, the U.S. bishops' conference was doing backflips — so excited because Kamala would be helping people on the margins. Sure she will. Helping them on the trains to the internment camps for political opposition maybe.

So why would a staffer at the USCCB feel such freedom to tweet out her ecstasy at Harris' selection It's obvious — because the USCCB is all down with the Democrats. Her only sin would have been perhaps simply being a little too public about it.

Bambera and other U.S. bishops are registered, dyed-in-the-wool Democrats. They have been for decades. Even Providence, Rhode Island bishop Thomas Tobin admitted publicly in 2012 after Obama was reelected that he could not remain voting for Democrats.

Well, good. But seriously, in 2012? Talk about late to the game. But on the other hand, better late than never, we guess. Why are bishops like Bambera allowed to remain bishops (heck, even in the Church if they cling to their affiliation with the party of death)?

The Democrats today are straight-up child-slaughtering Marxists who are in love with sodomy and are doing everything they can to bring about the final conclusion to the sexual revolution — the destruction of America.

Bambera is a fraud of a Catholic. Sure, he's baptized. Sure, he's a bishop. So what? Doctors of the Church assure us there are loads of them in Hell. And how did those poor, miserable former bishops end up in Hell? By trading away their grace of office for worldly pleasure. That's how.

That trading away ultimately (sooner or later) results in a full-on loss of supernatural faith, and then, it's just a matter of time till Old Nick stokes up the furnace for them. No Catholic, much less a bishop, can vote for the party of death and not commit mortal sin.

The party is wracked with intrinsic evil which it converts into laws, and any Catholic who pulls the lever for them must beware that he's also pulling the lever for the trap door under his own feet. It's a party of godless, atheist Marxists.

And when a bishop like Bambera appears in his cathedral, he should be booed out of it by faithful Catholics. A bishop like him is a traitor to the Church, souls and the country. Yet he gets to stand up there and use his office — or rather abuse his office — for the promotion of child slaughter.

It doesn't matter whether he personally promotes it; he helps the killers get into power. Without quislings like Bambera they would never attain high office. But frauds like him have spent many years polluting the minds of the faithful into thinking good is evil and evil is good.

So when he, a registered Democrat, brings in spiritual terrorists like James Martin, he's bringing them in to further confuse the faithful. It sure would be interesting if everyone who saw this Vortex called the bishop [at (570) 207-2238] and asked why he is a registered Democrat.

(570) 207-2238.

Yep. (570) 207-2238.

Imagine if you called (570) 207-2238 and could ask him, when you dialed that number — (570) 207-2238 — why is he a registered member of the party of death.

Uh huh. (570) 207-2238. But even if he doesn't answer cuz he's busy with the Democratic National Convention, maybe helping Kamala get her hair all done up for tonight's big acceptance speech, even if he doesn't answer when you dial — (570) 207-2238 — then leave a voicemail.

We're certain they'll get back to you because, you know, at (570) 207-2238, they care about the people on the margins. In fact, at (570) 207-2238, the little people are all they care about, just not the littlest people, the ones truly on the margins.

If the Democrats can stir up all kinds of trouble about mail-in voting, well faithful Catholics can certainly do some phone-in voting, right? So phone (570) 207-2238 and let him know how you feel about him being a registered Democrat.

And then, it'll be on to some more bishops around the nation. Hiding under your robes has gone on long enough.

TRANSCRIPT

If you needed any proof that the swamp establishment is more than a little concerned with, first the Catholic vote and second, the influence outfits like Church Militant might have over it, look no further than a few articles that were published by the Marxist Left this weekend. The first one popped up in the Jesuit heretical online rag, America.

In this particular piece, the author Mike Lewis laments the division in the Church and how much the likes of Church Militant are responsible for it. His piece is entitled "Pope Francis' Critics Are Dividing the Church and Families — Including Mine."

In the piece, he cries over the divide that has arisen in the wake of Pope Francis' ascent to the throne of St. Peter and lays all current division at the feet of those who oppose him. He even goes on about how his own dying mother (God rest her soul) had become very suspicious of the pope for his agenda.

He says in particular, "Well-known Catholic apologists who openly encourage opposition to Pope Francis and the bishops — including extreme voices like Michael Voris of Church Militant ... have wildly popular multimedia platforms and go largely unchallenged by Church leaders." That last part is flat-out wrong. The liberal, Marxist-bishop crowd (along with many of their fellow sycophant, cowardly bishops) never miss a chance to tear into us.

Heck, Bp. Barron had just concluded a conference call a number of days earlier about how to deal with the faithful Catholic peasant online uprising — and America rag was one of the participants. So either Lewis was lying or uninformed. Maybe both. He follows the party line of the modernist Church of Nice of trying to paint opposition to the decades-long destruction of the Faith from within the Church as some recent opposition to Pope Francis and nothing more.

In that, he is lying. For the record, Mr. Lewis, Church Militant was decrying the filth of errant or gay or both types of bishops long before Pope Francis showed up. Watch any of our hundreds of Vortex episodes between 2009 and 2013. The fact that the sex abuse cover-ups and continuing appointments of bad bishops by essentially Cdl. Blase Cupich here in the United States is just that — a continuation of what we've been saying for years before Francis stepped onto the loggia.

But there is a method to the madness here by the likes of Lewis (as well as Barron) and many other bishops. In fact, in private discussions with other apostolates over the past year or so, I told them the modernist, Democrat-loving Church establishment is going to try and portray all of us as "enemies of the pope" so that what we say can be automatically discounted once the Catholic vote starts being fought for.

That warning and strategy is now coming to fruition and being employed. Lewis is lying through his teeth when he tries to trot that out. Church Militant is not an enemy of the pope. Unlike other outfits — who need to speak for themselves on this — we have never said he's not the real pope, or he's a heretic, or Benedict is still the secret real pope, or the conclave to elect Bergoglio was rigged.

We've never said anything like this for two reasons: No member of the laity can sit in judgment over a pope. Only God judges the pope. And then when the man who was pope dies and is no longer pope, a future pope can judge him and declare him an anti-pope. If others want to venture into those waters ahead of a future pope, you go right ahead, but I would greatly caution you spiritually.

Secondly, if the very men who were in the conclave — the likes of Mueller, Burke, Sarah and others — have publicly declared him pope and still do, and they have never said the conclave was rigged and Benedict was forced out and all those conclave conspiracy theories, then lay people better guard their speech.

So, as to Lewis' argument that Church Militant is somehow in the vanguard of opposition to the pope, try again. What we are (and have been) in the vanguard of is fighting the destruction of the Faith by modernist forces in the Church that, on a political scale, embrace Marxism, globalism and all its inherent evils dressed up as goods.

There is nothing — repeat nothing — good about Marxism, globalism or modernism. Marxism has cost the lives of hundreds of millions and modernism has cost the souls of, most likely, more. Lewis is a modernist Catholic — his bio at the end of his piece says he worked for the Catholic Climate Covenant, a hogwash outfit trying to advance globalism by tying fake manmade climate-change to theology and so reengineer Church teaching, deflecting from actual dogmas and substituting them with more social-justice-warrior glop.

But while Lewis' little whining and pining piece about division in the Church was sitting in the back rooms of the Church-only world, it was just that — isolated to a small discussion among those who can argue these points. But then, miraculously (and of course, "coincidentally"), a follow-up story on it suddenly appears the next day in, drum roll please, the Daily Beast (appropriately named, theologically speaking).

This piece was penned by Barbie Latza Nadeau, who also, of course, contributes to CNN as well as Newsweek. Seeing the connections here? Faithful Catholics who speak up and challenge the Marxist narrative in the Church have drawn the eye of Sauron. In her useless screed entitled "This Secret Society of Priests Still Won't Recognize Pope Francis," Nadeau makes a failing effort to tie us to this "secret society," whoever they are.

She essentially cut and pasted Lewis' idiocy, naming us as "popular anti-Francis voices that seek to push the opposition to this pope, including Michael Voris of Church Militant." Again, with all the savvy of an out-of-control, over-sized windmill, she as well as Lewis simply ignore (or lie) about what Church Militant has been about for years before Pope Francis arrived on the scene.

And for the record, as long as gay, Marxist, globalist bishops are in place, we will be about it all after Pope Francis has departed the scene. It ain't about Francis (as I have privately counseled numerous well-known Catholics online who have trained their guns on Francis).

One day Francis is going to be gone. Then what? Are you going to start your caterwauling against Pope Francis II? The problem is the swamp that keeps producing crooked bishops who have no supernatural faith and abuse anything and everything they can get their grubby, little Judas fingers on.

They have wrecked the Liturgy, the devotional life, the seminaries, education — in fact, you can't come up with one single area these theological-modernist perverts have not disfigured beyond belief. Not only do they clam up about the biggest evil engulfing the world right now — abortion of hundreds of millions brought to you by the sexual revolution of the Marxists — many of them are actively gay or supportive of it.

The current cardinal archbishop of Newark, New Jersey, Joseph Tobin used to say the gay Masses for Dignity here in Detroit when he was a lonely little Redemptorist being promoted up the ladder to increase the destruction. James Martin's addressing of the Democratic National Convention is perfect casting. 

The Democrats don't believe in God, and neither does James Martin. Not the God. Martin is a tool of the Devil, and the Devil is using him at every turn. But the Martin invocation is fitting because it shows exactly what we have been talking about here at Church Militant. It's that foldover, that crossover between the world of Marxist theology and Marxist politics that Church Militant has been explaining to faithful Catholics for more than two years now.

You cannot escape the politics of all this. A number of supporters have contacted us over these many months and asked why we spend so much time on politics. James Martin — homoheretic extraordinaire — is going to be standing before a crowd of bloodthirsty, child-killing, race-baiting, sodomy-marriage, America-hating Democrats and giving them the very thin appearance of having something to do with the work of God. 

How do you imagine that came to pass? Because, behind the scenes, the political and theological Marxists have married and joined common cause in overthrowing the Church and Her teachings. That's a multi-pronged strategy — one prong of which is to create a false narrative around Church Militant that we are enemies of the pope. Untrue.

We are loyal sons of the Church and always will be. In fact, unlike the Martins of the world (and his supporting bishops, like Robert Barron, Tobin and Cupich), we are keenly aware that our eternal salvation depends precisely — rests directly — on what we do here. The truth must be declared regardless of what others say, even when those others are phony Catholics hiding behind the corporal works of mercy as well as their collars and miters.

You have the Serpent directing your efforts. We have St. Michael and the Queen of Heaven directing ours. 'Nuff said.

TRANSCRIPT

It's not really shocking that, in a political landscape dominated by identity politics, certain "types" would gravitate around one party or another, one candidate or another. It's not really hard and fast — or a guarantee — but the Marxist media assures us it is the case, so it must be true. Remember, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.

So, buzzing around the Biden-Harris ticket are child-murderers; homosexual activists; climate-change fanatics; illegal-immigration, open-border enthusiasts; poorly catechized Catholics and so forth. You know — the Marxists. Trump, of course, has pretty much the other end of the spectrum: Patriots, pro-lifers, religious-minded and so forth. You know — actual Americans.

There is some crossover (but not much, particularly in the increasingly polarized society). But there's another group that kind of gets to fly under the radar, but which really bears much closer scrutiny. That group is the U.S. bishops. And that body deserves much scrutiny because of the disproportionate influence they have over voters.

It's not that the individual Catholic voter hangs on every word emanating from the U.S. hierarchy (thank God), but they have created an environment through decades of deceit, deception and distortion that gives the impression that the Catholic Church aligns better with the Democratic Party than Republicans.

But it doesn't. Not even close. The Democratic Party platform supports outright intrinsic evils while also denying natural law. But there are bishops in the U.S. who are all down with that evil, and Church Militant thinks that those bishops should just come clean and stop hiding behind each other's skirts.

We all know that a sizable number of clergy are homosexual. Even James Martin admits that. Heck, he even upbraided them and said they all need to come out of the closet and fess up. You'll rarely hear this out of Church Militant's mouth, but we agree with Martin. He should start with himself: Admit it or deny it, Father — come on.

But he is certainly not alone. How about Lexington, Kentucky bishop John Stowe. How about it Bishop? Are you a homosexual? We mean, why should you get to abuse your office to promote all kinds of moral filth, pretending you don't have a dog in the fight. You house the anti-Catholic "Fortunate Families" outfit in your diocese, you speak at gay conferences like New Ways Ministry and you even share the stage with known homopredator clerics. But that sexual abuse is okay, right — because it's all in "the family"?

Look, if you're a big, ol' queen, fine. We can use that as a jumping-off point to start talking about all this. But until you come clean, you can't be taken seriously because you're fundamentally dishonest and untrustworthy. And is there anything else that can be said more disgraceful of a successor of the Apostles?

So when you publish social media posts about how evil President Trump is, why should anyone listen? You haven't shown your cards — and we suspect you may have two or three queens. Speaking of gay bishops, how about Joseph Bamabera of Scranton, Pennsylvania who has had James Martin in the diocese so many times to promote sodomy that it raises questions about what's really going on there.

Bambera is so effeminate that some of his own clergy call him "Bambi," and Bambera has been outed previously by Church Militant as a registered Democrat. You know, a card-carrying member of the party that hacks up little children and sells their pieces for profits and also promotes gay sex like nobody's business.

Giving Bambi the benefit of a doubt in presuming he doesn't actually support the chopping up of little babies, whatever could be his reason for remaining in the party? While abortion is the religion of the Marxists, taxpayer-supported, non-stop, constitutionally protected gay sex is a really close second. So why would any bishop be a Democrat and throw his support behind child murderers and gay sex? To protect the spotted owl? Seriously? Come on!

These exact same questions can be asked of Cupich in Chicago, McElroy in San Diego, Tobin in Newark and in quite a number of other places, some of which might escape scrutiny the first time around. The question is simple: Are you gay? Yes or No? Given the current climate in the Church and the world, every single Catholic has a right to know that.

Long gone are the days when bishops could be trusted — many of them even admit that. Good. At least that's a start. We won't go into the reasons we can't believe you or trust you; the list would need two eternities to be read aloud in its entirety. But a major reason you can't be trusted is because so many of you are homosexuals in hiding, working to destroy the Church from within. And you need to say out loud, all of you (which I suspect is a pretty sizable number, if you are homosexual. 

A simple "yes" or "no" would do. But of course, that will open up another set of questions for those of you who are gay. For example, how much do you let your sexual inclinations and attractions influence your politics, doctrine and well, frankly, your personal lives? It's abominable, given your track record, that you think we don't have a right to know this.

Of course we do. Faithful Catholics should be picketing your residences and chanceries demanding to know if you are homosexual. Much of the gay world supports the Democratic Party and brain-dead Biden. But you already know that, of course. You hate the religious air that surrounds the Republican Party, even if it is thin, questionable or even somewhat imagined.

You gay bishops hate God. You hate Scripture. James Martin even tweeted out that the Bible does say homosexuality is wrong and bad and all, but he added the Bible is wrong. Most importantly, you hate the Church. Admittedly, some of you have this love-hate relationship with the Church — you live with a tortured conscience, longing to have sex with men, maybe even actually doing so, but also knowing it's wrong. And you are unable to come to terms with the inner conflict.

You need to resign. You need to get out now and save your soul. And if you need a little help, then call on the laity. You all may not like it but what the Era of Trump has caused is the great unmasking — pun intended. Everyone is now learning where everyone else stands on everything, and as a result, everyone is realigning themselves.

We think that all you bishops should join the party. Come out of the closet. Like you buddy Jimmy says, come screaming out and declare what you are. It's probably safe to say that — while there would be a few surprises — most of you aren't gonna shock any of us. We already know who you are by the way you direct your politics.

We know many of you ran deep into the closet in seminary and have made a pretty comfortable life for yourselves. Well, time's up. Many of you are gay Democrats, which admittedly is kind of redundant. But regardless, your people need to start asking you. They need to go up to you after Mass (whether it's in Detroit, New York, Washington, D.C. or Fort Worth, and flat out ask you, "Are you gay?"

If there was ever a time for total exposure in the Church, this is the time. What the faithful need to understand is a large number of these men are more gay than they are Catholic, and they are doing everything they can think of to get you to vote Democrat. It's just helpful to know where a person stands. Nothing wrong with that, right your excellencies? A little actual honesty would be refreshing.

TRANSCRIPT

First off, allow us to say thank you to each and every one of you — a growing spiritual militia of supporters whose prayers, donations and premium subscriptions (as well as your chatting us up to friends and sympathetic clergy) allow us to keep the doors open. For the entire staff, thank you.

One of the great joys of working here is the likemindedness of the gang.  Every one of us is dedicated to the supernatural realities and truths as they are lived out in the natural world. This past weekend, as you probably know, we had our annual Strength and Honor Men's Retreat — by far the most heavily attended to date. It attracted men from all over the country.

The talks were fine and all that — booster shots for the soul we like to think of them as — but most important is the shared experience of the men, some of whom brought their sons. Some (maybe even most) men are refugees from the "Church of Nice" — lied to, deceived and deprived of authentic Catholic beauty, truth and glory for most of their lives, stretching back to their homes and schools as young boys.

It was heartening to see so many brought their sons, to see so many younger faces in the crowd. They get it. Authentic Catholics, men of goodwill, they get it. They just need it laid out for them, which, of course, we do. But in between the daily grind of working, shooting, editing, writing, making calls, talking to sources, praying in chapel first and last thing of the day, there is what I like to call our "our time."

That's the time where the faithful group of men and women who work here get to sit around and speculate on the big picture. Some of the things we ask and ponder and bat around don't really have any official Church teaching one way or the other — but the topics show the chops of this crowd. They freely quote St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, or this encyclical or that, or this or that passage of Scripture — not really to convince, but just to reflect, ponder, wonder really about the glory of God.

And we discuss all sorts of things: What will our relationships with our loved ones here on earth be like in Heaven, for example? As many of you who know my story may know, my mother Anne (whose prayers and offerings of her horrible cancer pains brought me back to the Church and where this apostolate was born), my dear sweet mom, was the victim of a vicious full-on rape when she was a young mother of my brother who was only 3 months old.

My mom was 20. She was barely off the boat from England, no more than a few months. I never knew that horror the entire time I was growing up and into adulthood, until the night my father and I buried my mother in New York's Westchester County. It was a filthy secret my father had kept for the 51 years they were married.

My mom's emotional health was shattered, and it remained that way until the day she died. I never knew her mentally or emotionally stable. Don't get me wrong — she was a beautiful soul, but deeply, deeply hurt and oftentimes lashed out from that pain. Childhood was difficult for me and my older brother, and marriage was a true cross for my dad.

I bring all this up to say, to speculate, to fathom the love of Almighty God — that my mom is now perfect. And I speculate, wonder in awe, what it will be like seeing her again (God willing) where no stain or pain of sin can ever touch her again. Will I recognize her, or fumble around like Mary Magdalene did at the tomb?

We all have questions — meaningful, wondering, ponderings about the next life: How it will be, how we will be. Our Blessed Lord told us to call the Divine Majesty "daddy," and I must admit, that's a little hard for me to get my head around. I believe it, of course; I just have a hard time picturing it. Our Lady being "mommy" seems much easier for some reason.

But what will that say of us, of how we will be? Will we each become physically like little sweet adorable 5-year-olds crawling all over Grandpa God's lap, pulling his beard while he laughs and loves us? And what about our guardian angels? We will see them in all their glory. I joke with mine frequently when I'm having ice cream that he won't ever be able to taste it. 

And yeah, I know — probably not good theology to tease your guardian angel, or so I've heard here at the apostolate. Bishop Sheen famously said there are no nursing homes in Heaven, only nurseries. Kind of hard imaging baby Bp. Sheen toddling around in big boy pants, but, we suppose, you don't need them in Heaven, right?

A fun discussion that arises — again, without any definitive conclusion — is will our pets be in Heaven with us? Like Rebel, for example. Hardly a day goes by where I don't look at that beautiful creature and think of the creative explosion of God, the innocence, and thank Our Lady for him. So yeah yeah, we know: We talk about it here all the time — they can't merit Heaven, etc. Their souls are not immortal. Of course not. 

But God bringing a creature back to life, restoring him — there's nothing contradictory in that act in the will of God. The innocent animal fell in the sin of Adam when creation was ripped apart. They did nothing to inherit that punishment of death. St. Thomas even ventures that it was something of an act of restorative justice of God that at the birth of Our Lord, it was the animals that were the first witnesses, even as far as one Christmas carol goes — the ox's breath keeping his little, cold body warm.

Who knows? We hope so. Just so long as cockroaches and centipedes can't get in. They can hang out in Hell. We have many, many discussions here. Not everything is about the calamity engulfing the Church and the world. In fact, it is precisely so that Catholics everywhere can learn the Faith and revel in the joys of its beauty, even what we don't understand and won't until we open our eyes in the next life: This is why we do what you see most of the time.

We report on the corruption, discuss the malfeasance, the deceptions, the lies, the filth, the abuse, the cover-up, the theft, the heresy, the dissent — every last bit of it. All that is meant, directly, to rob you of the glory of the Faith — of the ability to be sufficiently trained in the Faith, to swim in the Faith, to cry in awe, to feel like a babe in his mother's arms. The intended aim of all of this is to take that away from you, deprive you of what is, by right, yours.

The same is true in politics. And is why we are so dedicated to covering it. There are evil men (many in fact) who are an inch away from driving the Church and the world into a new dark age. They have cooperators in the Church just as the Pharisees had Judas. Catholics who know must fight this wickedness. If Our Lord permits it to engulf the world, then we will do whatever it takes in those circumstances.

If through the prayers and pleadings of the Queen of Heaven we are granted another short reprieve, then in some ways, the battle will be even more fierce. Since we don't know the future, we must fight and fight to whatever level each of us is called. But each of us must be all in, in our own circumstances, whatever they are.

The next life should be thought about, meditated on, even discussed every day among faithful Catholics, just like members of teams talk every day about winning the championship. Heaven — salvation — is the only lasting goal you have in this life.  As one final thought to ponder on a personal note, in our wonderful chapel here, each day we pray morning and evening prayer and livestream it. Please join us.

Many of us in our prayer books have Mass cards — the little holy cards we get when someone close to us dies. My mom's and dad's are obviously in my book, and sometimes with all the page-turning and so forth, they all get jumbled up. The other day, I noticed my dad's prayer card on the same page as the prayer card of the father of a dear friend whose dad had recently died.

I thought to myself, "How wonderful." Their cards are next to each other, and I hope they are near each other (however that happens) in the next life. Do they "talk" about me and my friend and everything going on here? How does that work? Anyway, I hesitantly sent that photo of the cards next to each other to my friend, a little nervous that it might upset her. (Her father died recently, as I said.)

Here was her answer back to me (slightly edited):

Aw no, that's nothing but pure sweetness. First time I've cried in a long while, but it's all good. I just remembered, last night I was thinking about the two of them in Heaven and how much my dad would love that because he always told me how much he liked your dad. I would have never remembered that had you not sent the photo.

This is how faithful Catholics around Church Militant talk with each other all the time because this is how faithful Catholics talk — even about whether their doggies will be in Heaven.

TRANSCRIPT

When a candidate picks a vice president, there's usually a solid reason for landing on that person. Either they can carry a state on election day, or they fill in a gap on the presidential nominee's resume — like in foreign policy, for example.

So Biden's pick of Kamala Harris is proving to be quite weird, practically brain-dead, in fact. First, she's from California — hardly a state that threatens to turn red, so no help there. And Kamala Harris has no real experience in anything significant other than screeching at and blasting and haranguing Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court hearings.

During her term in the U.S. Senate, she sponsored no bills of import, but just signed on to the usual list of Marxist claptrap. While she was in California as attorney general, in a far more friendly, Marxist environment, she was able to beat back pro-lifers and advance the cause of same-sex "marriage."

She's been picked by Biden because she's a woman and he was under intense pressure from Marxists to pick a black woman, which every single person on earth understands means African American. You know — descendants of slaves, grown up in poverty, victims of "white privilege." But Kamala checks none of those boxes — not a single one.

For starters, her father admits in an online biography that he is a descendant of Irishmen and his side of the family owned a plantation in Jamaica — one complete with slaves. Yep, slaves! You heard right. 

Kamala is a descendant of slave owners. Likewise, she has absolutely zero biological ties to the African American community. She is not descended from sharecroppers; her ancestors were not kidnapped from Africa and chained in slave-ship galleys and sold in markets. None of that applies to her. And that's just her father's side.

Her mother's side is even less applicable to the whole question of racism aimed at blacks. Her mother's family is from Madras, India. Mom was a cancer researcher who met and married Kamala's father in Berkeley, California in the 1960s when they were working and studying. A few years later, her parents divorced. Mom got a nice job at a Canadian university, and Kamala went to live with her mother where she grew up in a racist-free environment in Montreal.

Kamala has, in fact, had none of the usual experience of what everyone understands as the "American Black Experience." She's Jamaican and Indian — at least Obama was half black; Kamala is not black, as commonly understood.  Likewise, to curry favor with non-blacks when she was attorney general of California, she pursued a vigorous anti-crime policy that massively drove up incarceration rates of young black men. 

That's something her running mate, Joe Biden, also did when he was in the U.S. Senate — the same man who also verbally opposed desegregation in schooling. Kamala actually ripped him on stage at the party's primary debates for being a racist.

What's curious about all this is that a racist man who keeps insulting blacks with condescending comments and a fake African American woman (who is not of African descent, but Jamaican and Indian) will now march off on a "blacks need to vote for us because we are woke" campaign — which will prove to be one of the most hypocritical shams in the history of U.S. politics.

Likewise, a whole host of other weird questions arise from this pick. Kamala said she believed Tara Reade, the woman on Biden's staff back in the day who accused him of sexual assault. Harris said flat out that she believes Tara Reade. So on top of accusing Biden of being a segregationist — meaning a racist, she also believes her running mate is a rapist.

Out of her own mouth she has accused Biden of being a racist and a rapist. Don't forget those points. She's descended from slave owners and thinks her running mate is a rapist and a racist. You can't make this stuff up. Add on to the list that she herself is a public anti-Catholic bigot.

In 2018, at the Senate confirmation hearings for Brian Buescher for a federal judgeship, Kamala went off on him for his membership in the Knights of Colombus, specifically because the Catholic organization is opposed to abortion and same-sex "marriage." In short, Kamala was applying a religious litmus test to a federal judgeship.

Catholics had better beware of this monstrous ticket of fake-Catholic Biden and anti-Catholic Kamala. But the Marxist media won't tell you all that. In fact, they don't know what truth and accuracy are.

Anything, absolutely anything — any idea, policy or proposal they don't like — is automatically tagged as "violent." At the same time, they portray actual violent attacks against innocent Americans, business owners and police officers as "mostly peaceful protests." It's all surreal, like we've stepped through Alice's looking glass. 

A spoiled, pampered girl profiting from a system built on their imagined "white privilege" in another country — whose lineage includes actual bona fide slave owners — manages to now be in the vice-presidential slot for the United States. All this victimization — it's horrible. Poor dear. 

Neither the media nor Kamala herself can go near this third rail. She cannot admit her lineage, lest the truth come out. And if she admits it and blames it "on the past that she had nothing personally to do with," then the whole BLM argument blows up in their collective Marxist face. Remember when Elizabeth Warren had to out and out lie about her Native American heritage to gain advancement?

How is Kamala's story any different? She lies when she calls herself "African American," with everything that imports in 21st-century America. And if the campaign wants to try and hide behind the line that some Jamaicans came from Africa a zillion years earlier, well, everyone in America can play that game. So everybody is both every ethnicity and no ethnicity.

The Democrats play the race card: They use identity politics to get elected. They even go so far as nominating a descendant of slave owners. So every actual black woman in the Democratic Party should be asking right about now, "What's wrong with us, the descendants of slaves, as opposed to a descendant of slave owners?"

The Democrats do have racism high on their list of issues, just not in the way they pretend. In that way, much of the U.S. hierarchy resembles the Democrats — harping on about fake issues of social justice and the environment in order to advance worldwide Marxism. It's going to be a heckuva remaining 80 days or so.

TRANSCRIPT

As the U.S. presidential campaign quickly approaches its final stretch, the issue of God has been placed squarely on the table by President Trump. Over the past couple of weeks, Trump has picked up the theme a few times — in speeches, comments and tweets — and is correctly torching Biden as the candidate opposed to God and religion.

Trump labeled Biden a "godless Marxist" at one point, calling him "the most extreme left-wing candidate in history." Biden is going to "abolish the police, abolish the suburbs and is even against God," according to Trump. 

Then in Ohio last week, Trump kept dropping the bombs: "He's following the radical-left agenda — take away your guns, destroy your Second Amendment, no religion, no anything, hurt the Bible, hurt God." Trump continued, "He's against God. He's against guns." Naturally, the moment Trump started landing those kinds of blows, the Marxist media jumped in to defend their fellow traveler, Biden.

Even homoheretic James Martin couldn't resist taking the bait, tweeting out a snarky anti-Trump comment. The Washington Post concluded that Trump's comments were not rooted in a single point of reality, going out of their way to cheer, laud and pointedly defend Biden's Catholicism, telling readers Biden "was raised Irish Catholic, attended Catholic schools and still frequently carries rosary beads in his pocket."

All of that is true, but it applies to tens of millions of other fake Catholics in the United States who have fallen victim to the doctrinal filth and perversion of the bishops (spoken through the likes of James Martin). In fact, there are literally tens of millions of "Catholic" Joe Bidens walking around the country — some wearing collars and miters. It's just that only one is running for president.

Joe Biden is a straight-up heretic. He's backed by Planned Parenthood and is even in favor of taxpayer funding for abortion. He not only supports so-called gay marriage, he actually performs them. And yet, the U.S. bishops, pretty much a group of heretics themselves — at least in practice — refuse to excommunicate their buddy for a host of manifest public sins and countless sacrilegious Holy Communions, all of which stem from his public opposition to the Church — even while he carries a Rosary around in his pocket.

There's a very curious thing here not going unnoticed by a huge and growing number of Catholics: The bishops will not think twice about dumping a faithful priest or having a secret conference call on how to silence faithful Catholics online, but they will refuse to even mention this man's heresy. We've known for a while that the bishops, collectively speaking, couldn't care less about abortion. 

The issue is a pain in their rears because, to hear them tell it, except for that inconvenient slaughter of a million children a year (some after they've actually been born alive or their body parts are sold for vast sums), the Marxist, godless Democrats aren't really all that bad. They care about the environment and illegal immigration, right? So as one of their early fellow travelers used to say, you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette, right? 

It sort of sucks for those little kids, very little kids, but hey — it's not so bad that we would actually do something about it. A "strongly worded statement" we know no one will read should be good enough. In bringing up what pundits call "the God issue," Trump is nailing it. Biden is anti-God, and he is a Marxist. 

The only difference is that, unlike the Bolsheviks of 1917 rampaging through the streets, he puts on a nice suit, sits in his basement and lets BLM and Antifa rampage through the streets. This is Biden's third stab at winning the White House. He ran in 1998 as well as 2008. 

On the specific issue of his support for child slaughter, back then he used to say he didn't really, actually, directly support it — just the right of others to choose it. In short, he was personally opposed — a falsehood the bishops have let fester in the Church in the United States for decades. But when Biden started popping up at actual fundraisers for Planned Parenthood, that storyline went out the window.

And while Trump's characterization of Biden as being directly anti-religion might be — might be — an exaggeration (because we know he is opposed to the authentic religion on key points) it brings up another point germane to politics. When you elect a candidate to the White House, you are really blessing his worldview. It's not just him but the whole entourage he brings with him — the thousands of cabinet-level and administration officials who set about to implement that worldview. And on this score, Catholics should be deeply concerned.

Biden has pivoted so left, so fast that the claim by Trump that he is little else than a Trojan horse for the far-Left is true. Biden himself personally may not actually be dyed-in-the-wool anti-religion, anti-Bible and anti-God (although there is a lot of evidence to say so), but those who are propelling him to the White House (who will be in control if he's elected) most assuredly are.

Given what appears to be Biden's focus challenge — we'll leave it there — it is altogether reasonable to see him as little else than an empty shell that the Left will control from just behind the scenes. And then, if he gets elected, a stunning majority of Americans believe he will not serve out his first term. Then, his vice president will emerge with all the power.

While we don't yet know, as of this recording, who that will be, let's just say it won't be Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm. That woman, whoever she is, will be the worst that radical feminism has to offer — anti-man, anti-God and anti-religion.

Trump has brought up a theme here that cannot be ignored, although the bishops are happy to. The central issue of this campaign is God and the resultant morality that necessarily flows from a universe created and governed by God.

There can be, certainly, theological differences, especially in a nation largely Protestant — differences that need to be expunged. But those differences do not negate the need to understand that the driving issue is man's place in the universe relative to God. The most powerful nation in the history of the world now stands on the brink of either formally accepting the right order or formally rejecting it.

No other issue matters, for that is the paramount one.

TRANSCRIPT

An increasing number of Americans believe the likelihood of a civil war is growing. Over the past two years, the number saying they think a civil is anywhere from possible to likely has increased to 31%, with 40% of Republicans agreeing.

There is no doubt there is a massive polarization in the country, and it's not going away, regardless of who wins the election. That's why so many are now starting to look beyond the election and are speculating on what a civil war would look like.

Unlike the first one, where there was a clear geographical divide (i.e., the North and the South), this time, not so much. In '16, Trump won 30 states; Hillary won 20. But within the states that each candidate won, there were still sizable numbers of people who voted for the loser. So a lot of Hillary supporters live in Trump states, and a lot of Trump supporters live in Hillary states.

So looking at some kind of armed conflict based strictly on geography is more than a little murky. The United States of America are, straight up, no longer united in the most meaningful ways — philosophically and politically. Trump states and Hillary states simply hold two vastly different worldviews, and they vote accordingly. 

The problem for the Trump states is that every time they try to enact their worldview about, say, abortion, the courts step in and kill it. This is because of one simple reason: The Marxists quietly seized the courts decades ago and have enshrined child slaughter and, now, sodomy-marriage (as well as a host of other evils) in law.

But enormous numbers of Americans — huge swaths of the population — vehemently disagree with these rulings, as well as many others, and do not want to live under these dictates from judges. They do not want their children indoctrinated with Marxist ideology in government schools; they do not want them to be taught homosexuality is normal, that killing the pre-born is right, that their tax dollars can be exploited by criminal career politicians and so forth.

Trump captured 46% of the national vote to Hillary's 48% — neither obtained a majority. And the final count is so close that many are wondering how the Marxist ideology is advancing across the country so fast (as if they had won some kind of massive majority). So a discussion is arising — and it bears some deep thought — about the United States splitting up, the red states forming their own nation, and the blue states their own. 

Balkanization it's called, referring to the Balkans (countries of southeastern Europe) being split up. And this is just one possibility on the table because, whatever happens, the current situation is unsustainable. The Left has control of every institution in the country. The control is firm. So it is hardly surprising that the question of how to secure safety, peace and morality for families has arisen. 

That's why a meaningful number of voters are looking down the road and worrying about civil war. In some ways, the preparatory work for this is already starting: Political conservatives are now taking a long, hard look at the long-term benefit of remaining in and raising a family in a blue state — especially a deep blue state, where even though they are a sizable minority, they are beaten down every time. 

So why stay? Some have already begun the migration process, in fact. But as long as the federal government institutions — especially the courts — retain their current stranglehold, exactly how much freedom will such political migrants have once they land in their new red state?

The answer: Not much, because the Marxist Left continues to use the federal courts and the media to defeat anything that political conservatives wish to do. If we shift this same paradigm to the Church, the same phenomenon is happening. Theological migrants, sick to death of the homoclergy crowd threatening the souls of their families, are also on the move.

They are deserting Church of Nice parishes, more and more reverting to homeschooling and swelling the pews of parishes and oratories with reverent (mostly Latin) Masses. Some drive hours every Sunday to such Masses, blowing right past Church of Nice parishes — parishes that cram social-justice, pro-gay, illegal-immigration, fake-climate-change messaging down people's throats.

They've had it. And they are doing what they can in the immediate moment to escape. And for the record, the political division present in the country, the wildly opposing worldviews — one expressing belief in God, the other material atheism — were set loose on the nation by the Marxist invasion of the Catholic clergy, which cleared the way for the Church to give up the social battle, the culture war.

Looking down the road (and perhaps not that far), it seems inevitable that a mass migration will take place within the United States. Hopefully, it won't be violent, but that possibility is absolutely not off the table because things have gotten that bad. The red-state crowd will fill up their states with like-minded citizens and separate from the blue-state crowd. America was always only a great social experiment anyway, and so now we face the reality, or at least possibility, that the experiment failed. 

The evil-minded, anti-God crowd first used the system and then usurped the system and now is a few short steps away from full tyrannical control. If you are a politically conservative type, you will be considered an enemy of the State and there will be retribution.

That's already here to a degree.  How many people have lost their jobs because of their views? How many have been censored or de-platformed by "tech giants" for their views? No crimes have been committed, just views expressed — but that's enough. So before it gets too impossible to recover from, the red state nation seems like a possibility on the table, which is why some are wondering about it.

These folks would have to get together and compose their own constitution — one that sews up the loopholes in the original one that the Marxists have been able to exploit. This constitution would define family correctly, forbid abortion expressly, bring an end to any and all government schools, reject any commercial enterprise from operating within the borders that promoted pornography, contraception, active homosexuality and so forth.

Your political ideology would absolutely matter. Liberals and Marxists would be arrested and imprisoned, just as conservatives would be in "Blue Nation" (as we already see with some pro-lifers). Marxists already caused the collapse of one civilization. This one, the theory goes, would be formed to prevent that from ever happening again.

Kids would be safe, not exploited and brainwashed. In short, a nation built on morality where the family is the central focus — Western civilization reborn. And in the blue-state hell that would remain, it would take less than a generation for the entire rotten mess to disintegrate. America's big cities today are little less than giant cesspools supported by federal tax dollars robbed from the hardworking middle class. Let them rot.

They use concentrated power to overwhelm simple people wanting to earn a living for their families and not deal with drug addiction, skyrocketing teen pregnancy and all those evils. And how would the Church fare in these two new nations? In Red America, there would be no more loopholes for wicked bishops to hide their dastardly deeds. They would be subject to the same levels of financial transparency as any other enterprise.

No more hiding behind the phony separation of Church and State for anything — child rape, cover-up, misdirecting hundreds of millions (or even billions of dollars) from their intended use. In Blue America, since it would be completely run by anti-God Marxists, they wouldn't last long, as every civilization which rejects God and natural law is doomed.

Bishops' property would be confiscated, and they would be imprisoned — or at least the handful who would not have converted to the communist side, which some have already done, as we know. Two official Americas would actually be more honest because it's what we currently have now, in practice, and the one is ripping the other to shreds.

The truth is, we are already living in something of this construct now, depending on where you are. So why not just formalize it, the thinking goes. Make the break, and then sit back and see which side prospers. Who will prevail? The side that has children or the side that kills them? The country that fosters racism and violence or the country that has no need of that? The country that secures one vote for each citizen or the country that fundamentally perverts the electoral process? The nation that forbids Marxist propaganda from filling its airwaves or the nation that feasts on it? The side that values police and law enforcement or the side that attacks it?

Of course, there are a billion details that would have to be worked out: There always are when you are building a nation, but that doesn't mean the nation shouldn't be built. If the details of all this prove too insurmountable, then on to some other approach, the thinking goes. But this is what the Founders did in 1776 (and even said so in the first words of the Declaration of Independence): 

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

For clarity, this is not an official position of Church Militant, but that these sorts of things are even coming up in discussions suggests that we have reached a whole new precipice in America. If something like this were to happen, what North America would look like moving forward would be America 2.0 (just buttoned up and more the wiser) and the Soviet Union 2.0.

The Church would thrive in one and be destroyed in the other. But the current situation is reaching the point of no longer being sustainable.

TRANSCRIPT

A very important event unfolded on Capitol Hill last week in the ongoing effort to drain the swamp by unmasking the deep-state actors. It happened in front of a committee of U.S. senators investigating how the phony Russia-collusion probe got approved based on falsified evidence supplied to the FISA court.

Former U.S. deputy attorney general Sally Yates, as part of the Obama administration, threw former FBI director James Comey under the bus, saying he went "rogue" in going after Trump aide Michael Flynn.

While that's all interesting in its own right, our focus is that the mainstream media didn't report a word of it. To them, it's like it never happened. But it did happen. It's just that the dishonest media doesn't want you to know it. In short, what they don't tell you is extremely important to know in trying to understand how the world operates.

They do this for a reason — not only feed you false information but, most importantly, keep truthful information from you. Now, shift this same underlying principle over to the Catholic establishment media, who are every bit as dishonest in their decisions on what not to tell you.

Yet the likes of Bp. Barron and his secret invite-only conference call a week or so ago with what he terms "Catholic media professionals" is a prime example. Consider the stories his pals made a deliberate choice not to tell you (or at best only came around to telling you about after all sorts of other media had already covered them).

You will not find any meaningful stories, which were both truthful as well as timely on: 

The list of things the "Catholic media professionals" deliberately keep from you, refuse to print and keep under wraps is ridiculously long. That practice is certainly not Catholic; nor is it professional. 

But these fellas call those stories "tabloid," which is nothing else than a head fake to deflect your attention from the reality that they refused to cover them. Corruption — especially spiritual corruption, which damns souls to hell — is not "tabloid."

These so-called professionals — which they are not — suck up to the hierarchy because they are bought-and-paid-for shills. They are not independent from the establishment; they are actually part of it. So how can they possibly report on the evils within it?

That is in fact why Barron gathered that clique around himself on his invite-only call the week before last. If they are so concerned about all of this, why aren't they calling Church Militant or others to have a meaningful discussion on all these things? The Church Militant staff — 10 of us — ran into Barron in the hotel elevator in Baltimore in 2018 and invited him to have a drink and talk about all this. He declined very curtly.

So they aren't really interested in talking — just censoring. They're just interested in keeping the truth from you and not reporting what professionals would and should report. In fact, their own deliberate choice to not report on the evils is an evil of its own.

But here's the issue none of them seem to be considering: They are part of the Church of Nice establishment — the same Church of Nice that is shrinking quickly. Within 10 years, there will be hardly anything left of the Church of Nice, as parishes continue imploding all over the country.

Ten years ago, Church Militant said the Church of Nice would not be able to survive beyond the generation being born at that time. Well, that generation is now 10 years old. 

In another 10 years, they will be college-aged, will have completely left the Church of Nice, and there will be nothing but nursing home patients keeping the Church of Nice on life support. Just who do these Catholic media "professionals" think will be still around to be reading their tripe?  

If there are any people working for these outfits (like EWTN or Catholic News Agency) listening to this, we sure hope you are not planning your retirements around a nice little pension from them. They won't exist, and you won't have a job before 2030 rolls around. Look at market trends.

In fact, the disposable folks in the chanceries should take that little warning to heart as well. As Catholics continue stampeding out of the Church and collections dry up, do you really think the bishop and his theologically corrupt, social-justice-warrior elites are going to take a pay cut so you can keep your job?

Just like the secular, Marxist media has contributed so heavily to the collapse of the culture by holding back on truthful reporting, so too has the Catholic media. Why were they not uncovering the homopredator scandal years before — while it was going on?

It will go down as an everlasting, eternal black mark against those outfits that secular media had to break and report a horrendous story of evil happening right within their ranks. And yet we are told they are the professionals — the trustworthy media.

And we are told that by the likes of Bp. Barron — who clearly has been tapped by the powers that be in the bishops' conference — to ride herd on the uprising of faithful Catholics on the internet. Barron has a dog in this fight; don't forget that. He is far from some neutral, innocent, objective third party just weighing in as a bishop.

He has a heavy, personal interest in helping put down the uprising because if the uprising is right theologically and culturally, then that means he has been and continues to be wrong. And the establishment can never be wrong lest it lose whatever little scraps of credibility it still has.

This is the same M.O. as secular, Marxist media. They have an agenda which oftentimes requires they either distort or (more often) ignore certain stories. Just look at CNN, which these days stands as much as for "COVID News Network" as the Communist News Network. 

Propaganda outfits all work the same way. The so-called Catholic media professionals have one job — to protect the hierarchy from being exposed for their corruption (be it sexual, financial, doctrinal or liturgical — or all of the above depending on the individual bishop).

Remember, what you don't know can hurt you.

TRANSCRIPT

It's clear from what's going on behind the scenes that the Catholic establishment class is getting nervous: In fact, they're downright scared, and more specifically, they now view themselves as on the defensive. That was the motivation for an invite-only meeting organized by Bp. Robert Barron a week ago — to discuss, specifically, the rise of authentic Catholicism on social media and the internet.

Barron invited onto the private call what he and his team laughably referred to as Catholic media "professionals." Some of them aren't "Catholic" and none of them are "professional."

On the call were:

This is the crowd that Barron surrounded himself with to talk about the threat from faithful Catholics completely fed up with business as usual in the Church of Nice.

Demonstrating a woeful ignorance — not even really understanding the actual issue — Barron pegged his private chitchat as a discussion about "radical traditionalists" online. He went on to foster a discussion about how so-called rad trads "ruthlessly criticize the pope and bishops and question the authority of the Second Vatican Council, often to the point of repudiation."

Barron utterly fails to understand the necessary distinction between the orthodox (meaning faithful, practicing Catholics) and the radical fringe (like the breakaway SSPX cult). The distinction is meaningful. Faithful Catholics do not question or repudiate the authority of the Second Vatican Council.

However, we certainly do question its implementation by a group of homosexual bishops who wanted to wreck the Church (which they pulled off in spectacular manner). Likewise, regarding his concern about criticizing the pope and the bishops, a distinction needs to be made: Criticizing about what, over what issues? There is more than an air of clericalism and superiority in Barron's poorly thought out condemnation.

We, of course, can't speak for other online Catholic apostolates, but Church Militant has never questioned the authority or the legitimacy of Pope Francis or his election. We are on record as saying that it is not the place of the laity. 

But we are most certainly on record saying that he should resign his office for protecting and promoting homosexuals and abusers within the hierarchy — a policy that has become routine. In so doing, Francis has broken trust with the laity, promising to rid the Church of this scourge, yet quietly and rapidly advancing it. 

Likewise, to suggest that bishops are somehow beyond criticism is preposterous. His characterization of well-deserved criticism as "ruthless" is just flat-out stupid. For example, is it "ruthless" to report on Cdl. Dolan for his promotion of active homosexuals promoting gay marriage being allowed into the St. Patrick's Day Parade?

Is it, likewise, "ruthless" to have exposed the over-the-top corruption of the lying, cheating former bishop of Buffalo, Richard Malone (who protected homosexual predators), and to have been instrumental in his forced resignation? How about the Marxist social-justice network within the bowels of the Church that promotes all manner of evil and dissent from Church teaching with the blessing of multiple bishops? Is it "ruthless" to expose Cdl. Blase Cupich's support for active homosexuals receiving sacrilegious Holy Communion?

These things — which are grave sins — are outrageous, and they cry to heaven for vengeance (a vengeance Almighty God will extract one way or another). But to describe revelations of these very public sins as "ruthless" is immature and childish on Barron's part. Barron has had his knickers in a bunch over Church Militant ever since we went after his grave error of suggesting that "we have a reasonable hope that all men are saved."

His entire Church of Nice structure is built on that ridiculous foundation — on an over-emphasis on God's mercy to the utter rejection of divine justice. As long as Barron gets to sit back and paint himself as the reasonable middle, he gets to skate. We called his bluff.

Judas is in Hell, not because Church Militant says so, but because the Son of God did. And if Barron admits Judas' fate, his whole facade comes crashing down, a facade he has constructed his entire persona behind.

But more than this, Barron has become the poster boy for the entire Church of Nice apparatus, always presented as the middle-of-the-road guy, not too much to one extreme or the other. That portrayal is asinine. With Our Lord, there is no spectrum, with extremes on either end and a "reasonable middle" where the truth is. There is simply Christ — in totality or not.

Barron and his clericalist crowd like to have you think of him as the modern-day apparition of Abp. Fulton Sheen, which he is decidedly not even close to. Whatever gifts Barron may possess, he has turned them to the world of his own self-promotion. He couldn't even summon the courage when talking to Ben Shapiro — who asked him an honest question about the necessity of Christ — to answer truthfully.

Barron whiffed and could only muster up a weak response that "Christ is the privileged way." Wrong, bishop. Wrong. And no, it's not "ruthless" for me (or others) to call out your horrendous error. But your sensitive emotional lot think any criticism of your errors is ruthless and mean and so forth.

For decades, the episcopate and the priesthood have been littered with emasculated men who simply cannot stand up and declare the truth plain and simple. Curiously, when Shapiro asked a Protestant minister the same question on his show, the protestant gave him the straight-up Catholic answer. No, you cannot be saved by any other name under heaven.

Jesus is not privileged; He is necessary. It's hard to tell if Barron and the rest of the bishops are just genuinely malformed on these questions and actually believe the sputum that drools out of their mouths or if they somehow know the truth and are just too chicken to say it. But they sure do get all prickly about it when you call them out on it. For the record, Bp. Barron, you and your pals and sycophant fanboys need to get a grip.

You aren't beyond criticism, but the problem is you clutch your pearls and whine at any criticism and classify it as "mean" and so forth. Interesting in this whole "private chat" controversy is that he also identified the others on the call as professional media. In what way have they demonstrated any degree of professionalism as media?

They made a career out of covering up and ignoring boatloads of scandals to protect their careers — scandals involving the hierarchy and that have produced tens of millions of victims of all sorts of abuse. Misreporting or not reporting on purpose is a huge breach of journalistic ethics (not to mention wildly unprofessional).

And here is the $64,000 question you chose to remain silent about: Why do you think Church Militant and others have gained such traction? Simple — we were (and remain) accurate in everything we report. We were the only outfit continually reporting on the invasion of homosexuals into the seminaries and hierarchy.

Barron and the bishops used to make fun of us and sneer behind our backs and tell others to do the same. But then, McCarrick happened. And there it was for the whole world to see: Church Militant was vindicated, as the evil that dominates so much of the hierarchy came tumbling out of their gay closet. They hate that we exposed that as well as layers of other corruption (spiritual, financial and the list goes on) and betrayal of the faithful.

So, now it's the case their sins are becoming known — largely because of our groundbreaking coverage — and they are clearly concerned about the fallout. They should be. The level of trust in the bishops as a body is practically nonexistent. But the private phone call with his pals just goes to show the wrongheadedness of the establishment.

Do they really want to pretend there are not crippling problems within the Church, that multiple bishops should not resign for these evils, that the faithful have not been dragged over the coals? Do they really deny all this? Apparently, because we never hear reports about secret phone calls to discuss how to address those evils.

Only this stupid phone call to address how to kill the messenger. They support gay cheerleader James Martin, as just one example. Have they ever had a private call about how to silence him? How about the never-to-be-released McCarrick report? Any calls on that? You get the point. 

The hierarchy as a whole is corrupt, and the bishops and the professional Catholic parasites who make their living off them need to keep all this from you. So they go after the ones informing you. The jig is up. There is no putting the toothpaste back in the tube. 

The hierarchy has no intention of cleaning up, but we already knew that. This little call — which was revealed in the National Catholic Reporter, a rag of liberal dissent that many bishops play footsie with and that was forbidden from using the name Catholic — was intended to get the ball rolling on some kind of censorship.

Good luck with that. You people are contemptible. You are part of the ecclesiastical swamp and cannot stand that you are being exposed. You have no desire to admit, confess or repent of the sinful status quo you have established within the Church. We're sorry you have arrived at that point, but don't think we are simply going to roll over. 

You can take your modernism-infected theology as well as the establishment that supports it and take a long walk off a short pier. You have denied enough souls the truth, and rambling on about your hurt feelings and mischaracterizations of what we report will not stop us — not for one minute. The bottom line is simple: You have spent decades building a false theology that has cost millions of souls.

Your willful silence and refusal to proclaim the truth has resulted in untold hundreds of millions of sacrilegious Holy Communions as well as a torrent of blasphemies, and yet your urgent concern is what faithful Catholics online say about your evil. Your facade must be destroyed and the authentic Faith restored. You're all finally on the run, and considering the damage you've caused, you should be.

Game on!