17 May 2014


In Part 1, a door to depravity in the Diocese of London was opened briefly, then slammed shut.

Readers wanting to reopen this door may do so with a document version of the article linked here.

I. One purpose of the March 17th post was to defend a priest unjustly maligned by his key-positioned "colleague" in a public forum, as if for sport, singled-out and isolated - from the bishop and all priests in the diocese, then held up as a focal point for contempt by the antinomian mob; yet devoid of any corroborating evidence to justify the attack. Classic Alinskian manoeuvring. Hopefully, Part 1 worked to mitigate any such brazen attacks on good priests in the future, specifically from the CanChurch homomafia and its lackeys, or at least making the raving queens think twice before doing so. Yes, there are some of us "out there" in the Canadian Catholic wasteland who are paying very close attention to what is going on... from sea to shining sea.

II. The incident covered was anomalous in the sense that this form of persecution most frequently eventuates out of public sight, behind closed doors, with internal diocesan politicking, at whatever Catholic institution, in power plays and position grabs, in the pursuit of personal agendas, ladder climbing and so forth. Magic Circle machinations and intrigue. Ask any orthodox priest (or former seminarian) born just before or after the Vatican II Council: to a high probability he will tell of an experience of homo-persecution to whatever degree, Machiavellian-like, while attending seminary, in his dealings with chancery office personnel or with whoever careerist, or with a guilt-ridden parish busybody on a power trip. Think also of the long-running Gaystapo putsch against orthodox seminarians/priests as outlined in Michael Rose's book Goodbye, Good Men. This acclaimed work provides documented evidence on:
...the cover-up and the sexual scandals - extends down to the very place where vocations to the priesthood germinate: the seminary. Too often men who support the teachings of the Church, especially the teachings on sexual morality, are dismissed for being 'rigid and uncharitable homophobes', while those seminarians who reject the Church's teaching or 'come out' as gays to their superiors are given preferential treatment and then ordained to the Catholic priesthood. A corrupt, protective network... the "Lavender Mafia", a clique of homosexual dilettantes, along with an underground of liberal faculty members determined to change the doctrines, disciplines, and mission of the Catholic Church from within. If the sex scandals that have rocked the Catholic Church are to end, the individuals responsible for this moral meltdown must be rooted out.[1]
III. However, that the attack on a traditional Catholic priest examined in Part 1 was done publicly goes to the level of impunity with which the homomafia now operates. This, not only confirming clout-welding positions in CanChurch its members maintain and its presence in the Diocese of London, but also echoing the now intensifying homofascism occurring outside the Catholic Church in secular society. No worries over repercussions from disgusting online activity given the confidence and job security that comes with the higher rank of homoheretic, so let's have some fun and pick on a lower-tiered "Missionary Preacher" who - the Persecutor alleged -  promotes "hate" against homosexuals (i.e. Catholic doctrine). Moreover, that the image/media referents the Persecutor posted previously were so explicit and offensive to Catholic sensibilities also goes to the level of impunity involved, let alone the depravity shamelessly broadcasted to the public (i.e. full frontal "in your face" homoerotic art with a facial expression as if in orgasm, YouTube homo-themed songs by the "The Rebel Fag", one from the Folsom Street Fair album, tagged with an image of a shirtless, brawny gay boy toy in muscle-man pose). For God's sake, what if any kids came across that Facebook page? What, then, would their impressionable and inexperienced minds think about the Catholic priesthood? Even more souls become warped. Moreover, adult laymen were quite upset, exasperated after reading the March 17th post. Here are some responses received or seen elsewhere: "really troubling", "I feel kind of helpless", "I feel like a lone voice crying out in the desert", "unfreakenbelievable", "Welcome to our world here in the Diocese of London". The Persecutor overviewed in Part 1 is not only an open/public supporter of the sodomite culture - as against instructions from the Holy See, he is actually Director of Liturgy for the London Diocese. Infamy. How does this happen?

IV. The cause for this impunity, then, this allowance of "free reign" as it were, this sense of possessing a kind of "diplomatic immunity", facilitated by a coexistent silence from those whose responsibility it is to be a watchdog and keep such matters in check (i.e. "official" Catholic media) by reporting to Catholics on ground level, points elsewhere but directly to a weakness or failure in leadership, to fatherly correction and, when necessitated, punishment then banishment from the bishops, shepherds of their respective flocks, who for whatever reason permit this impunity to run its destructive course. Be it by indifference, cowardice, complicity, blackmail - all these, including other sins by omission, boiling down to a deficient faith, fearing men more than fearing God.

V. If the reader thinks the degree of impunity argued here is exaggerated, as it applies to the CanChurch homomafia, just consider the case of the notorious Abbé Raymond Gravel, from the Diocese of Joiliette, Quebec. Not going to delve into his dossier here, but most Catholics who follow Church affairs north of the 49th parallel know of his past as a male prostitute, politician, his ongoing antagonism with the Vatican, often expressed in his interviews with sodomite magazines, including his pro-abortion and pro-sodomy views/activities - as in, for example, his support for "same sex" marriage and of conducting a "gay pride mass".[2] Given his long public history of heresy and outright disobedience, that this "priest" has yet to be defrocked only tells of the moribund condition of Catholicism in Quebec, especially of its episcopate. Last year, CPAC (Cable Public Affairs Channel), a bilingual specialty TV channel covering government/public affairs in Canada, including House of Commons proceedings, broadcasted an interview with Gravel. The program is called Tête à Tête (Head to Head). The original link for a video of the interview is here, when this blogger viewed it in 2013, but it has since been removed. A search at the CPAC site yielded nothing. The WayBack Machine archived it in 2013 on March 31, April 4, May 21 and December 19, minus the video. This writer transcribed the interview when watched last year, where Gravel spoke about his entrance into the priesthood, sometime in the early 1980s:
@6:05  mark: "I went to work in a bar"... @7:05 mark: worked at "Limelight", "I went to gay bars, straight bars, different kinds of bars. There was even a leather bar where I was working, because I followed a bar man's course to work in bars..." @7:50 mark: "Did they question your past? [interviewer question, then answered...] Oh, absolutely. You know, at the time it was more open than today. When I finished my Master's, I went to see the bishop in Joiliette. And the bishop said [unintelligible]. So he came to see me where I worked in a bar. He came to, the bishop came to have a beer one night at the bar. Then he came home with me. And he said he'd speak to me, in the third person, he said it would be good for you to work in a parish..." @8:50 mark: "The bishop said before you're ordained, you have to go to the seminary. So I went to the seminary for a year. And after that year I was ordained".
The bishop visited Gravel at a gay bar, had a beer with him, then went home with him. Ordained only after a year in the seminary. So nonchalantly articulated. No worry about consequences from speaking publicly in such a manner, a presumed exemption from reprimand from Gravel's boyfriend bishops. If this blogger recalls correctly, the bishop to whom Gravel made reference is just recently deceased.

VI. As to the reason why the March 17th post was removed from this blog only after 24+ hours, the message (outfitted with hard, indisputable facts), as intended, rapidly got out to those who needed to know, friend and foe, to any other persecuted priests in the Diocese of London, including those elsewhere in other dioceses. Expressly, to warn the remnant of faithful Catholics in the London Diocese of the danger, and also to convey that, with a mainstream media personality homolobbyist directing liturgy for the diocese, they can only expect further feminizing directives for it in the near future - let alone any scheming to hinder the celebration and growth of the Latin Mass, as against Summorum Pontificum. That is, Pope Benedict's 2007 motu propio, indicating that the Tridentine form was never abrogated. Also stipulating that priests can celebrate it without the bishop's permission, or the permission from anyone else under him, including a Director of Liturgy. Generally - as has been bluntly conveyed with this blog over the last few years, to once again advise concerned clerics and laymen about the abysmal state of Catholicism throughout Canada.

VII. Blog hits on the stats board lit up like a Christmas tree. It did its job. But continuous public exposition on a blog of such abominations "in the raw" which are immediately/easily viewable, of filth and faggotry uploaded onto the internet by a Catholic priest, deadens the impact over time. That invoked knot in your stomach will afterwards dissipate, where eventually things become more so an exercise in detached gawking, analogous to drivers rubber necking at a car accident scene, slowly travelling past a catastrophe, yet still separated from it, where the seriousness of the situation is not fully realized. Most crucially, there was concern here for the holy dignity of the priesthood, for the purpose of safeguarding it. In the future, unassuming or improperly informed blog visitors, Catholic or not, might erroneously conclude - in all likelihood not reading the entire, lengthy post - that a significant number of priests conduct themselves in such a manner online. Contrarily, as Fr. Dariusz Oko states, only a "disturbed minority" constitute the homoheretical contingent within the Church, albeit influential - and it is "a global phenomenon".[3] Zeroing in on Canada, it is likely more than a "minority", based on what a very reliable source tells me.

VIII. This blogger has been informed that the Facebook site has removed the offending posts, thus no more harassment and sewage spewing out into the public square from it, for the time being anyway. It is hoped that by now the March 17th post has by whatever means (electronic, hardcopy, etc.) reached the Apostolic Nunciature at MacNab Manor House, Ottawa. Perhaps, even making its transatlantic way to some Roman dicastery. Don't even bother sending it to the chancery office. No effect. It will be ignored. If London's bishop, that diocese's bishop since 2002, is letting a pro-sodomitical priest run amuck - teaching at a seminary, in charge of liturgy, flaunting perversion on Facebook, collaborating with the national secular media without qualifying or challenging its inbuilt anti-Catholicism, promoting the homosexual agenda - you know the rot is pervasive, running deep and throughout the diocese. So it is not about a cheapening sensationalism or an aspiration for maintaining a high number of blog hits. It's about ending the silence and calling out manifest heresy in CanChurch, including and especially its attending moral degradation, with the prime emphasis being on the salvation of so many misled souls.

IX. Another purpose of Part 1 - with a long-term, Canada-wide goal in mind - was a kind of testing of the waters. That is, analyzing various reactions to a dive bomber counterattack from out of the blue, to a lightning strike of counter-criticism that connected all the dots - armed with facts, primary sources, documentation, quotations, references, etc., readily available in, and derived from, the public domain. Then to stand back. Wait. Watch - and it cannot be stressed enough, to pay attention. To understand the enemy, particularly the enemy within, it is important to study how it reacts to a challenge, to profile it, to see what it actually does and says when encountered as such, then to discern its patterns and processes of response, even to look for any reactive commonalities between this enemy and its allies elsewhere, outside CanChurch. One might even venture to say that these reactions can at times be mechanical, therefore predictable. This is because, despite the surface appearance of Catholic accoutrements (so to say), we are dealing with that which is obsessed with the world, minus transcendent and eternal aspects, something wholly possessed or enraptured by the "spirit of the world", preoccupied with the horizontal, the temporal and the immanent. It has an insatiable craving for fame, pleasure, luxury, power. Resultantly, it tends to operate by cold physical laws, thus being in some ways deterministic, potentially making its objectives and end games more foreseeable. An analogy here would be the formulation of a numerical equation to simulate or forecast physical phenomena.

X. Freewill is binary, yes or no, I will serve or I will not. Fate, or an abnormal sexual behaviour alleged to be pre-determined or biologically inherent or irrevocable, involves for the claimants no freedom of choice or self-control because no real personal responsibility is taken. Blame for the dire effects of personal sin is laid elsewhere, outside the self to some external, contrived and imprecise abstraction (e.g. "homophobia" in society). Guilt is redirected somewhere else via ambiguous language, and the degree of effect this has in influencing or persuading others is a direct function only of emotional intensity and forcefulness of the will. Not with right reason, not with faith in the teaching Magisterium, certainly not with a love for Our Blessed Lord and Our Lady... getting somewhat philosophical here. Nonetheless, all these aid in the development of strategies, to set up effective countermeasures, with the goal being to neutralize whatever homo-phenomena warring against the Catholic Church. Helpful information was garnered from the various responses to Part 1. Those poisons lurking in the mud started to hatch out. 

XI. Accusations against this writer of "hate", "libel", "pharisee", a demand for an "apology", and so forth, came as anticipated. No argumentation with facts/evidence to bolster these counterclaims. No mention or concern from them for the priest singled out and publicly vilified by his "colleague", as demonstrated in this space with facts/evidence. Minimizing to insignificance the blatant sodomitical imagery/media, with gleeful-laden comments therein, publicly posted onto the internet by - let me repeat - a Catholic priest. Indeed, yours truly was indicted with posting "filth"! Who uploaded the filth? Who did it publicly? Diversions, excuses galore, rationalizing the obvious iniquity, antinomianism and overinflated "mercy" subtracting any citation to, or balancing by, Catholic moral law, rabid manifestations of guilty consciences, shooting the messenger - same old story.

XII. One instructive reaction came after the March 17th blog post was removed. A few years ago this writer did an analysis on the bioethics of Fr. Michael Prier, from the London Diocese, regarding his positions on the Winnipeg Statement, embryonic stem cells, tubal ligation and early induction, which are tainted with Proportionalism, as this writer argued. See the post here. Given that it dealt with controversial happenings in the Diocese of London, someone identifying himself as "Keith Metcalfe", apparently familiar with the Persecutor, figured the older post would be an available outlet to vent on the removed post of March 17th. He began trolling its comments section, spiced up with colourful language. Also, a good friend of this blog commented at that post, writing:
I see you've stirred up a couple of homoheretics, TH2, with your post that, I presume, dealt with some of the nastiness that infects the London diocese. I'm sorry to have missed your piece on that situation, but happy you've worried them enough to be combing through past articles... Our Lady, who destroys heresies and crushes demons, is 100% pure, and comes to the aid of all those who faithfully support such purity.
...and there is nothing like a proclaimed deference to the Most Holy Virgin Mary to trip the demonic switch. "Keith Metcalfe" responded to that comment thusly [emphasis / corrections, comments]:
Lol I love your salutarions! [salutations]
You and all you farms [forms] of filth have no clue with whom you are dealing.[no, we know exactly with whom we are dealing] I don't hide behind the veil of ignorance that is the internet. You wimps feel safe behind the net, but if you grow a pear,[that would be "pair", not the fruit] come on by London and meet me face to face and we will talk like actual men. Inforunately [Unfortunately] I don't see that in the future because punk ass pieces of shit don't actually have legit wit [an alliteration - "Bravo!", as Cardinal Dolan would say] to flex with such actual skill. You'd rather act like being internet pussies makes you 'real' fighters for truth. Gee.. I wonder how real saints dealt with quarrels before the internet.
Come at me
So, you see, the rage, the irrationalism, the psychological disturbance, the latent inclination to physical aggression, are quite apparent in that comment, dispelling that manufactured image of the compassionate, loving, self-assured and unperturbed personality type. Poor grammar, too. My trusted advisor also indicates that such comments are evidential of the "useful idiot" component of the homolobby. That comment, and other similar communications received, also work to substantiate what Fr. Dariusz Oko stated in his essay With the Pope Against Homoheresy:
We must be aware that the other party may have become internally degenerated by decades of living in sin and hypocrisy, that they may have gone downhill to the level of ordinary criminals, that they are prepared to do even the worst things, both in words and acts, to defend their interests and position.

We must be prepared, and not be surprised even if we are insulted with the worst curses, if we are accused of the worst things, for it is "out of the overflow of the heart that the mouth speaks" (cf. Matthew 12:34). Someone who has committed great iniquities for dozens of years is ready to do things at least equally vile to conceal evil and avoid responsibility. It is much easier to lie and say they have not done anything wrong than to beat or kill someone.[4]
XIII. Interesting in the responses were those claiming to be "seminarians" who quickly came to Audrey's defence. More interesting, no responses to the broadly read March 17th post came from, shall we say, "official channels". No notices, no denials, no legal threats from them, none from public notables, nothing. How could you, given the raw factuality presented? Probably, from the officialdom's silence we witness the distancing involved when "one of their own" gets caught red-handed. Ssshhhhhh, keep it within the inner circle, the Magic Circle. Speaking out in protest were only a party of powerless underling dilettantes, submissive princesses if you will, almost certainly under the district queen's immediate sphere of influence. Any formal acknowledgement or even denial from the officialdom of an operative homomafia within the London Diocese would inevitably - given its long, sordid history of clerical sex scandals - invite interest, an interest compounded, then detailed examination from outside parties, like the secular media, including from Church authorities higher up in the food chain. No officials or "equals" coming to the fore because they would then automatically implicate themselves and the diocese. Even given today's dominating liberal Catholic climate, how can you justify to Jack and Jill Pewsitter a Catholic priest's ecstatic appreciation for homoerotic art and music videos by "The Rebel Fag"?

XIV. Let's now look at the bigger picture so as to provide more latitude in the context. Because where there's smoke, there's fire. The chancery does not want outsiders snooping around and looking under rocks because there are secrets to hide, despite the calls for "dialogue", "accountability", "openness" and "transparency" we incessantly hear from the luminaries of Nu-Church. The homolobby within the Church is clandestine by nature, it has to be, due to the loathsome behaviour involved, that is, male-on-male sex - which is its focus, its fantasy, where it finds its fulfillment, and whatever else it says intends only to camouflage this actuality. Otherwise, if one scandal erupts, a chain reaction starts, dominos begin to fall, finally a rubicon is surpassed, then behold the awfulness that cascades out of Pandora's Box. Caught in the crossfire, those few quietly suffering faithful Catholics within the inner sanctum, hence very cognizant of the circumstance, will become disaffected, then unafraid to openly talk about this huge problem (and others) as they will be less intimidated by the connivances, threats and bullying from the enemies within. For such matters to go viral is to be avoided to the n'th degree, as instructed to chancery office personnel by diocesan lawyers everywhere. That is, to steer clear of whatever sex scandal that could potentially detonate throughout, right to the outer rims of the public square. Why? Think about it. Pay attention, people...

XV. Because the Diocese of London is already in a state of implosion. Do not hurry the process. Do not let the wider Catholic public know what is really going on "inside", of what is really happening "within", as the small remainder of faithful laity, already "fed up", might be impelled to really do something effectual to clean up the Augean stables. Maintain the facade, for there are "pastoral plans" to concoct and redundant committees to convene and careerist galas to attend. It's the "New Evangelization"! Dwelling in the underbelly, however, are data and information that tell of a dismal story of disintegration, remarkably so since the early 2000s. Statistics from various sources, including the London Diocese, bear this out.

XVI. Between 2004 and 2012 around 55 parishes have been canonically closed/suppressed. G-Catholic indicates that there are 121 churches remaining in the diocese presently. That is an enormous loss within a short time frame.  A 2011 report from the London Diocese  indicates "there are 120 parishes and Catholic communities".[5] The added "Catholic communities" means, of course, the 120 is an overestimate, as these "communities" can mean pretty well anything, with the name "Catholic" affixed to it. Below are graphical trends for the number of parishes in the London Diocese for the period running from 1950 to 2014. Notice the plummeting trend signals after Vatican II and 2002.

No. of Parishes from 1950 to 2014, Diocesis Londonensis (Data Sources: Catholic Hierarchy, G-Catholic, Diocese of London)

The priest population in the Diocese of London is dwindling at an accelerating pace. In 2011, the diocese stated that only 100 priests were serving in parishes.[6] In 2013, it was reported that there were 125 "active priests", with only 9 under the age of 40.[7] Note that "active" can, again, connote anything, not necessarily meaning service in a parish, so the 125 is probably another overestimate. Below are the trends for the number of diocesan/"active" priests in the London Diocese for the period running from 1950 to 2013. Again, notice the plummeting trend signals after Vatican II and 2002.
No. of Diocesan Priests from 1950 to 2013, Diocesis Londonensis (Data Sources: Diocese of London, Catholic Hierarchy, London Free Press)

Do not forget, concurrent with the speedily diminishing number of parishes and priests since the early 2000s, the Catholic population has increased. In 2011, the London Diocese was claiming approximately 450,000 Catholics. Of these, the average Sunday Mass attendance was extremely low at 14%, or 63,000.[8] And how many of these actually believe Catholic teaching in its fullness? If we take as true the 2011 figure of 100 priests serving in parishes, this means there are 4500 Catholics per priest. Yet the Catholic Hierarchy website indicates 622,138 Catholics for the diocese as far back as 2004, which suggests an even worse scenario for clerical dearth. Heightening this crisis is the growth in "Lay Ecclesial Ministers", increasing substantially since 1980, i.e. bloated laity involvement, liturgical novelties, egalitarian tendencies, amateur hour "theologians", "ministry" fiefdoms, sundry and superfluous "committees", "seminars", "ecumenical working groups", "faith initiatives", and so on ad nauseam. Their average age in 2011 was approximately 50 (i.e. aging baby boomers) and around 80% are women, hence signifying how the Novus Ordo liturgy and parish activity in general have progressively feminized in the last few decades. As for the resupply of priests, St. Peter's Seminary is far from capacity with students, a meagre 8 seminarians currently listed according to the website which, coincidentally, includes the name "Keith Metcalfe". So wretched is the situation that just recently it received a 2 million dollar "donation" from the nearby Diocese of Hamilton, purportedly for "investing in the future of our Church, through the formation of our future priests, deacons and lay ministers".[9] Read desperation, failure, bail-out, "show me the money". Notice also the word "investing", as if the Church is primarily a business operation, not so much a vehicle that directs souls to salvation in Heaven. Given current trends, the Diocese of London is going to be a Catholic dead zone within, say, 10 to 15 years, pending some miracle to reverse this nosedive into oblivion. Miracles, however, involve faith and adherence to Church doctrines, aspects this diocese lacks, monumentally. Numbers don't lie.

XVII. What is most pathetic about the London Diocese collapse since circa 2000 are the explanations provided for it by the officialdom. Regarding the drastic reduction in priests/seminarians, Vocations Director Fr. John Pirt avers: "Part of the drop in the number of men entertaining the priesthood is caused by a societal shift that doesn't foster a call to vocation".[10] What specifically is a "societal shift"? It is a vacuous and imprecise term - which, of course, is the trick. That is, direct the cause to some vague, meaningless abstraction existent outside diocesan structures/personnel. No problems within, goes the implied avowal. Now consider parish closings, like the former Our Lady of the Rosary Church in Windsor. Why the closure? Here's an explanation from DoL's Director of Communications, Mark Adkinson: "changing demographics in the latter half of the century, restoration costs and the Diocese's process of parish reorganization led to the closure of the church in 2007".[11] Plainly, the claim of "changing demographics" does not hold water. Why? Demographics statistically characterize a population by its age, the male-female distribution, income level, employment, housing, ethnicity, class status and so on. Yet, these parameters always have changed over whatever time period at whatever rate in whatever region independently of whether or nor not Catholicism flourishes in a society. Catholicism, because it is the one true religion, is not limited by these "world-determining" factors, transcending them all. Scriptural reminder: "All you who have been baptized in Christ's name have put on the person of Christ; no more Jew or Gentile, no more slave and freeman, no more male and female; you are all one person in Jesus Christ" (Galatians 3:27-28). Still, the number of baptized Catholics in the London Diocese markedly increased over the last few decades. Logically, then, it would be expected that more of these Catholics would fulfil their Sunday Mass obligation, thus pewsitter donations would augment with time, helping with, among other things, maintenance/"restoration costs" of churches and the construction of new ones. Yet this is not the case here. Why? Where did all the money go? The beautiful Our Lady of the Rosary Church was closed, then sold, eventually to be converted into some gaudy "banquet and event hall".[12] According to Mr. Adkinson, the diocese was "very excited about this development". No, that is not a misquote. 

XVIII. Then there was the 2011 diocesan report, Trends Impacting Pastoral & Personnel Planning in the Diocese of London. Bishop Ronald Fabbro equivocates on his diocese's demise:
This downward trend in our diocese is influenced by a wide range of factors, including declining birth rates, changing multicultural populations, societal influences, loss of religious affinity, changing faith practices, etc. All of these factors must be taken into account in our pastoral and personnel planning.
More of the same vagueness, attributing the collapse to a muddled array of external factors and/or not affording exacting reasons for the "downward trend". Importantly, note the "etc." at the end of the "wide range of factors" list, i.e. throw everything in but the kitchen sink. Why, precisely, are there "declining birth rates"? Could it be that the majority of Catholics, contrary to Church teaching, are using contraception, having abortions, more divorce, embracing homo-marriage, rejecting the traditional family unit, deeming children a burden instead of a gift from God? Could it be that they are more so cohabiting (thus separating sex from procreation) or, if socially inept, settling in as a perpetually unemployed porn-addicted masturbatory man-child, living a life of self-imposed sterility with his sex doll in his parents basement? Why, then, is the bulk of DoL's Catholic population transgressing Church doctrine? Could the cause be that these Catholics were badly catechized (if at all) in the first place? Who was responsible for catechizing? What specifically were they teaching? Which books and theologians did they use as references? Could the cause be priests preaching moral heresy or whatever permutation of Modernism in their homilies? Could it be their silence on family and life issues, especially with unsettling ones, like fornication, contraception, abortion and sodomy? Or could it be chancery-enforced gag orders on priests who attempt to speak candidly on these issues? Could it be priests promoting the homosexual agenda? Could it be those crazy Sisters of St. Joseph who, "in partnership with King's College", have an upcoming gnostic symposium on "Becoming Agents of Evolutionary Change"? Could it be Bishop Fabbro's consistent pattern of never doing anything about these regularly occurring heretical get-togethers in the London Diocese? Could it have been those Barry Glendinning-inspired liturgical dance routines joyously performed by Fr. Fruitcake and Sr. Sapphic? Could it be the ascendancy of irreverent-cornball-feminized liturgies that instinctively repel real men and make even children feel awkward? Who, then, can blame them for skipping Mass and instead playing golf on Sundays? The abovelisted all point to internal problems, yes?

XIX. Correlated with "changing demographics" since it is a subset of it, "changing multicultural populations" as a reason is also a non sequitur. The growth of Catholicism is limited by race and culture?! Here we have another upshot of Trudeau's debilitating multicultualist policies of the 1970s. So-called "societal influences" is the same as the abovementioned "societal shifts" - nebulous, polysemous. Invent your own definition or spin the wheel to randomly see what it means, so long as it does not suggest corruption within. The phrases "loss of religious affinity" and "changing faith practices" are just bureaucrat sprechen for Catholics who have apostasized en masse. Again - why? And what centrepoint are all these so-called attributable factors orbiting around? Says the bishop: "pastoral and personnel planning". That is, for the preservation of, not the Faith, but of administrative operations within... the Magic Circle. Dissimulation extraordinarius. Bravo! Give him a hand everybody. Indeed, the main objective for examining the report is "to develop sound pastoral strategies for the future". What future? Re-examine the trends in the two graphs presented above.

XX. Now we come to the most famous word in the Dictionary of Bureaucratic Euphemisms: "reorganization". "This reduction", prelate +Fabbro states, "primarily results from parish reorganization over the last ten years". To be clear, succinct and not to dilly dally, this specifically means church closings/suppressions and, correlatively, a scarcity in funds to sustain them. This in turn means lesser people have attended Mass, thus resulting in lesser monetary contributions from parishioners, to cover not just parish costs, but also cash flowing downtown to the chancery office to pay for programs, to remunerate its employees, including functionaries at Catholic institutions throughout the London Diocese. Or, in Nu-Church lingo, for "pastoral and personnel planning". This "reduction" further involves the priest shortage and the drought of seminarians. But, as indicated above, the DoL had to obtain 2 million dollars from a neighbouring diocese just to keep its seminary operational, for a measly 8 seminarians presently. Why did the diocese have to succumb to the unusual measure of acquiring funding from outside its jurisdiction?

XXI. Accordingly, is there not another, more accurate, hard-hitting and, yes, appalling explanation for the unprecedented "reorganization" which, at core, really means effective bankruptcy and hence, diocesan implosion? Before proceeding to that which is never admitted by Professional Catholics, to that which the "official" Catholic media never ever wants to speak about, to that which bishops will not even touch with a 10-foot crozier, here is a clue from Fr. Oko: "the priestly vocation is more and more now called a gay profession".[13] What, then, could this explanation be? Where will this clue lead us? Yes, there's something in the air, ladies and gentlemen. Do you feel it? Don't know about you, but my spidey senses are tingling and...

XXII. The diminution of parishioner offerings, a corollary of lower Mass attendance and parish closures, can explain the London Diocese's languished monetary situation only to a certain degree. Thus, this first of two very important questions must be posed: Where did all the money go? Upon an initial purview, many would assume there are surpluses hanging around somewhere, or a rich old Catholic widow bequeathed her will to the diocese to save the day, or that accruing financial investments, even slush funds, will help matters along, somehow. However, the open secret, regularly reported by secular news outlets, is that in recent years gigantic sums of money have been lost, gone to payouts for settlements in clerical sexual abuse cases. Probably, the most infamous case of priest sex abuse in the DoL was that of  Barry Glendinning, a superstar on the liturgical dance circuit, a homosexual pederast and a serial predator.[14] His prey being minors, his crimes - committed since the 1970s - being made known publically in the late 1990s, then convicted, dead by 2011. This legal matter cost the diocese a staggering $3,000,000. Not to diminish the pain and suffering of his victims, but that's a massive financial clobbering, and only one in a long sequence. So seemingly precarious are DoL's finances is that the bishop had to put up his residence for sale to cover costs for victims of clerical sexual abuse. The money went "into a general fund to aid abuse victims in the diocese, which covers nine counties throughout Southwestern Ontario".[15]

XXIII.  To get a good idea of how terrible it has been in the London Diocese, it is just a matter of popping over to Sylvia's Site - "The Inquiry". She has for a long time been cataloguing newspaper/internet reports and articles, legal proceedings and associated documentation regarding the Catholic priest sex abuse scandal throughout Canada. This blogger is grateful for her industrious labours. The Diocese of London features prominently at this site. Currently listed at her site - of those charged, convicted and/or sued - are 312 names (by last name, A-to-L here, M-to-Z here), 28 of them are from, or have been associated with, the Diocese of London. That is 9%, a hefty proportion when compared to her compiled national total so far. So much money has already been lost from past court cases, others are still being adjudicated, and still more charges and Statements of Claim are in the works. Remember: such matters have been recurring for years, since about the late-1990s/early-2000s, when the clerical sex abuse scandals in dioceses everywhere started exploding onto the world scene. Pope Benedict lamented in 2010:
Yes, it is a great crisis, we have to say that. It was upsetting for all of us. Suddenly so much filth. It was really almost like the crater of a volcano, out of which suddenly a tremendous cloud of filth came, darkening and soiling everything, so that above all the priesthood suddenly seemed to be a place of shame and every priest was under the suspicion of being one like that too.[16]
Note well: the clerical sex abuse scandal is a global phenomenon as is the clerical homomafia a global phenomenon. Both of these poisons hatched out of the mud into the international spotlight at approximately the same time. Correlation or causation?

XXIV. So, the second very important question that must be posed is this: Of those priests who have committed sexual violations against youths, which have or currently are bankrupting dioceses everywhere due to court settlements, is there a common denominator that can be identified or some factor which most characterizes them, thus explaining their wicked behaviours? But this question need not be put forward because it has been answered, proven and written about myriad times before. That is, the majority of sex abusing priests have been homosexuals. The majority of victims have been young boys. Thus, there is a direct, irrefutable connection between homosexual priests and pederasty. There are many cases of male youths being abused simply because the Catholic priesthood is populated by many homosexuals. These facts need to be restated over and over because it has been the homolobby itself which has worked very diligently to obviate this message from getting out to confused and disheartened laymen, who have been a pains trying to figure out why the Faith has so suddenly atrophied in recent times. Fr. Oko again:

We should first expose the common lie presented by the media. They keep talking about paedophilia among clergymen, while it is most often the case that the problem is ephebophilia, which is a perversion consisting in adult, homosexual men being attracted not to children, but to pubescent and adolescent boys. It is a typical deviation related to homosexuality. Basic knowledge about that reality includes the fact that more than 80 percent of cases involving sexual abuse by clergymen reported in the U.S.A. were cases of ephebophilia, not paedophilia! That fact has been carefully hidden and ignored, as it reveals particularly well the hypocrisy of the homolobby in both the world and the Church. It is all the more important that it be exposed.[17]
No less an authority on the subject, Randy Engel, author of  the massively documented and definitive tome The Rite of Sodomy, provides some historical context:
...sexual relations between adult men and young boys and youth, has been the most universal and pervasive form of homosexuality from ancient to modern times. This fact dispels the myth that there is no connection between the current sexual abuse scandals rocking the Church and homosexuality.[18]
Even ++Tarcisio Bertone, certainly not my favourite Cardinal, points in this direction:
Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia [they do believe, however...] that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia... That is true... That is the problem.[19]
But there's more - a pre-Vatican II Instruction promulgated on the priest selection process. It was certified and signed by a sainted pope. Not by St. Pope Pius X, assailer of Modernism. But by a newer saint, a hero of Nu-Church, in fact. He was canonized recently, St. Pope John XXIII, who convened the Second Vatican Council, which opened the floodgates of Modernism. Paragraph No. 30 reads:
Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with the evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious danger.[20]
Nobody took heed back then. Today we pay the price.

XXV. What about those homosexual priests who, though withholding from acting out on their deeply-hidden appetites for young boys, are still sodomizing each other at their drug and dram parties, after their drag shows, or at whatever orgiastic pinkfest where their secret cabals meet up? Or what about those homosexual priests who empathize and work closely with whatever homosexual group, both invariably unrepentant and determined to change Church teaching on the subject? Three observations here:

(1) Said Ven. Bishop Fulton Sheen: "What man does is the externalization of what he is".[21] Because homosexuality is how these priests self-identify, this necessarily will resonate in their viewpoints and activities occurring "on the outside", in the public realm - pastoring, homilies, in liturgy, counsel to parishioners, writings, seminary lectures, media interviews/commentary, friendships, social interests - everything. Undeniably, these viewpoints and activities are Modernist-inclined, liberal, progressive, dissenting, heretical, apostatic, anti-Catholic, worthy of excommunication. Certainly, they will endorse lax, sympathetic or endearing perspectives on homosexuality, even ascribing it as a "gift", making sure all the while to conceal the negative ramifications of such a lifestyle to the self and society, despite unequivocal facts given in biomedical, psychiatric and sociological studies.

(2) Related to the first observation, this positive "non-judgemental" position on sodomitic behaviour produces over time an atmosphere of acceptability, an artificial environment of "normality" skewed far away from a once-considered depravity of rare occurrence. This expanding bubbleworld itself, detrimentally, makes matters conducive to further sexual abuse. Because it allows for more opportunities, in time and place, for the most degenerate of homosexual priests to satisfy his secret lust for young Johnny "in the backroom" at his apartment downtown in the gay district, while his intoxicated lovers are outside in the party room, on bean bags, snorting lines of coke, slugging down the booze, necking, petting each other, watching Will and Grace on TV. If they discover what their friend just did in the backroom, they are sure as heck are not going to report the rape. Excepting, perhaps, to the queen bee, but that only to ensure proper mechanisms are set in place to prevent leaks, stifle whistleblowers, etc. Recall: the homomafia is a protective network.

(3) Many priest sexual abusers have obtained their due justice, from the State and from the Church, especially during Pope Benedict's reign. Additionally, the number of reported abuses have significantly declined in recent years. Let us also not forget the damage done by those crew cut lesbian nuns garbed up in their polyester pantsuits. It must be emphasized that the number of abusers, compared to the overall priest population, is very small. Metrics have been overblown by the Catholic-hating secular MSM, of course. Moreover, there has been an effective news blackout on sexual abusers from other religions - Mohammedans, Jews, Pagans, Protestants, including those in secular occupations, e.g. teachers, civil servants. Nonetheless, it must be highlighted in this third observation that, in the main, the homomafia in the Church has escaped ecclesiastical penalty. It has weathered the storm of the sex abuse scandals, remaining deeply embedded, still powerful, holding key positions at all levels, globally. There has been no purge. Remember - on the cusp of his abdication - that mammoth dossier Pope Benedict had three trusted Cardinals prepare for him? Remember the white box? Whatever happened to that? Don't read about it anymore. Vanished. Remember the anticipation you felt when news from all over was intimating a breaking story on the exposure of a homomafia network inside the Vatican, linking to points beyond? Remember Michael Voris reporting on this from the Piazza? Remember when Fr. Oko's essay spread like wildfire on the internet upon its English translation? Then... nothing. A fleeting memory. Later on, with Pope Francis' "Who am I to judge" comment, which went nuclear - reinforced with his appointment of flamer Msgr. Battista Ricca to the Vatican Bank,[22] perception by an ignorant and apostasized populace usurped principled Magisterial teaching. Francis has crushed so many hopes, alienated so many good Catholics. So it's smooth sailing for the Homointern. Sodomites triumphant... for now.

XXVI. Between July 2012 and February 2013, in the period leading up to Pope Benedict's surprising abdication, the always engaging and highly knowledgeable Steve Jalsevac of LifeSite News wrote, in my opinion, three very important articles on how the homomafia have been chiefly responsible for razing the Catholic Church from within,[23] assumingly based on experience mainly with the Canadian circumstance. It is encouraged that these be read in full, including the com boxes (links here, here and here). Below are what this writer deems to be the most "need to know" statements made in those three articles:
The cancer I'm referring to is the presence within the Church of numerous active homosexuals among the clergy at all levels, within many of the orders and among the laity in many Catholic institutions... This has been and still is a much greater problem than the vast majority of Catholics realize...

...It is ugly, disturbing and not something that most people want to hear about. It involves tales of infiltration, seduction, rape, and other abuses, rampant use of porn, sordid encounters, frequent blackmail and brutal reprisals against whistle-blower seminarians and priests and intimidation of bishops. It is nasty stuff, not for the faint of heart and holds the potential to threaten faith.

...the influence of networks of homosexual clergy within the Church is still very strong. They are still an obstacle to strengthening of the Church for the great spiritual and cultural war which is building... playing a large role in most of the dreadful corruptions and dissent that have been plaguing the Church these past 50 or more years...

The scandal is that many bishops have been refusing to use their authority to take action against these decades' long, in-your-face challenges to Catholic moral principles, despite constant appeals and complaints, with much solid evidence given by faithful Catholics. The groups have seemed to be untouchable, despite their blatant dissent...

...there are all the individuals in authority who skillfully keep their totally unrepentant immoral life and homosexual network... well hidden from ordinary Catholics who trustingly think the world of most of them.

...the homosexual and otherwise very dissenting sexual culture that has ruled within much of the Catholic Church...

They tend to gain a lot of control over Church agencies, clergy and staff appointments and Church media, making it difficult to expose and expel them.

You want to know why there has been very poor and inconsistent support for the life and family movements for many years from Catholic Church leaders? The powerful homosexual subculture in the church has, in the opinion of many in the know, been a main cause of that puzzling and crippling phenomenon.[23]
XXVII. So, then, how does all this relate to our case study on the Diocese of London? What specifically explains its so-called "reorganization"? Why the acute priest shortage? Why the sudden drop in the number of diocesan priests from 2002 onward, just after the diocese had a new bishop installed? What has triggered an emptying of students from St. Peter's Seminary and the desperate requirement to attain funding from another diocese to keep it operational? Is the cause a "societal shift"? What is that? Even with "declining birth rates", the diocese has a reported population of 450,000 baptized Catholics. Surely - even with an ample percentage of non-practicing Catholics, 450K is still a large enough pool to draw potential candidates from, yes? Or is there something else deterring and even scaring young men, manly men, orthodox men, away from being candidates for the priesthood? What has accounted for the bottoming out of Sunday Mass attendance? Could it be all those women at the altar, doing readings, assisting the priest, 80% of them "Lay Ecclesial Minsters" - a feminization of the liturgy and of parish life? Who has been responsible for feminizing the liturgy? Or what about the almost immediate closure of numerous parishes with a corresponding loss of revenue for the chancery office? This cannot be wholly explained with depleted pewsitter contributions from low Mass attendance. Did it not result from colossal payouts in legal settlements from sex abusing priests in the diocese? Were not most of their victims young boys? Does not that tell of a singular sexual proclivity of the abusers?... We can continue, but basically the preponderance of evidence points to a homosexual subculture as being largely responsible for the implosion currently underway in the Diocese of London. Fr. Oko, a world authority on the subject, gave this warning in 2012: "If homolobbyists are allowed to act freely, in a dozen or so years they may destroy entire congregations and dioceses".[24] If the information presented in Part 1 of this analysis is any indication, this appears to be the future for Diocesis Londonensis.

Yet, there is a hope, do not forget. Even though faithful Canadian Catholics, both clerical and lay, have been disenfranchised and betrayed by the bishops, by the CCCB and regional bishops' conferences, by careerists, by Professional Catholics, by the "official" Catholic media, by so-called "Catholic" publishers, by heretical university professors, by "Catholic" unions, by "Catholic" teacher associations, by nearly every "Catholic" institution and nearly every member of CanChurch, there are still ways to fight back and score severe blows against the sinister homomafia. How? First things first: supplication to the Blessed Virgin. Pray the Rosary, for yourselves, for those affected, especially for the enemies within. Only absolute purity and holiness, only the Immaculate Heart of Our Lady, can provide the necessary leadership and guidance required to eliminate this utter filth and perversion infecting the Church. If not done, you are wasting your time in this war.

XXIX. As for earthly logistics, the best way to do this is to band together as a community or, even better, as a brigade. Father Oko again:

...homomafia in the Church must be dealt with in a very professional way - we must act like a prosecutor or an officer in the battlefield...

It is important that we find a possibly large group of people of goodwill to protect us and support what we do. That group should include clergymen, as high in the hierarchy as possible, experts in various fields, archive records specialists, lawyers, policemen, journalists, and as may believers as possible. It is good to exchange information, documents, evidence. The global network of homolobbies and homomafias must be counterbalanced by a network of honest people. An excellent tool that can be used here is the Internet, which makes it possible to create a global community of people concerned about the fate of the Church, who have resolved to oppose homoideology and homoheresy. The more we know, the more we can do. We need to remember that in these matters we are like "sheep sent among wolves", and so we must be "as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves" (Matthew 10:16). We must have the courage to stand up against evildoers, as Christ had the courage to stand up against the Pharisees of his times...

The global network of homolobbies and homomafias must be counterbalanced by a global network of decent people.[25]
This blogger would definitely exclude bishops from the mix, given the current crop of Canadian prelates - unconcerned, complicit, blackmailed, heretics, all talk/no action, no balls. They must be kept out of the loop. I would also expand policemen to include detectives from sex crimes and homicide units, simply because they have the wherewithal and experience to objectively assess the most sordid levels of human behaviour. If some sort of internet forum or similar online gathering place be developed, IT experts would also be needed, familiar with the technology and software, but also adroit at thwarting hacker attacks, accessing offshore servers for backing-up databases, etc. Vetting would be required in some instances to screen out possible infiltrators. There should be no worry about funding because most of the work would be done on a volunteer basis. People concerned about the homomafia menace, especially if it has affected the lives of those they know, are not going to care much for monetary compensation. Why do you think there are so many unpaid Catholic bloggers around who spend hours upon hours writing about affairs in the Church? Why, in general, do so many devout Catholics volunteer time to help their neighbour? Because they love Our Lord and His Church, they believe what it has always taught, and they know they've been fed crap and pablum by CanChurch for these last five decades. Anyway, the larger the brigade membership, lesser would be the time required for carrying out apportioned tasks to individuals in whatever area of expertise.

XXX. Next, compile master lists for target investigations - the entirety of "official" Catholic bodies and institutions: bishops' conferences with their departments and branches, chancery offices and their "partners", diocesan newspapers, magazines, academic journals, publishers, parishes, habitless hussy "convents", associations of religious, seminaries, universities, schools, hospitals, healthcare agencies, sports groups, unions, "social justice" organizations, and so on. Then begin the information gathering process. Dispatch your researchers and investigators. Go undercover to meetings, seminars, conferences and local watering holes. Amass documents, writings, photographs, video and audio recordings, screenshots of internet activity, PDF downloads, every kind of media and, of course, be sure to follow the money. Here, forensic accountants and private investigators would be excellent additions to the brigade, especially those involved with insurance fraud cases. Although masters of disguise, it is well neigh impossible for homomafia perverts to hide their real identities for extended periods of time. It takes much mental energy to put up the front of victimhood, their greatest weapon. It takes enormous concentration to invariably come off as compassionate and kind, to manufacture charity and selflessness, to remain calm and cool. No human being is capable of these indefinitely. Sooner or later a breaking point is reached. They will "come out" on their own, without external prompting. The telltale narcissism will inexorably emerge. It is just a matter of waiting, watching and paying attention to what they write, to their personal associations, to their pursuits, interests and social enjoyments. Clues leading to facts will be there, rumours and suspicions will be floating about, too, pointing in general directions.

XXXI. After data collection is complete, catalogue everything. Sequence, collate, certify, verify, time stamp, back check, triple check, trace everything back to original sources, no hearsay, just the unadulterated facts, make sure all information can be corroborated and would hold up in judicial proceedings. Enter the lawyer's expertise. Print out multiple hardcopies of the final product, send it out in digital form to all agents in the field. But tell brigade members to wait until you give the signal. Now, once matters are set to go for dissemination, it's time to visit the bishop. Make an appointment, skip the pleasantries, summarize your findings, then plop the report on his desk. Ignore whatever he says in response about a requisite appraisal from an internal canonist, which consistently results in prevaricating linguistic gymnastics to rationalize away everything (which is why you want to have a trusted canonist in the brigade, completing his evaluation beforehand). Disregard the bishops' plea for "discretion", that it must remain an "internal matter" and never take as true promises made to "resolve" the situation. Words are empty without action. Give him a time limit to act, you have X amount of time to do something conclusively with absolutely no extension, then exit. Goodbye. In and out. If nothing eventuates by the deadline, then it's time to contact the nuncio. Repeat the process, do it quickly, and do not return any follow-up phone calls or correspondence by the bishop after the deadline. He's already out of the picture. Just looking for more time to cover himself or, if complicit, he's scrambling, freaking out, fearing implications, and likely already has convened with his bitches on the situation. If nothing happens after the nuncio, which in all likelihood will be the case, then go direct to Rome - if you can find a helpful someone in a dicastery, that is. This is tantamount unachieveable these days. Many others before you have tried with no luck. Remember, delay and bureaucracy increase exponentially as you proceed higher up the ladder. We haven't hit a roadblock, however...

XXXII. Because now it's time to give the signal - do a Document Dump, but an orderly and coordinated one. That is, do a multipronged upload onto the internet of all data and information for the case at hand. Not just brigade members, but notify bloggers and others who utilize social media as well. Everyone upload it all on the same day and at the same time. Aside from brief descriptors, no opinion commentary should be included with the uploaded files. Let that happen in the com boxes and in the tweets. Just present the data/information as such. Brute force, confuse the enemy, smoke 'em out, shock and awe, welcome to the jungle. "Make a mess" - was that not declared by Francis? Around this time, packages are arriving to editors at secular news agencies, containing hardcopies of the report. They could pop it the news cycle. Let them have a feeding frenzy. However they spin it is irrelevant because it's just raw facts and information. The main goal of the brigade is to make enough noise so as to wake up the sleeping giant. Then, let the chips fall where they may, praying all the while that Our Lady guides those chips to all the right places.

XXXIII. This would not be a revolutionary operation, but a counterrevolutionary one. Proper protocol was already accomplished beforehand by going up the chain of command. Nobody listened. Nobody did anything. And there is precedent for publicly informing the faithful when prelates fail them, in canon law and by grounds given by the Universal Doctor.[26] Time and again, dealing with hierarchs will end with hindrances, denials, diversions and inaction. That's too bad because, had you just one strong and loyal shepherd of the Athanasius variety, he could, with his Apostolic authority, rightly reign down so hard and fast to get the job done - of inquiries, to confiscate documents and materials, to expose and suspend, then to defrock and banish. This is not the situation in the post-Vatican II era. Now is the age of Democratic Catholicism and the pope, as alleged by Nu-Church, is merely "the first among equals".

XXXIV. If conducting a counterattack against the homomafia by the means just proposed, there will, undoubtedly, be castigations and accusations of witch hunts, of inquisitions, of fanaticism, you name it. This would be amusing but also hypocritical given the homomafia's well-known reputation and proficiency for swift, vicious retaliation against its opponents who endeavour to explicate and expose them. They know, in the core of their beings, that their endorsement of the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, that is has been condemned by the Church from the very beginning. Thus the requirement to create an underground cooperative, anonymous, a network of protection, faithful to themselves rather than to Magisterium. It has only been in recent years that the homosexual underground in the Church has come under the scrutinizing magnifying glass, largely assisted by the internet, in terms of easily available informational resources and the rapidity to which data can be accessed and verified. Still, the homomafia has yet to be thoroughly challenged and exposed for the surreptitious commission of its evils, past and present. To be openly challenged, as has been done in this two-part analysis, is to them a shock, an affront, "how dare you...", which, again, goes to the level of impunity involved. Yet such reactions also validate the enemy's entrenchment within Church structures, its entitlement mentality, its dictatorial sense, its Phariseeism and - most especially - its defiance. That is, non servium.

Let them sweat for a little while, I say. See what it's like. Reap what you sow. No more free ride.

We end where we began: Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.


1. M.S. Rose, Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption into the Catholic Church (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing Incorporated, 2002), pp. xi, xii.

2. "Renegade Priest: Gravel Celebrates Gay Pride Mass, Bashes Cardinal Ouellet again", LifeSite News, August 19, 2010.

3. D. Oko, "Z Papiezem przeciw homoherezji", Fronda 63, June 2012, pp. 128-160. English translation: "With the Pope Against Homoheresy". Available online.

4. Ibid.

R.P. Fabbro, "Trends Impacting Pastoral & Personnel Planning in the Diocese of London", September 15, 2011.

6. Ibid.

7. K. Pedro, "London Roman Catholic diocese beats bushes for new priests", London Free Press, January 31, 2013.

8. R.P. Fabbro, "Trends Impacting Pastoral & Personnel Planning in the Diocese of London", September 15, 2011.

9. E. Boudreau, "Diocese of Hamilton donates $2 million to St. Peter's Seminary", Catholic Register, April 19, 2014.

10. Quoted in K. Pedro, op. cit.

11. M. Adkinson, "Our Lady of the Rosary Church to be New Art, Cultural and Exhibition Centre", Diocese of London.

12. D. Battagello, "Landmark riverfront church finds new life", Windsor Star, December 4, 2013.

13. D. Oko, op. cit.

14. Cf. P. Likoudis, "Liturgical Renewal has Been Run by Sexual Liberationists", The Wanderer, February 17, 2000.

15. N. De Bono, "Condos the future of bishop's house", London Free Press, July 30, 2008.

16. Quoted in Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times, A Conversation with Peter Seewald, trans. M.J. Miller and A.J. Walker (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2010), p. 23.

17. D. Oko, op. cit.

18. Quoted in "CFN Interview on Rite of Sodomy", Catholic Family News, June 2006.

19. Quoted in M. Sheridan, "Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone blames homosexuality - not celibacy - for child abuse sex scandal", New York Daily News, April 30, 2010.

20. Careful Selection and Training of Candidates for the States of Perfection and Sacred Orders, Religiosorum Institutio, Congregation for Religious, February 2, 1961, 30(4).

21. F.J. Sheen, Preface to Religion (New York: P.J. Kennedy & Sons, 1946).

22. N. Squires, "Pope's 'eyes and ears' in Vatican bank 'had string of homosexual affairs'", The Telegraph, July 19, 2013.

S. Jalsavec, "A still very serious problem in the Catholic Church that needs to be dealt with", LifeSite News, July 27, 2012; S. Jalsavec, "Something to be dealt with in the churches - urgently and forcefully", LifeSite News, January 4, 2013; S. Jalsavec, "Catholic clerical 'Gay Mafia' finally being exposed in media?", LifeSite News, February 22, 2013.

24. D. Oko, op. cit.

25. Ibid.

26. Canon 212: "The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires... they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful". St. Thomas: "fraternal correction which is an act of charity is within the competency of everyone", Sum. Theol., ii-ii, q. 33, art. 4.



marylise said...

Too delicious for words! Truth, truth, truth. In addition to all your cogent advice, maybe we need to learn actually to enjoy the wrath of the enemy (instead of simply not fearing it). Let's consider the day wasted if we have not seriously irritated an enemy of the Church. Perhaps the most surprising insight in this posting is that of the connection between homosexual tyranny inside the Church and the failure of priests to preach on life issues. For example, the universal silence on contraception has baffled many of us. However, since contraception in effect turns its practitioners into homosexuals or homosexual sympathizers (by redefining sex as primarily a means of pleasure), it is logical that priests who are homosexual or live under the dictatorship of homosexuals would be afraid to condemn contraception. Somewhere buried inside their calculating minds is the realization that contraception among heterosexuals is an essential building block towards homosexual dominance of the culture. So if they preach against contraception, they are preaching against homosexuality. This they know will shut down their careers.

John Scott said...

Despite the flowery language and roman numerals, this blog
post (ok, I’ll humor you: “document”) is nothing more than a sad glimpse into
the heart of a person who probably knows very little real love in their life,
and I suspect struggles on a deep, personal level with their own sexuality. I
do feel compassion and sympathy for you, and I invite you to let go of the
hate, obsession and repression that has led you down this sad road. On the
other hand, I cannot sympathize with the way which you choose to vent your
feelings – i.e., though manipulating facts and personal attacks on people. I
urge you, for your own sake and for the sake of those that you are attacking:
get professional counseling help, and drop your “heresy hunt” campaign.

Pater Ignotus said...

Your response to this "document" as you call it, is typical of those who will deflect attention to a problem by attacking the one who tells the truth. Yes, the Heresy Hunter's "personal attacks on people" are nothing like your personal attack because your diagnosis is couched in the language of "compassion and sympathy" (They're the same thing). I wonder if the victims of clerical predators can muster your level of compassion. Yes, those who abused them were probably deprived of real love too and also struggled "on a deep. personal level with their own sexuality" but because they chose to do something about this everyone is better off now, obviously. Since in your compassion you generously issue invitations, here is one for you and everyone else who is uncomfortable with the truth: I invite you to let go of your willful, ideological blindness and your moral relativism. This is not a sad road but a highway strewn with victims and destruction. You can patronisingly dismiss evidence corroborated by statistics and broken lives everywhere (no compassion allowed for the victims than inhabit a now desolate city) because in the end, facts really don't matter. Yes, absolutely; the Heresy Hunter will get professional counseling for being truthful, you can feel superior to him because after all, you are compassionate and caring and everyone else can continue to enjoy and participate in the flourishing life of CanChurch where everything is great. We will tolerate every theological, moral, liturgical and pastoral aberration because then we will all continue to fee the love that has done so much make the Church in Canada so vibrant and effective in the work of evangelization. It would be too facile a thing to issue a diagnosis. Our Lord (for those of us who believe in His divinity) told us very simply that the truth will make us free. The faithful who have dared to raise their voices in concern over the destruction of the Church have been at best dismissed as "angry" by the bishops and their minions; just as you have condescendingly dismissed and accused the author of this blog. Though you dismiss the meticulous research and data provided because you are no doubt compassionate, this is cold comfort to those who love God and the Church and their neighbour for whose salvation they pray and sacrifice. I suggest you read the blog post or "document" again. This time, do so with a desire for the truth and a charitable heart. If you are truly concerned about the wellbeing of the author, you will be likewise concerned with the wellbeing of the countless souls who have been victimized and continue to be harmed by the moral and theological relativism of our times. This is true compassion.

DAJD said...

From Keith Metcalf's own Facebook page: and so it continues


K----posted to‎Keith Metcalfe
April 8
Congratulations Keith on the announcement of being ordained as a Decon (His friends can't spell either) in June, and Gloria and my thoughts and prayers are with you through all of your journey. Peace be with you and love ya. Take care and see you soon

John Scott said...

I am not hiding my identity. John Scott is my real name. I
attended St. Peter's Seminary for three years, and left because I discerned that
I do not have a vocation to the priesthood. I currently live in Vancouver,

VC, why don’t you come forward with YOUR real identity? I
don’t know who you are, so I honestly don’t know if I have ever addressed any
letters to you or not.

Keith said...

You're a joke buddy. I wrote that response quickly via a phone. So you can throw all the stones you want, makes no difference to me whatsoever. And going after a family friend for his typo says more about your character than anything.
The very fact that you decided to 'creep' my fb account as it were, is an indication of your own lack of relevance in life.
This heresy-hunter and all you computer nerds need to get a life. Perhaps using your real names would be a start... But you're all cowards of course!
I have no compassion for any of you, it appears that you are all under the same sort of brain washing consistent with any cult... Follow your leader, it is clearly not Jesus Christ..
Ps hunter, I had a good laugh at your comment about your pondering whether your 'part 1' made it to the nuncio or a Roman Dicastery... That really demonstrated what I feared most, your own megalomaniacal personality, coupled with delusions of grandeur for your blog, has led to an erroneous belief that anything an anonymous writer's ridiculous blog and pseudo-research would actually matter to anyone significant!
You are not important enough, period.

DAJD said...

Dear Keith, considering that you are about to be ordained to the Diaconate and presumably next year the priesthood, do you think your response is of the pastoral nature that it should be? Calling me a "joke" a "nerd" having "no compassion" for me? You are not fit for the Diaconate and you are not fit for the priesthood.

The homosexual priests in the diocese of London have done enough damage to souls. ALL WILL BE OUTED!

DAJD said...

It is also quite obvious Keith, that this expose and the one on the Director of Liturgy and his homoerotic art and links has caused some outrage, eh? Is that because you have all been caught? The truth is out, you cannot hide.

I will say it again, the fact that you wrote such bile above is proof that you have neither the spiritual or emotional stability and maturity for Ordination.

As for "creeping" your FB, change your security settings!

TH2 said...

Argumentum ad misericordiam.

"Furious"? For passing along material that was voluntarily uploaded, already publicy available, remaining so for months? "Furious" at this blog? It really is astonishing. Given this fury, then, what does that tell us?

Mention by Mr. Coren is irrelevant. Blog recognition by a columnist from a diocesan newspaper or by paid apologists holds no weight here. Anyway, we both know in recent months of how his views on the subject have turned, shall we say, more liberal.

Where were your "friends" when a good priest, simply doing the Lord's work in social media and not looking for any fights, was publicly singled out, isolated from all priests and the bishop in his diocese, and vilified by a more notable public media personality? I do not recall any of your "friends" coming to the defence of the former? Perhaps they had more important matters at hand to attend.

"Meanwhile tailoring the tone of public communications, including Facebook posts, to best accentuate one's calling and state in life is certainly a good idea" To add to this statement, we could also advise those who presently reside in Ivory Towers to every once in a while proceed downward to ground level and see how the vineyard has been utterly devastated.

Dorothy said...

Well, you know. Sometimes you call people colourfully nasty names. Few people enjoy that. So far I have escaped this, and I am grateful. I flinch at what you could come up with.

Personally I had no idea who your good priest was until you blogged about him, nor did I know that he had been singled out by some other priest I had never heard of. Not my friends' diocese, which let's face it, is not world-famous in its own right. I'm a bit more concerned about what Cardinal Kasper, for example, is up to.

TH2 said...

You're the exception. I can think of one of your "friends" who for years has been vilifying and misrepresenting orthodox Catholics, less overtly these days. I see no problem to respond in like fashion, then.

Dorothy said...

Blimey. I can't. I don't have any close pals who are columnists.And I got chucked from PM, so... Hmm...

Post a Comment