Sunday, October 16, 2016

Toronto Area Police Display Cultural Bias Against Pro-Life Witness

Chief Paul Martin says the DRPS is working hard to reach new recruits from diverse backgrounds

Unfortunately cultural bias in the Canada of 2016 is decidedly against traditional Christian morality, in particular pro-life and pro-family witness. In this posting I share the content of recent letters to the Durham Regional Police Services Chief and the Chief’s response. The letters speak for themselves but I will preface each letter with a short intro. I make public this correspondence for the sake of transparency in law enforcement, for the advancement of freedom of speech and expression and for the greater good of the pro-life community.

I look forward to the readers’ comments and reactions to these letters.

Intro: On May 28, 2016 I was displaying signs in Oshawa at Taunton Rd. and Harmony Rd. intersection as I often do on Saturdays. On one side of my sign was a graphic abortion image and on the other a related text message for passers-by.

June 14, 2016

Chief Paul Martin,
Durham Regional Police Services,
605 Rossland Rd. E, Box 911,   
Whitby, ON L1N 0B8

Dear Chief Martin,

I am a resident of Oshawa, ON. I am a former high school teacher and a retired pastor.

On Saturday May 28, 2016 I had an encounter with one of your officers in Durham Regional Police Service; or rather I should perhaps say the Durham Region Thought Police. I have video and audio on file of this encounter. Officer Lee, a motorcycle patrolman, conducted an extensive inquisition into my activity at Harmony and Taunton Roads, sometime around 2 pm, while I was holding an anti-abortion sign at that intersection. Mine was a completely innocuous law abiding exercise, although the sign, one which I have used for several years, was of a graphic nature. Graphic pictures of abortion evince a strong response from some individuals of the public, as they rightly should, since they portray the results of a bloody violent act against a fellow human being.

Officer Lee approached me asking what’s up and proceeded to inform me that my sign was very graphic and asking why I was on the street corner with such a sign, inferring that I was engaged in doing something wrong. I informed Officer Lee immediately of my Charter rights in regard to freedom of expression and asked him what, if anything, I was doing contrary to the law, but it made little difference to his modus operandi, which, throughout the encounter, essentially consisted of harassing me with his opinions and point of view. He immediately insisted that I produce identification, without even providing just cause for his intervention.  I told him I was reluctant to lay down my sign in order to get ID from my car because I’d been through this routine before and it served no good purpose but he was adamant and so I complied and went to my car while he accompanied me.

From that point onward a discussion ensued wherein Officer Lee lectured me on why I shouldn’t be exposing others, particularly children, to such images. His opinion was clearly favoring the so called right of “Choice” i.e. the choice of women to kill their pre-born children and when I countered with my opinion he kept insisting that “it all depends on what you believe…what you feel.” So apparently Officer Lee’s opinion took precedence in the matter and he was determined to press that opinion as far as he could, against my protestations. Then followed a host of questions about how many other times had I been stopped by officers in the past, why did I feel so strongly about the issue that I would hold a sign at this street corner, had someone in my family been affected somehow by abortion, why is abortion a personal issue for me, why don’t I protest instead outside an abortion clinic (Officer Lee recommended that as a better choice!), etc. During the questioning I kept reminding him that he was violating my Charter rights but he simply dismissed my protests with comments such as “How, by talking to you?”

After he had run out of questions and excuses he finally said, “I’m going to read your sign before I let you continue.” The other side of my sign had some text referring to Canada’s evil culture and again, Officer Lee was making it sound as though my right to say such things was in question. We walked back to my sign and then he started to write in his notes the words that were on my sign, interrogating me all the while on my meaning. I offered to email him a copy of the text on the sign but he declined the offer, continuing the interrogation as he went down the list of items on my sign. Clearly this was pure intimidation and animus. He never let up first nor last on forcing his opinions upon me, availing himself of every opportunity to demean or contradict the message I was delivering. At no time did I solicit his comments or his opinions, rather I tried unsuccessfully to have him leave me alone and allow me to get back to my business at hand. I protested, “I have a different opinion Officer and I’m allowed to have it. We’re not living in North Korea or in Russia…” Eventually Officer Lee could avoid the question of the law and my rights no longer, although he never conceded at any point that he was overstepping his bounds, and when I finally  insisted “Am I free to go now, Sir?” he replied “Oh, I’m not stopping you…”

What outrageous behaviour for a professional in the service of the public! But that wasn’t the end of it. He went on to take a cell phone picture of the graphic photo on my sign and then interrogated me on where exactly I had obtained that photo, i.e. the source from which I purchased it. I answered his question precisely, wished him a good day and returned to my sign duty.

On July 7, 2015, a little less than a year ago, the Kingston police issued a statement on Facebook and Twitter regarding pro-life sign protests happening in their city at the time (see media story attached to this letter). This was their message to the public:

We are receiving numerous calls regarding “Pro-life” or “Anti-Abortion” protests happening around the city. We are aware of the activity, and the graphic nature of the images on display. To this end, we have sought a legal opinion from the Kingston Crown Attorney, which advises that this conduct is not an offence under law, and is protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically freedom of expression. We are aware that some may find these protests offensive, but we would kindly ask that you refrain from calling police to report.

A few years ago I was engaged in a perfectly peaceful and lawful pro-life activity in another city in Canada when I was seriously hampered and harassed by police officers without cause. I was strongly advised to file a human rights complaint against the police. I did not do so at the time and it would be a sad day for Durham Region, for Ontario and for Canada should I have to do so the next time a Durham Regional police officer misuses his authority and position.

Chief Martin, I trust that you will do everything in your power to ensure your officers are fully informed of the law regarding this type of demonstration and that they respect the rights of all law abiding citizens to express themselves, whether officers are in agreement or not. It’s simply the only professional response acceptable and it should be the only one tolerated.


Attached: News article Vandal arrested after smearing black paint on graphic pro-life billboards

Link to Kingston Police Facebook notice

Info: By mid-September I still had not received an acknowledgement or response from the Chief of Police. For reasons stated in the second letter below I decided to write again. On this occasion I sent copies to other individuals listed.

September 18, 2016

Chief Paul Martin,
Durham Regional Police Services,
605 Rossland Rd. E, Box 911,   
Whitby, ON L1N 0B8

RE: My Previous Letter Of June 14, 2016 Remains Unanswered

Dear Chief Martin,

I refer to my previous letter of June 14, 2016, copy attached, which remains unanswered to date, more than ninety days later. The letter demanded time and effort on my part and the incident which it described was quite unsettling and frustrating. Should it be altogether dismissed or unworthy of so much as a form letter by return mail? Although I did not specifically request a response, I certainly hoped to receive an acknowledgement of the same and at least a comment or two, perhaps offering some perspective on my concerns. My letter was hand delivered to a female staff person at your office reception desk.

I assume you received my letter but of course, without receipt of a reply, I cannot be certain. I therefore feel compelled to write this follow-up correspondence. I cannot help thinking that, had I been a member of the LGBTQ community who was reporting an instance of unjust discrimination or interference by a DRPS officer, my concerns would certainly have merited a quick reply of support and encouragement. Isn’t that what outreach activities relating to diversity and inclusion would mandate?  Am I or my politically incorrect cause to be excluded from the conversation exploring all the “dimensions of our diverse Region”? Is political correctness blinding us to the concerns of fellow Canadians? I can’t help but wonder.

With sincere regards,

cc.          John Henry, Mayor, City of Oshawa
Don Mitchell, Mayor, Town of Whitby
Roger M. Anderson, Durham Police Board Chair
Deputy Chief Chris Fernandes
Deputy Chief Uday Jaswal

Info: The following is a jpeg of the police chief’s response of October 5th. I was appreciative of the fact that he finally went on record with a response although it seems to me that he skirted altogether the facts of the matter and the concerns I voiced.

This is hardly the first time such bias showed up at my doorstep. However, there have been exceptions, this posting has further details.

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Holy Family Parish in Whitby Shelters Pro-Abortion Liberal MP from Church Law

UPDATE :  see update at end of posting.

Sunday past, August 28, 2016, I headed out to Holy Family Parish in Whitby to educate parishioners on Church teaching in regard to pro-abortion Catholics and Holy Communion. Liberal MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes self-identifies as a practicing Catholic and receives Holy Communion at Holy Family parish, yet she publicly supports abortion, euthanasia, same sex “marriage”, LGBTQ lifestyles and transgender "rights". Some parishioners have complained to the parish priest, Father Laszlo Nagy, about this scandalous situation but to no avail.

[Unfortunately scandals associated with Canon 915 are rife in today’s Catholic Church in the West. On the same day that I made my case outside Holy Family parish, a group of fellow Catholics were protesting at the parish attended by US Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate Sen. Tim Kaine. See coverage here, here and here. These Catholics are on the cutting edge of a true reformation urgently needed in today’s Catholic Church. There should have been hundreds, even thousands of Catholics who appeared in that protest.]

Father Nagy shows up in the video at about the 14 minute mark but unfortunately it was not the pleasant type of introduction that I would have wished for. I was obviously still quite agitated at that point by the parish ladies who, just a few moments prior, were intent on knocking over my sign. Sadly, this priest seemed entirely unconcerned with my message and instead inferred, over and over, that I was doing something wrong in using his name on my sign without his permission!!! God help us! We are in a grievous state indeed!!

UPDATED August 31st
Catholic MP Celina C-Chavannes tweeted out the following in the early hours of this morning:

Sunday, July 03, 2016

The Swift And Stunning Downfall Of The Catholic Faith In Canada

ChurchMilitant.TV does an in-depth investigation into the collapse of the Catholic Church in Canada at the hands of Bishops who betrayed the Faith and their flocks. If you are a premium subscriber you can see the full 70 minute+ report by going here.

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

When Bishops Betray: Court Decrees 40M Bubble Zone Outside St. John's Abortuary

Pseudo-catholic Rolanda Ryan, owner of child killing centre, 
with her lawyer in Supreme Court
A health clinic in St. John's has reached a deal with anti-abortion activists to ban protests within a 40 metres radius of its building. 
The Athena Health Clinic finalized the decision at the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador on Tuesday.
Would this be the same "health clinic" run by the same pseudo-catholic as I exposed in this blog posting in 2014? In fact, yes, it would be.
Now this entire tragedy spells S-C-A-N-D-A-L in a multitude of ways: scandalous that someone raised Catholic could ever contemplate facilitating or assisting in the murder of unborn children, let alone protesting in public a woman’s “right” to murder her children; scandalous that fellow Catholics could sit in pews and watch known baby killers join in the Communion line to desecrate the Holy Eucharist without rushing to protect the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ from sacrilege; scandalous that priests can’t/won’t/don’t stop it; scandalous that Bishops seem indifferent or powerless to address such abominations. 
These are some of the tweets I sent out in response to this disturbing development:

You see, when God's people stubbornly and consistently defend the lives of pre-born children threatened by abortion—as these pro-life heroes have done in St. John's, NL for decades—eventually the devil gets enraged and stirs up his minions, the champions of death, to push back and protect his territory. Because, you see, legal abortion is perhaps his greatest bloody achievement in the war against God and His Creation.

And when Catholic Bishops are indifferent, on a daily basis, to the evil of child killing taking place in their very backyards and, worse still, can't be bothered to intervene when peaceful, prayerful and loving pro-lifers themselves are under direct attack, you may expect the devil to make huge gains in advancing  Why wouldn't he expect a great victory in a spiritual offensive when his enemies are weak, apathetic and oblivious to the power granted them by their Lord and Master?

Imagine if Archbishop Martin Currie of St. John's, had taken to heart the scandal exposed in my posting of 2014. Imagine we had seen serious action such as I proposed:
...a front page notice in the local newspaper or the Archdiocesan website lamenting the fact that so-called Catholics who run the local abortion centre received Holy Communion inadvertently last Sunday at St. Teresa's parish? Did we hear that local Catholics were so outraged to discover this that they demanded from the Archbishop assurances that such a thing might never happen again? Did we subsequently see on the Archdiocesan website or the Archbishop's blog a statement from Archbishop Currie that such a disgrace would never happen in his Archdiocese a second time?
Imagine the Archbishop had arranged a meeting with the Ryan sisters to advise them of their standing in the Catholic Church in accordance with Canon Law and their automatic excommunication for their support and facilitation of abortion. Imagine he had impressed upon them the seriousness of their actions before Almighty God and the absolute impossibility of receiving Jesus Christ in the Eucharist whilst living in such a separated, wretched and sinful state. Imagine he had, with godly earnest, perhaps even with tears, implored these sisters to immediately repent of their sins and be reconciled to Christ who loved them so. Imagine what a different outcome than the one we saw take place today in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Failing in his direct appeal to and discipline of the pro-abortion Catholic sisters, and every other reasonable effort to distance Holy Mother Church from the evil actions of renegade Catholics, the Archbishop might likely be forced into the most extreme Christ-like course of action required: joining the pro-life warriors in prayer and protest outside the killing centre and defying the intimidating tactics of the court. Of course this programme of self-sacrifice might ultimately lead the Archbishop to a night in jail but who in the province would ever thereafter doubt the Church's staunch opposition to the killing of innocents? Would even the courts dare pursue the Archbishop's prosecution?

But alas, we know only too well that Catholic Bishops have seldom, if ever, displayed such conviction or offered such sacrifice. And so it is that abortion continues to rob our nation of God's precious gifts. 

And so also, it would appear that we are one court case closer to the tragedy of a Canada where those opposed to the murder of children in the womb face immediate jail time for their public show of resistance.

Monday, June 13, 2016

The Overwhelming Rejection Of The Faith Among Catholics

Michael Voris hammers away. I couldn't agree more.
The reason why, in the final analysis, is fear. The bishops need to hear that what they are doing is wrong. They need to be told point blank that they are completely out of touch. They are steering the Church over the cliff, that they are being unfaithful and disobedient, that their "managing the decline" approach to evangelization is ridiculous, that substituting watered-down "hugs and kisses" catechesis for actual doctrine will cost them dearly when they die and approach their Lord and Master.

Friday, June 10, 2016

Pseudo-Catholic Liberal MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes Receiving Communion At Whitby Parish

Allow me to clarify: A pro-abortion, pro-sodomy, pro-same sex marriage, and pro-euthanasia “Catholic” politician in our Archdiocese regularly attends Mass and is served the Sacred Body and Blood of Jesus Christ by the parish priest.

So what’s the big deal? A majority of Canada’s Catholics qualify for the label pseudo-catholic and yet they are still offered Holy Communion in their parishes (it’s still sacrilege though).

True. But here I’m talking about a Catholic who has high public visibility, an elected Member of Canada’s Parliament who represents the Whitby riding. It’s technically safe to call her, in Catholic parlance, a public sinner.
Who is Celina Caesar-Chavannes?

Celina R. Caesar-Chavannes MP is a Canadian Liberal politician, who was elected to represent the riding of Whitby in the House of Commons of Canada in the 2015 federal election. Wikipedia

She is also Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister. Yes, correct, that Prime Minister, pseudo-catholic Justin Trudeau. Take note then, she has been appointed to speak on behalf of Justin Trudeau! (Is there any chance he would have chosen a secretary to speak for him who has views contrary to his on crucial messaging?) In fact, she gives every evidence of being a veritable clone of our current PM.

I will refer to Ms. Caesar-Chavannes for the remainder of this posting as CRCC.

CRCC attends Holy Family Parish in Whitby, ON. She regularly presents for Holy Communion.
What are the political facts about CRCC?


She is a Liberal MP in Justin Trudeau’s cabinet and all his MP’s are under a mandate to vote pro-choice.  In May 2014, a year prior to CRCC’s election victory, Trudeau said, “Candidates who oppose abortion are barred from running in the Liberal Party’s ‘open’ nominations for the 2015 federal election.” We can only assume CRCC votes in favour of the status quo on abortion in Canada. She supports a woman’s “right” to kill her unborn child.

On June 1, 2016, CRCC posted the following on her Facebook page:

I was honoured to join Prime Minister Justin Trudeau today as he raised the Pride flag on Parliament Hill. He reminded us that there is still much work to do to - and that we are all responsible for doing our part.

She included the link to the CBC story Prime Minister Justin Trudeau raises a Pride flag on Parliament Hill for the first time in Canadian history as well as embedding the CBC video on her timeline.


On May 17, 2016, CRCC posted the following on her Facebook page:

Today is about hope, change, & the understanding that as Canadians we should all feel safe to be ourselves. Very proud of our government and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau today, and thankful to the countless people who continue to work hard to eliminate homophobia and transphobia.


On May 3, 2016, CRCC posted the following on her Facebook page:

Last night I spoke in the House about Bill C-14, Medical Assistance in Dying. It was an honour to stand up in support of this important legislation. This bill has amplified the discourse about life and about death. I am thankful to all who participated in the preparation and tabling of this document.

She featured a video of her speech in the House of Commons (also posted same, with text, on her official MP website) summarizing the government’s position on Bill C-14, noting particularly that she was “proud” of the government bill. She even touted her bona fides as a “person of faith” in assessing the positive nature of the new suicide paradigm (sounds familiar), also citing her meeting with St. John the Evangelist Catholic parish in Whitby over concerns about conscience rights of physicians. Of course, she insisted, her government would never trample conscience rights! (except when it came to MP’s voting pro-choice!) She waxed eloquent about how the work on C-14 “challenges us all to examine our fundamental beliefs about life and about death.”

Pro-same-sex “marriage”

There was no direct reference that I could find on CRCC’s Facebook page to support the conclusion that she is in favour of sodo-marriage. However, given her very close position as spokesperson for PM Justin Trudeau, her membership in the Liberal Party of Canada—the party that pushed through this insult to God and marriage—and her other publicly stated positions on homosexuality and LGBT rights, it is only reasonable to assume she supports same-sex “marriage” as well. Of course if I am wrong on this point I will certainly amend this paragraph with an update to that effect.
What is CRCC’s status as a Catholic parishioner?

I do not know this woman personally and so I rely heavily on my sources. She is a regular parishioner at Holy Family Parish in Whitby, ON. She regularly participates in the celebration of Holy Eucharist, publicly receiving Jesus Christ without restriction or censure. She has been questioned at times about her political affiliation and her support of policies and positions identified by the Catholic Church as grave evils. Rather than engaging in any reasoned discussion, she provides no explanation whatever for her public dissent but instead insists that judging is contrary to the Bible.  

The parish priest is well aware of the concerns that faithful Catholics have in regard to CRCC’s dissent from Catholic teachings and the scandal generated thereby. He is also aware of the strong objections that some have to CRCC partaking of the Holy Eucharist while obstinately persisting publicly in a condition of grave sin. (Canon 915 of the Catholic Code of Canon Law insists that such public sinners are NOT TO BE ADMITTED to Holy Communion.) Perhaps the priest, like CRCC herself, believes in the mantra that “we should never judge others” or perhaps he believes in the heresy that has infected CanChurch since the Catholic Bishops’ 1968 Winnipeg Statement, that of “conscience rights.”

No doubt it would be a bombshell going off in his parish and in his personal career if he decided to deny Holy Communion to such a high profile politician. Is that why he continues to ignore Canon 915 or is it because the status quo in the Archdiocese is to never seriously address any grave evils in the lives of the faithful in respect of administering Holy Communion, let alone that of public sinners. This appears, increasingly, to be the modus operandi of Cardinal Collins. Why then would any of his priests bother to make grave sin an issue or to protect the Lord Jesus Christ from sacrilege?

But the fallout from such cowardice and betrayal is of nuclear proportions. Faithful Catholics are so scandalized by repeatedly witnessing such sacrileges that the Holy Spirit within them becomes vexed and grieved and they see no alternative but to leave their parishes. But where do they go to find a community of true believing Catholics?  They can easily become overcome by doubt and cynicism and cease Church-going and their public worship.

Even now the scandal at Holy Family parish in Whitby is taking an extreme toll on serious minded Catholics and some are already preparing to leave.
What does the future possibly hold for CRCC?

CRCC is a very savvy politician. I would describe her as one who has a sixth sense about her job. Her political instincts are sharp, powerful and quite competitive. She is a gifted communicator and is extremely effective with social media and getting her message across. The feedback she receives from constituents and interested parties in general is almost universally positive and even extraordinary. In short, if they don’t love her they at least regard her as a very impressive, committed and authentic politician, one possessed of great compassion and care for her community.  

I hasten to add here that any gifts that CRCC possesses in regard to serving her fellow man are gifts given to her by God through the Holy Spirit at her confirmation. She is obligated, again by that same Holy Spirit, to use those gifts in accord with the laws and statutes of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church. She has NO freedom to use them as she pleases. In this connection we see the great sin of Canada’s Catholic Bishops who refuse to teach the fullness of the Catholic faith and to properly form the consciences of the faithful. Their omission to do so, and their refusal to discipline wayward and renegade souls, particularly Catholic politicians and other influential public figures, has resulted directly in the creation of a false counter-church—a pseudo-catholic culture—within the bowels of Canada’s true Catholic Church.   

In a recent interview with CRCC, Global TV broached the subject of a possible future run for Prime Minister by the rookie politician. We learn from that interview (and others) that CRCC recovered from a very low turning point in her life when she cried out in prayer and with tears to God for help. She credits her future in politics, at least partly, with the unfolding of God’s answer to her prayer. Unfortunately God is not the only one battling for souls and the problem is if the Bishops don’t address their failures in forming the minds and hearts of CRCC and the rest of Canada’s faithful, we may very well be watching the making of another pseudo-catholic Prime Minister.
It’s all on the Bishops

Some of us could see it coming with Justin Trudeau for many years. The Bishops apparently couldn’t or simply didn’t care (sufficiently). Through their denial of Canon law and other select Church teachings we see they prefer to do crisis management and now those that seem to care are running mad and scared.

God equips His people with great and fearful gifts, in order that His Body might be built up and Christ glorified in our world as King. Then He passes these souls over to the Bishops in order that they might be trained and put into His Service. When the Bishops fail in their responsibilities then Satan wins by default. Through the indoctrination of culture and the world and through the weakness of human flesh, Satan already has a stupendous foothold in the lives of every individual not on a steady path of daily conversion to Christ. Catholics like CRCC and Justin Trudeau, although very likely culpably ignorant, believe they are doing the best they can for their families, others, and the nation but too many are actually in the service of their father the devil. Unfortunately, priests and their Bishops, immobilized by fear and confusion, are doing little to correct them on their deadly path, and, may one day join them in Hell.
The failure of Archbishop Prendergast to redress scandal

Renegade “Catholic” politicians, as well as scores of key public officials, like CRCC could be saved from the destructive path of dismantling the moral fabric of Canada if only Archbishop Prendergast would take seriously the charge he has from Jesus Christ and His Church. Canon law demands that public sinners be denied Holy Communion for just such a reason as we currently see in the CRCC scandal. If the Archbishop were to PUBLICLY apply—as indeed the spirit of the canon demands and as I have argued he ought to—the censure of Canon 915 with respect to the most powerful antichrist “Catholic” in Canadian politics, our very own PM Justin Trudeau, it would be a powerful antidote, and rebuke, to other pseudo-catholics like CRCC and cause them to think very carefully and seriously about not following in the same path. It would also embolden the local priests to follow his example and apply some much needed discipline to the lives of the most rebellious public sinners in their parishes.   

Instead of idolizing and cozying up to the most notorious pseudo-catholics in Canadian history, wayward Catholics might be more inclined to shun them altogether, to the eternal good of their souls.

Sunday, May 29, 2016

Faithful Catholic Teachers in Toronto Persecuted With Full Knowledge of Cardinal Collins

It's happening and it`s vicious. That's all I'm going to say.

Sharing details will only further jeopardize the futures of the teachers already humiliated and victimized.

Why is it happening? In order to silence the Truth of Catholic teaching on contraception, homosexuality, Islam, etc., in order to shut out He Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life, from an evil, counterfeit, make-believe copy of the One True Religion.

Pseudo-catholic administrators are now entirely in charge of the “catholic” school system.

Maybe some investigative journalist can expose the whole sordid mess of religious persecution in our own backyard.

Scandalous beyond measure.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

I Demand That Canada's Catholic Bishops Protect Me From Justin Trudeau

I WILL NOT share the same cup with Justin Trudeau.
You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. I Corinthians 10:21
When he attends my parish for a funeral Mass or other occasion I want to know for certain that I will not be drinking the same cup from which this pseudo-catholic devil drinks.

Yesterday our gallant PM attended a funeral Mass in Cape Breton. Nobody seems to know whether he stepped forward for the Body and Blood of Christ. We can say almost of a certainty this means he did present for Holy Communion, otherwise would it not have been a point of interest in somebody's report? On Easter Sunday past the PM attended Mass on Fog Island, NL: same uncertainty with respect to Holy Eucharist.

Right now there are rumours and questions swirling about whether Trudeau currently partakes of Holy Communion. Some have said he does not since his conversation with Archbishop Prendergast of Ottawa. But we don't know and the establishment Catholic media (including LifeSiteNews) are too busy covering for this Archbishop to bother sending an investigative team to answer the question.

There should be no doubt. There ought to be certainty. The Church makes clear provision, as she always has, for dealing with public sinners. Canon 915 is the prescription for Justin Trudeau's behaviour, He has created great scandal and Bishops have refused to address his public sin and the sacrilege that accompanies it every time he partakes of Holy Communion, to say nothing of the great danger to his own soul.

A closed door meeting with Justin Trudeau is not a sufficient response. An entire nation of Catholics needs to know whether this awful scandal has been redressed and whether Justin Trudeau, who holds the highest political office in the nation, is above the law of Christ's Church. Otherwise souls will continue to be scandalized, some might even give up on the Church and lose their souls.

It is past time for Ottawa Archbishop Prendergast to #CanonizeJustinTrudeau: Implement Canon 915 such that all Canadians know he has been properly judged and proscribed by the Church.

If ever I shared the same Mass with this catholic imposter I would never step forward at that Mass to drink from the same cup. This is the stuff of which schisms are made.

Sunday, May 15, 2016

The Best of Canada's Catholic Bishops: Actively Betraying The Faithful For Decades

Back in early March of this year Catholic theologian (and blogger) Dr. Colin Kerr announced that my blog Contra|Diction had been banned from his Society of Canadian Catholic Bloggers. I promptly left a comment on his blog posting and then issued my own short posting in response. Colin’s posting generated a good number of interesting comments, as did mine, and these comments taken as a whole provide both a range of insight as well as a share of ad hominem attack. I initially planned to publish a more detailed critique of Colin’s decision to oust my blog as well as of the confused rationale which he had expressed in his posting but I soon realized it simply would have consumed more time and energy than it was worth. It would have been quite unrealistic to expect that yet more argumentation could override his strong emotional connections to Archbishop Prendergast particularly, but also to Cardinal Collins.

Fast forward to last week when Vox Cantoris blog posted Pervert Priest and the Canadian bishops that covered him up, so-to-speak. The Vox links to a shocking post at Sylvia’s Site detailing the cover up in the 1960`s and 1970`s of infamous sexual predator Father John Sullivan by a host of Canadian Bishops. Go ahead and read the revolting details in order to appreciate the depravity and duplicity of the (Best) Bishops involved.

For most of 29 years that man – this wolf in sheep’s clothing, a child molester – was permitted to hear confessions, offer up the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and continue to prey on innocent young boys.

Is it really possible that several Bishops participated in such a heinous cover-up? Yes indeed and not only several, but several very powerful Bishops, those who, at the time, were considered to be the best of Canada`s Bishops.

Bishop Alexander Carter was one of the influential Gang of Five, a group of Canadian bishops who, as I once said elsewhere,  were fast friends who wielded an inordinate influence  upon their fellow Canadian bishops and hence upon the face of Roman Catholicism in Canada and indeed upon the face of the nation period.

Would anyone dispute the claim that a great many good Catholics of that time period, much like Dr. Colin Kerr today, were delighted to count these men as exemplary stewards of God? Likely they would have defended them to the death, not being fully persuaded of the mystery of iniquity. Yet were these Bishops not deeply infected with an evil that led to immense suffering for many innocent persons? Imagine the scorn and abuse that might have been heaped upon the fellow Catholic who had the temerity in those days to suggest that these Bishops were complicit in protecting a priest who serial-raped young boys. Perhaps Sylvia’s site can provide us with just such an illustration?

Bishop Alexander Carter – and others – knew that Carter was a sexual predator, and, what did he/they do?  Nothing!  Well, no, not really nothing.  In truth, the bishop (s) enabled Sullivan.  It was, after all, thanks to Carter that Sullivan was permitted to continue to masquerade as a priest and continue his sacrilegious romp from one sanctuary to another, and, yes, it was thanks to the bishop(s) that parents throughout the diocese were wilfully deceived, children were wilfully placed at risk, – and Sullivan was free to rape the souls of countless other young boys. Sad to say, and I would suggest, not surprisingly, Sullivan did just that. Until 1979!

Read the full posting, see the list of Bishop`s names and do a little homework. Lo, many of these *best* Bishops were architects and supporters of the Winnipeg Statement! History has issued its verdict on that act of defiance, and now also on the cover-up surrounding Father Sullivan.

Could there be a more a cunning, scandalous, evil and depraved betrayal of the flock by the shepherds?  I am at a loss for words.

Incidentally, ask yourself, what is worse: the cover up of sexual abuse or the mass spiritual destruction of souls? (Be sure you answer that question before leaving this page.) Forty or fifty years ago, Bishops were covering up the perverse sins of priests; now they find it convenient to cover up the sins of Catholics who regularly practice intrinsically evil behaviours, believing and pretending there’s really nothing to see here. “Let’s move along now folks, nothing to see here.” The common thread though is a blatant disregard for the welfare of souls, a de facto denial of sin and evil as well as judgment for personal sin. The scandal extends to pseudo-catholics—like PM Justin Trudeau—who infect all strata of society and who, like a huge colony of ants, are busy incrementally dismantling every moral safeguard of society and the common good. As long as Bishops don’t expect or require Catholics to live like Catholics our nation will continue to disintegrate into chaos. Which then is the worse evil?

Bishops who are not actively promoting and defending the fullness of Catholic truth, along with correcting the grievous and pervasive errors of the day, are tolerating much greater evils that are not apparent to the eye. As part of a strategy to cover up for these evils such Bishops downplay or even ignore the concerns that the faithful bring repeatedly to the fore.

But didn’t these Bishops who enabled Fr. Sullivan appear to be sincere, dedicated and enthusiastic servants of the Lord? You betcha. Were they bad, devious, un-Christian people? I doubt anyone would characterize them as such, even their critics. Were they well loved and respected by many, many Catholics? Of course they were. Learn then a lesson here: Those who discreetly, or otherwise, disrespect and undermine the teaching and discipline of the Church do not come dressed in red costumes with horns and tails but appear rather as angels of light and servants of righteousness. Blinded by their pride and arrogance they are not always aware of their own treachery nor do they always recognize rebellion in their selective silence and omissions.

Would we—should we—pray for the downfall [scroll to the end of linked posting] of such men, the “best” pastors of the Church? I imagine the answer depends on whether we can admit to, or rather grasp, the depth of evil at work in our midst. Souls are being lost, the Faith is undermined, the nation is reeling, all due to sin and scandal while too many Bishops veritably preside over the meltdown. Certainly we ought to call first for the conversion [scroll to the end of linked posting] of such men so that the Church and our society might be saved from the devil’s worst plans. But how strongly can we condemn the wayward prelate while at the same time respecting his office?

St. Paul urged the Corinthians to judge those in the Church who were guilty of sin, indicating their responsibility to put away from among themselves the wicked person. He indicated they must “deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” Surely if St. Paul could counsel the local parish to expel or excommunicate one of the brothers we may ask St. Joseph to intercede on our behalf, beseeching the Lord to convert the heart of a renegade or hireling Bishop, finally bringing to bear divine judgments of many kinds if necessary, or even the removal of said Bishop so that a worthy replacement might be had.

But shouldn’t we constrain ourselves in our struggle to see justice and order restored in the Church of Christ? Shouldn’t we come to grips with the fact that these Bishops—like all men—are not perfect, and that realistically any replacement is unlikely to be better and quite likely to be worse? GOD FORBID!! If we cannot envision and work with all our might towards a Church that is truly purged of known evil and made a holy instrument of God, then we may as well give up on our own personal call to holiness!

But again, does our condemnation constitute lack of reverence for these pastors of the Church?  Are we being presumptuous? Would we be guilty of an offense against charity? Would we be presenting a one-sided negative account of the matter? Would we be rushing to conclusions? Look at the example set by Jesus Christ Himself. These were exceedingly strong criticisms of the religious leaders of his day! Do any of the woes pronounced therein apply to the Bishops who shielded Father Sullivan? Do any of the woes apply to Bishops who consign millions of souls to hell because they fail to warn rank and file Catholics of their sinful behaviours and sacrilegious Communions? Do any of the woes apply to Bishops who neglect their duty to discipline public sinners who scandalize the faithful and corrupt the morals of a nation?

In fostering these great evils, i.e. confirming the faithful in their sin, obstinacy, heresy and sacrilege, the “best” Bishops are at one with the worst, and will suffer similar judgment with the worst if they do not return to the Lord.

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Catholic Resistance Movement Counters PseudoCatholic Lies In Oshawa

Outside St. Gertrude's Catholic Church in Oshawa before the vigil Mass on Sunday past there was a great deal of traffic. Many hundreds of people were impacted by the signs. For more info on this campaign see this posting and this one too.

It seems more and more Catholics are calling for some kind of Catholic resistance movement. God bless them all, it's about time! But if these programs don't get to the heart of the problem on the local level of EVERY parish in a diocese, I suspect they'll amount to all heat and no light. Anyone who wishes to undertake such an ambitious project had better be prepared for huge backlash including personal attacks, character assassination and loss of income stream. Really, at the stage we find ourselves, only those who have worked hard to make their personal situations relatively invulnerable will be in a position to offer effective resistance. Nevertheless, even that person must be prepared for the likelihood of a serious hit.

By the way, I'm looking for someone who might be willing to carry signs (ground level signs can also be used) and conduct other resistance efforts in the diocese of Ottawa. I can provide full details if you'd like to email me or direct message me on Twitter. Email me at the following address:

Wednesday, May 04, 2016

Ambiguity And Artful Disingenuousness

What role does ambiguity play in the current crisis of faith experienced in the Roman Catholic Church? A very significant one, particularly since Vatican II, in my opinion.



D.Q. McInerny, Professor of Philosophy
Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary
February 2016

The wizened and wily tyrant, King Ambidexterius III, was on his deathbed.  He called for his son, the heir to the throne, to give him some last minute advice as to how he should conduct his reign. Among the things he said to the young man, soon to become Ambidexterius IV, was the following: "My son, always speak with a forked tongue when addressing the people. Let all your proclamations be fairly awash in ambiguity. It is through ambiguity—ah, glorious ambiguity!—that you will be able to keep the people in a state of debilitating doubt and uncertainty, and thus safely out of reach of the truth.  Remember, my son, in ambiguity is our strength, for truth is our enemy, and ambiguity suffocates truth.” History does not provide us with the particulars as to how Ambidexterius IV followed his father's advice, but followed it he must have, for we do know that he was every bit the tyrant as was his father.

Ambiguity is a linguistic disease of a peculiarly virulent kind. It does indeed, as Ambidexterius III knew well, have a suffocating effect on truth. Just what are we dealing with here? Let us begin with some etymology, which is always illuminating.  Our word ambiguity has its roots in the Latin noun ambiguus, which means "uncertain,” which in turn is rooted in the verb ambigere, meaning "to wander about." That nicely describes just the way ambiguous language works: it wanders about aimlessly, never managing to arrive at a definite, clearly identifiable and comprehensible destination.

The typical effect of ambiguous language on those who are exposed to it is a general blurring of the mind.  Doubt and uncertainty reign. You know, or at least you strongly suspect, that the language is intended to convey some potentially detectable ideas, but, if so, those ideas are so thickly fog-bound that no amount of determined squinting on your part will allow you to make them out. After a while, out of fatigue or frustration, you may choose simply to give up the effort, which could prove to have unfortunate consequences, if it was your initial understanding that the message addressed to you had to do with some really serious matters.

The doubt  and uncertainty which is engendered  by ambiguous language, because of its equivocal, double-dealing nature, is of course clearly disadvantageous to the individual, for each of us, as rational creatures, is made to know the truth,  and doubt and uncertainty stand as formidable obstacles to the truth. But the negative effects of ambiguity assume a larger, communal dimension as well. Language is the highest form of communication, for it is the discourse of rational creatures. The root of the word communication (Latin communis = "common") is the same for the word community. When communication among a people breaks down, as the result of a surfeit of ambiguous language, and the suffocation of truth it brings with it, then the community to which those people belong begins to disintegrate. Common adherence to fundamental truths, which is the bond which ensures the integrity and coherence of any community, begins to weaken as doubt and uncertainty pervades the entire atmosphere.

There are two causes of ambiguity—carelessness and calculation. We are all liable at time to traffic in ambiguous language, in our speech and in our writing, simply because we are not giving to language the constant monitoring attention it demands. But if we are in general properly conscientious about our language, once we are made aware of the fact that we are not being clear and unambiguous in what we say and write, we usually will promptly take measures to correct the situation. We should always be prepared to take ambiguity seriously, as did the author E. B. White.  In a bright little book called The Elements of Style he wrote that ambiguous language "is not merely a disturber of prose, it is a destroyer of life, of hope."

The second cause of ambiguity is calculation. Here ambiguous language is not accidental, not the result of inattention; it is quite deliberate. People who use ambiguous language in a calculating manner know exactly what they are doing. Their modus operandi is one of artful disingenuousness. They want to inculcate doubt and uncertainty in the minds of those who hear what they say and read what they write. They are not friends of truth; in fact, it is precisely the truth they wish to undermine, but they know that were they to attempt to do so in a clear, straightforward manner they could not gain their objective, for people would immediately see what they were up to and the alarm bells would go off. So, in order to accomplish their plan of substituting falsity for truth, they advert to ambiguity.

In doing this they take a two-pronged approach. First, they never explicitly state, much less emphasize, what they know to be the truth, but leave it unspoken so that it is not in the forefront of the minds of their auditors or readers. Thus they set the stage for confusion. Secondly, they focus on the falsity which they want to promote, but they do so in a subtle, indirect manner. Let us say that X is what they know to be the truth—which, if they were responsible, they should be defending—while Y is the falsity which they are promoting. They will not come right out and say, "X is clearly the truth and we must adhere to it tenaciously." Nor will they say, "Y is the new truth which we must now all assent to." That would be too blunt an approach, and would only backfire on them. Rather, they invite their auditors or readers to be open and flexible in their thinking, receptive to new possibilities, so that they might see in Y something worth serious consideration. "Yes, of course," they would say, "we have always in the past considered Y to  be false, and, mind you, we are not exactly saying that it is true now, but, after all, times are changing, and we must be prepared to make accommodations  in order to keep up with the progressive advance of human  history." And they might, quite irrelevantly, throw in the idea that we all have to strive to be caring and compassionate.

Those on the receiving end of this calculated use of ambiguity are left in a state of perplexity. Having not heard the truth which is X explicitly stated, while having been presented with the falsity which is Y as something which, so they are left to suppose, is a negotiable matter, and even as something they are perhaps under moral obligation to regard as an acceptable alternative to what they previously believed to be true, they do not quite know where they stand. "What is the truth?" they ask themselves. And now, given their confused frame of mind, there is the danger that eventually they may wonder if there is any objectively determinable truth at all to be recognized in the matter. Perhaps, they think, it is simply up to each individual to decide, "following his conscience." Enter moral relativism.

Our Lord admonished us to be clear and direct in our language, saying Yes, Yes, or No, No. The raspy voice of ambiguity, for its part, says, Maybe Yes, Yes; Maybe No, No. 

Tuesday, May 03, 2016

Cardinal Robert Sarah: An Eclipse Of God

An Eclipse Of God

by Cardinal Robert Sarah

Inasmuch as God has lost his primacy among man’s preoccupations, inasmuch as man himself gets in the way of God, we are experiencing an eclipse of God. Consequently, there is increasing obscurity and incomprehension as to the true nature of man, for he is defined only in relation to God. We no longer know who man is once he detaches himself from his Creator. Man intends to recreate himself; he rejects the laws of his nature, which become contingent. Man’s rupture with God obscures his way of looking at creation. Blinded by his technological successes, his world view disfigures the world: things no longer possess ontological truth or goodness but, rather, are neutral, and man is the one who must give them meaning. This is why it is urgent to emphasize that the abandonment of God by contemporary societies, especially in the West, affects not only the teaching of the Church but also the foundations of anthropology. [Source]

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Bewildered Faith Leaders Pleading To Caesar For Protection From Euthanasia

The horse has bolted the barn (the latch has been off the door for years) and now "faith leaders" have given up on getting the animal back in the barn. They are instead asking for "conscience protection" so they don't have to feel they are a part of the evil coming down the tracks.

Guess what? Their faith communities acquiesced a long time ago to the evil and today's result was inevitable. Of course these leaders don't really understand what's happening round about them anyway. They are at an extreme disadvantage. (BTW, doesn't this scene look similar to many we saw just before same sex "marriage" was legalized in Canada?)

Their communities don't possess the fullness of truth but rather a shadow of, or an imperfect, truth. On the other hand, the Cardinal Archbishop of Toronto, a Successor of the Apostles of Jesus Christ, has all the resources of heaven behind him, along with all requisite authority. He has been anointed to not only save souls and defend his flock from evil but to identify demons and defeat them altogether in the name of Jesus Christ,
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Matt.28:18-20
Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. Matt. 18:18
Did any of these leaders strike a note of Christ and His supreme victory in their interventions?  Of course many criticize my outlook on the Catholic Church and her mission, accusing me of promoting a narrow minded triumphalism (BTW, guilty as charged).

But did any of these leaders mention today the salvation offered to the world by and through Jesus Christ? Did any warn the Prime Minister or Parliament or individual politicians of the grave consequences to their souls should they enshrine in man's law that which is forbidden by God's law? Or were they simply pleading with and begging the powers of this world to please be considerate of the "values" and concerns of religious people?

Cardinal Collins, won't you please step up to the podium?