Thursday, August 27, 2015

Explosive Letter From LifeSiteNews Details Betrayal By Canadian Catholic Bishops

Vox Cantoris offends, then offers apology in response to a letter from Steve Jalsevac of LifeSiteNews.

No doubt Campaign Life Coalition and LifeSiteNews have done a tremendous amount of good over the years in their efforts to defend unborn children against the scourge of abortion. But I have observed on a few occasions that they try too hard to stay in the good graces of the very people (the Catholic Bishops) they criticize behind the scenes, as this letter below illustrates. Too often they actually avoid saying the things that need to be said to (or about) Bishops.

That's why the letter that was sent to David Domet will be a great shock to many pro-life people and perhaps especially to faithful Catholics, many of whom believe their Catholic leaders are adamantly opposed to evils like abortion, etc. and are doing all they can to deal with the problem.

The question is, why hasn't LifeSiteNews come clean on this epic scandal before now? Why haven't they shared the more intimate details of the decades old betrayal by Catholic Bishops? Why do we poor readers have to work so hard to get these kinds of plain historical facts about our own Bishops? I've criticized pro-life leaders in Canada on a number of occasions for their timidity in calling out unfaithful Bishops, which pretty much takes in almost 100% of the Canadian episcopate. Sometimes it seems that our pro-life leaders heap honours upon Bishops who give a mere semblance of orthodoxy by showing up at things like pro-life marches, yet throughout the year facilitate the culture of death. Is that the way to win the battle against abortion and to defend the teachings of Holy Mother Church?

And then there were the times when yours truly was really trying hard to fight just that kind of battle myself, putting everything on the line, and then getting persecuted and attacked for it. Was LifeSiteNews aware of my circumstances and the outrageous treatment I received? Yes. Did they write one word of news reporting to share my difficulties with the wider pro-life community in Canada and to expose our sick culture? No. Even after requests by me to bring these reprehensible incidents to light? No they didn't. Did they even shy away from opportunities to hold Catholic Bishops accountable for their reprehensible silence in some of these scandalous situations? Yes they did. My blog postings over the last couple years tell the further story.

You get the picture. But why would they take such an approach towards a fellow pro-life warrior? Your guess may be as good as mine but at least I'll venture a guess since this is the first time I've disclosed such sad history on this blog. Was it because at times I've been critical of pro-life leadership in Canada (and rightly so, I believe)? I headed up a national pro-life initiative which called out Bishops rather severely at times (again, it was necessary). Perhaps the top brass at LifeSite wanted to distance themselves from such a "radical" pro-lifer. Perhaps they saw me as competition in some sense, someone who didn't tow their line (which makes their actions seem like petty rivalry). Well there you have it. That's my best guess.

But the point is that something DOES need to change at the highest levels of the pro-life movement in Canada. David at Vox Cantoris maybe did not accurately point out what needs to change. But nevertheless, after reading the letter from Steve Jalsevac, I believe a good many more people will agree with me that pro-life tactics definitely DO NEED TO CHANGE in Canada. The indisputable fact is that Catholic Bishops need to be held accountable (yes, charitably, of course) and BY NAME, EACH and EVERY time they fail in their duties to defend the truth of the Catholic faith and particularly as it concerns Life and the Family issues. They need to be put under the microscope at all times and made to feel it. We are losing Canada because the demons have been let loose and Catholic Bishops--who are the only ones with authority to cast them out--are off in their ivory towers with doors locked or, worse still, actively assisting the enemy.


Letter to David Domet from LifeSiteNews:

David, your evaluation of past pro-life efforts is distressingly uninformed. The view from the inside of Campaign Life Coalition and other groups is vastly different than the brutally harmful, inaccurate history that you present. The claim that the movement "has taken an "all or nothing" approach" generates a fury within me because some may actually believe that falsehood (I don't say it is intentional).

Unless you were right there with us you cannot understand all that was attempted and the devastating repeat betrayals, and destructive Catholic and other opposition and extreme disappointments that were experienced by the pro-life movement in this nation.

The situation in Canada is dramatically different politically, legally, religiously and culturally from the United States. So don't look to the US and say, if they did it there it should also have worked here. Some things did, but many did not simply because it was Canada. We have tried just about every US strategy and also developed our own unique approaches. As well, the US successes have been exaggerated. Sure they elected many pro-lifers and were thankfully able to pass a large amount of incremental legislation, but abortion is still very common in the US. Abortion stats are still huge every year. The culture of death is far from being ended, We are, however, much encouraged by the recent video exposes of Planned Parenthood and the strong pro-life calibre of many of the Republican leadership candidates.

Just try to get a Canadian pro-lifer nominated in Canada. The nomination wars are dirtier in Canada with the parties being tyrannical and blind to nomination rules when they have certain candidates that they want to be the nominee, which have never been pro-life. The Canadian political system is more amenable to tyrants than the US system with its stronger democratic traditions and checks and balances. However, freedom has deteriorated in the US under the Obama administration.

To state that incremental measures were not attempted betrays profound lack of awareness of what actually did take place. I myself was in a leadership position during attempts to gain some of the incremental advances (conscience legislation, defunding, parental rights) introduced. Exhausting work was put into consulting with MPs and MPPs and experts, preparing documents and legislative proposals and more, but with the mostly consistent result of the power elites ruthlessly shutting us down before we barely got to stage one or past the first vote. And of course you must be aware of Stephen Harper’s constant blocking of any chance of success of even the most reasonable incremental measures that the public overwhelmingly would support.

As you well know, there has been no religious leadership anywhere in Canada comparable to that in some quarters in the United States. In fact, terribly damaging, behind the scenes and also deliberate undermining of our efforts by Canadian bishops and the CCCB are one of the great scandals in the Church in Canada. The Catholic Church has far more influence in Canada than in the United States because Catholicism is the dominant Christian religion here.

As the result of a massive (that is no exaggeration), united effort by all the major pro-life organizations in Canada, we were extremely close to winning  protection for the unborn in the Charter of rights. However, this was suddenly lost at the last minute because of Cardinal Carter's betrayal via a secret agreement with Pierre Trudeau that ensured public funding for Ontario Catholic Schools. We were devastated by Carter's betrayal. Grown leaders were in tears.

The omnibus bill that legalized abortion, divorce and more in Canada was quietly given approval to John Turner in a private meeting with the CCCB  executive before the vote while the pro-life movement across the nation was vigorously opposing the bill. It was years before we learned of this betrayal.

The CCCB seriously undermined the huge, united effort of the entire Canadian pro-life movement to pass the motion proposed by MP Gus Mitges to amend the Charter to include the unborn, which had a good chance of succeeding.

The CCCB also actively undermined the efforts of the pro-life movement to defeat the Reproductive Issues Bill C-13 because of serious flaws in the bill.

It took several years for more than one retired bishop to come to the March for Life in Ottawa. Distributing flyers simply noting the positions of the various local candidates on the life and family issues is almost universally forbidden by bishops in Canada, whereas such distribution is very common and encouraged in many dioceses in the United States. So a crippling handicap that the Canadian pro-life movement has had all along has been roadblocks put in our way to prevent the most natural pro-life voting base from becoming well informed at election or even nomination times. Worse, most of the bishops have been strong Liberal Party or NDP supporters, no matter what the position of the candidate on the life issues.

It was Catholics who supported and elected lesbian Kathleen Wynne as an MPP. Friar Rick of St. Bonaventure's parish took her around door to door to homes in his riding promoting her election.
The Canadian media, political and religious culture is far more ideologically uniform than in the US which encourages a greater diversity of views. In Canada, rocking the boat of the established consensus is greatly frowned upon. Lukewarmness is considered a virtue that must be enforced.
Opposition to aborted baby photos is stronger in Canada. The United States has nothing like the enormous, negative influence of Quebec on religion and politics on the entire nation. The majority of PMs since the 60s have been Quebecers - a province of mostly faithless, rebellious, former Catholics who despise Christian morality. Thankfully, there were a good number of wonderful bishop appointments in the province under Benedict. But change will take a long time.

There was a pro-life caucus in the Harris government, but it was essentially shut down by the premier and his thugs. What was done to MPP Jim Brown who worked closely with us on a proposed conscience protection bill, and more, was like something out of a Mafia movie. That very good man was crucified by the party leadership simply for acting according to his conscience and they made him a nervous wreck who forever left politics. Harris welcomed gay activist Jaime Watt into his inner circle and from then on all pro-life, pro-family efforts were toast. A gay activist was appointed to head the Human Rights Commission and the Harris government, more than any other in the nation, led the way to eventual federal passage of same-sex "marriage;.

We worked very closely with the PC Family Issues Caucus and Ontario MPP Frank Klees to pass his parental rights on health care Bill 91 which would simply have required that parents be advised of health care treatments planned for their children. The bill was supported by 34 Tory backbenchers from the PC “family issues caucus". But Mike Harris and his cabinet thugs betrayed their own caucus members and joined with the opposition to vote against and defeat the bill. See my report card on the Harris government.

I have shown you only a tiny snapshot of all that was attempted over many years. Your readers deserve more than your personal opinion, limited by your own experiences within the political system and all the whispers and lies that occur in that environment, in order to accurately make their own evaluations of what took place in the past and what should be done now.

Sorry to be so intense about this, but your comments were so far from the truth (I don't doubt the goodwill in them) and potentially damaging to the good reputations of some of the most dedicated and selfless people I have known in my life, that I felt I had no choice but to respond. These kinds of comments have been going around for years from one person to another and I can tell you that they serve no good purpose at all, other than to cause more harmful division and confusion.

Steve Jalsevac

Saturday, August 22, 2015

Canada's Favorite "ProLife" Bishops Endorse Failed CCCB Election Guide

In my last posting I lamented that Canada’s Catholic Bishops were seriously downplaying many evils—chiefly abortion—touching Canadian society through the very vague and lukewarm document recently released by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Other prolife and faithful Catholics have also weighed in on that subject with valuable insight, exposing just how seriously deficient the CCCB Guide really is and pointing out the most egregious omission: cogent voting advice to ensure pro-abortion politicians do not gain power. The peculiar thing is that even those Bishops who are the honoured “champions” of the prolife movement seem to be quite content with promoting the CCCB Election Guide without further commentary or supplementary resources.

Of course they could take the time to add their own versions of a voting guide if they chose to, since each has full apostolic authority in their own diocese, but as I have noted on other occasions, the last thing any Canadian Bishop will think about doing is breaking ranks with their (liberal) brother Bishops who completely set the pace of downward slide, even at the risk of the destruction of souls.

Therefore take note that “prolife” Cardinal Collins of Toronto and “prolife” Archbishop Prendergast of Ottawa, as well as “prolife” Bishop Henry of Calgary, are each featuring prominent links on diocesan websites to the CCCB Election Guide, without urgently needed qualification and supplementation:

It defies imagination that any Catholic heartbroken over the destruction of 100,000 children annually could not muster a more serious strategy to defeat the culture of death in Canada: a most pitiful and outrageous effort by the most “prolife” Bishops of Canada…to say nothing of a failure to mention other very evil and dangerous trends, such as gender ideology, surfacing at the highest political levels, and which demand urgent address. Yet all we hear is a deathly silence.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Canada's Catholic Bishops Downplay Evil In Election Guide UPDATED


Canadian Bishops Go Green

Their new federal election guide devotes more time to environmental reform than to saving the unborn

OTTAWA, August 19, 2015 ( - Canada's bishops have issued an election guide that devotes more time to environmental concerns than it does to protection of the unborn.

Issued this month by the Episcopal Commission on Peace and Justice, a national commission of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), the document purports to provide guidance to lay faithful on how to vote for politicians. Most striking is that the guide only devotes a single line to fighting for the lives of the preborn (which are killed to the tune of at least 65,000 per year in a country with the laxest abortion laws in the world), while devoting multiple admonitions on immigrants' and workers' rights as well as an entire section on the environment.

The first section, titled "Respect for life and human dignity: from conception to natural death," offers examples of what the bishops deem essential to "choosing life." The right to life of "the human embryo and the foetus" is one duty on the list, along with the obligation to fight capital punishment and poverty, among other things. The guide fails to list a hierarchy of duties by priority, and gives the impression that fighting poverty is equal in importance to fighting abortion.

This is problematic, as it represents the seamless garment theory — a notion coined by Chicago cardinal Joseph Bernardin that equates the importance of protecting the unborn with fighting poverty, hunger, oppression, capital punishment and the like. The Catholic Church has always held, however, that abortion is an intrinsic evil and can never be justified, whereas capital punishment can be justly applied in some circumstances, and therefore cannot rank in level of gravity as the crime of abortion. 

Monday, August 17, 2015

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Statement From The Archdiocese of Toronto Regarding Father John Duffy

Further to my previous posting on Father Duffy, I have found a little more information to share but serious questions still remain. The Archdiocese of Toronto issued a statement dated July 18, 2015 which was subsequently read out to the parishioners of Father Duffy`s former parish, Sacred Heart Parish. The text of the Statement reads:

Archdiocese of Toronto

Catholic Pastoral Centre
1155 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario M4T 1W2
T 416.934.0606

July 18, 2015

Statement from the Archdiocese of Toronto re: Sacred Heart Parish, Uxbridge

Over the past several years the Archdiocese of Toronto has been working closely with Fr. John Duffy to address a number of issues concerning his responsibilities as pastor of Sacred Heart Parish. We have also been deeply concerned about his personal health and well-being.

After numerous discussions, Fr. Duffy commenced civil litigation against Cardinal Thomas Collins. After mediation involving a retired Superior Court of Ontario judge and legal counsel, Fr. Duffy decided to retire from active ministry, effective July 13, 2015.

We are working with Fr. Duffy to provide the financial and pastoral support he needs. We are grateful for his many contributions both to the Sacred Heart community and in his previous assignments.

Fr. Joseph Rodrigues has been appointed pastor of Sacred Heart Parish and will arrive this week to begin serving the faithful. We pray that he will be welcomed with open arms.

We extend our thanks to the parishioners of Sacred Heart for your ongoing support and engagement in your faith community. We pray for Fr. Duffy and Fr. Rodrigues with the hope and prayer that your parish will continue to serve as a beacon of faith, hope and love to all.


There is an online petition published on behalf of Father Duffy and a great number of persons have left comments. A remarkable show of support for Father Duffy, as well as shock for the circumstances, is evidenced in these comments. They are nearly unanimous in their very high praise for their priest`s service and influence in their lives. It does leave one to wonder what could possibly have taken place on such a secret level for so long in Father Duffy`s life that virtually nobody as close to him as those who left comments would have suspected the very grave action taken by the Archdiocese. 

The Archdiocese claims that Fr. Duffy decided to retire from active ministry but Fr. Duffy`s final sermon as well as the online petition paints the picture that he was suspended from ministry by the Archdiocese. In fact the spokesperson at Sacred Heart Parish confirmed to me that Father Duffy has been suspended with loss of faculties. My understanding is that except for behaviour that is a cause of very serious scandal it is normally very difficult for a Bishop to suspend or “laicize” a priest, even if he wants to. Conversely, we know how much hell can be raised if a Bishop supports his priest and sticks with him through thick and thin.

Also my understanding is that in cases such as this if the priest contests the Bishop`s actions and appeals his suspension, the execution of the penalty is suspended until such time as the Vatican has made a decision on the matter, i.e. Fr. Duffy should still be serving his parish until the Vatican rules on the matter.

To be clear, this is only conjecture on my part on the basis of readily available information on the internet regarding canon law. I called the Archdiocese for further details on the matter but they declined to give further info and suggested I call Sacred Heart Parish.

Monday, August 10, 2015

What Has God Done With The Souls Of Countless Aborted Babies?

Father Paul Nicholson draws on the words of Jesus and other insights from the Holy Scriptures to plumb the depths of this question. His judgment is sobering indeed.

Sunday, August 09, 2015

Is Cardinal Thomas Collins Responsible For "Unholy" Suspension Of Father John Duffy?

Everything I post (aside from a few of my comments which follow) is available from a simple Google search under the terms "Father John Duffy Uxbridge." I also share the contents of a forwarded email from what appears to be two of Father Duffy's parishioners (or friends) who sought out support for Father in his difficult circumstances.

I make no judgment in this matter and the title of my posting is simply a reflexive action which I hope might better contribute to the emergence of the truth in the matter of Father John Duffy's suspension.

Why do I frame my posting in such a controversial fashion?  Simply because I have seen too many priests who have a deliberate bent to "Tradition" and the authentic teachings of Holy Mother Church come under fire by their superiors and end up severely damaged by a campaign of persecution from the Chancery, in much the same way as Fr. Duffy has described. In fact I do not find it much of a stretch at all to believe Father Duffy's description of the events. I believe that Father Duffy's case needs to come out into the disinfecting power of sunlight and remain there until all parties (yes, including the laity. We have a right to know) are reasonably satisfied that justice is properly served in this unfolding tragedy.

Father Duffy has made some very serious charges indeed against the Archdiocese. I do not see that his suspension could have come about without the nod of Toronto Cardinal Thomas Collins. To avoid all possibility of scandal the Archdiocese needs to specifically address the substance of Father's charges and add whatever details it can to justify its decision to suspend this priest. Is that really too much to ask? After all, Fr. Duffy has been a priest for over 20 years.

Please note that I do not know Father Duffy personally and  I have never met him. All information I know of him I have found either online or from others that speak highly of him. I do know another priest who likewise believes that the Archdiocese tried to short circuit his priestly path due to his outspoken ways in regard to traditional Catholic teaching and what he felt was his responsibility to address scandalous situations. He was, however, not suspended as was Father Duffy.

Feel free to leave a comment if you think it may lead to a positive outcome. And please keep all parties involved in this contest actively in your prayers until a happier outcome is achieved.


Forwarded email

This Is A Very Very Very Sad Day For Our Church!!! 

We NEED PRIESTS - GOOD PRIESTS and here we have lost one because of EVIL!

Father had the courage to STAND UP FOR THE TRUTH and the LIES have taken him down...BUT as in all things we know who will win!

PLEASE PRAY AND REMEMBER Fr. Duffy during this very difficult time! 

God Bless. 

------Begin forwarded message:

Please pray for my dear friend Fr. John Duffy who has been unjustly suspended by the Archdiocese of Toronto; yes that is the same Archdiocese who we have not heard a single word from concerning the evil sex education that is now in full force.  I find it interesting that this diocese has time to make a video asking for money to support a family faith campaign (!!!) yet our children's souls are now in the hands of a satanic curriculum.  Well folks this is the same archdiocese who has suspended a faithful, true, kind, generous, hardworking holy Priest who has always defended and upheld the Truth of Jesus Christ and Catholic traditions and beliefs.  Please express your thoughts to the diocese in support of Fr. John Duffy who has given over 23 years of his life to the Priesthood.  Our Priests are under attack and they desperately need our prayers to stay strong against the current winds of evil which we see becoming more and more apparent in our world today. 
In Christ,
        (name redacted)


From an online petition in support of Father Duffy...

August 8, 2015

Dear Friends of Father John Duffy

We have known and loved Father John for many years. We are fully aware of how Fr. John has dedicated his priestly life to serving his congregations in a selfless manner for the 23 years of his priestly vocation.

Fr. John has never failed to comfort, help, encourage and support young and old alike through the Holy Sacraments and through his friendship at any hour of the day.

You can find many wonderful testimonials about Fr. John when you read the comments people have posted on this website.

Fr. John has NOT RESIGNED from the priesthood and he left Sacred Heart under extreme duress.

Fr. John received verbal communication that he was to vacate Sacred Heart parish forthwith.

Fr. John if need be, will defend himself under the tenets of Canon (Church) Law, if he must do so, which is in fact the correct procedure for a priest to follow.

When you read Fr. John’s final sermon (see below) to his beloved Sacred Heart parishioners, it will become clear that he desperately needs our FINANCIAL and SPIRITUAL support.

Please help us support Fr. John in his time of great need, as he has done for us.

Text of Father John’s last address to the parishioners of Sacred Heart Parish:

With a broken-heart, I must announce to you that this is the last Mass I will celebrate in my life.

Effective 4:00 pm tomorrow, Monday 13 July 2015, I will be suspended by the Archdiocese of Toronto. "Suspension" is the most serious of penalties a priest can receive in the law of the Catholic Church. "Suspension" is a penalty that is typically given to pedophiles and other types of criminals. I am being “suspended” for hiring a civil lawyer to seek redress for grave injustices done to me.

Nobody in the Archdiocese of Toronto would help me.

How did this all happen?

Two and a half years ago, I found myself in need of appealing to the Archdiocese of Toronto for their help regarding a group of parishioners who were spreading the most unspeakable gossip possible against me. Without going into horrible detail, the object of these slanderous parishioners was to have me removed from the parish. As this most wicked slander continued for four years, my health was affected significantly.

Yet, when I asked for a "lawyer's letter" to be sent from the Archdiocese of Toronto to the person who started the worst of this most unspeakable slander, they refused - and I was shocked by their lack of care and concern. The Archdiocese of Toronto is loathe to send a "lawyer's letter" to the laity as they are terrified of the public. Very disappointingly, priests, on the other hand, are disenfranchised - and are not a threat to them. The senior ecclesiastic, who refused to have a lawyer's letter sent to the most vicious of the slanderers, said to me; "The squeaky wheel gets the oil". That is to say, the formation of policy in the Archdiocese of Toronto is based on expedience - and not the norms of Christ's Gospel.

When I pushed the matter further, I was aggressively threatened by men who were supposed to be my spiritual fathers. Nobody in the Catholic Church would help defend my good name, nor assist me in my efforts to govern and unify our Parish. Therefore, I was forced to seek out the services of a civil litigation lawyer to fight for my cause, namely my honour and good name - and for the good of our Parish.

I have been fighting for redress regarding these matters for the last two years. I am sorry that I kept this matter a secret - and certainly didn't think that obtaining justice would be delayed and dragged-on for this long. In May of this year, the Archdiocese of Toronto stated that they wanted this matter "resolved sooner than later". As my health and financial resources were exhausted, I felt relief and hope that justice would finally be served.

Last Monday, 6 July 2015, was the day arranged for the Archdiocese of Toronto to "mediate" for a "solution". I felt relieved and hopeful. When I arrived at the "mediation", I had the sinking feeling that the matter was "pre-determined". Rather than receiving justice, I was merely informed that I was "suspended" for life - yet I would receive a few shekels in return for keeping my mouth shut. I felt like I was all alone in the room - and had no recourse.

I felt forcefully coerced- telling me to sign a "document of discretion" whereby I would be "muzzled", that is, no longer able to defend myself and my honour. Yet, the "document of discretion" stated that the Archdiocese of Toronto would be allowed to "retain the exclusive right" to publish "whatever they deem to be the reason for Duffy's suspension". Though I am not a lawyer, something in my soul told me that, as well as being grossly unjust, there was something unholy about the "offer" from the Archdiocese of Toronto.

As well, the Archdiocese of Toronto threatened me - saying that if I "broke discretion" they would cut-off the few shekels offered me, and demand that I return whatever was given me in the past. I was threatened that if I refused the "offer" made to me, a pittance that would leave me starving in the street, I would be told to get out of my Parish, put on the street, receive nothing at all. I was filled with dread. Certainly, the suspension left me sickened the most. I felt hatred and evil in the "mediation" room towards myself. To add insult to injury, I was told that I was responsible for the legal fees - costs that have put me in great financial debt.

My efforts to reacquire my good name only resulted in my being stripped of my priesthood, my dignity, my good name, my home and parish, my financial credit - and what I cherished more than my very life... my honour. I politely left, but felt doomed. I refused to sign the "document of discretion". I will put my trust in the Lord, come what may.

Anyway, I could not leave without saying farewell to my parishioners! I hope that I have served you well over my six year tenure. As well, and at least, I will always have the consolation of knowing that I defended Christ's Church, speaking out publicly from this pulpit about corrupt politicians - and, yes, corrupt politicians in the Church who have acquiesced, capitulated and accepted teaching that will destroy the innocence of our children in our Catholic Schools - and religious - political careerists who, rather than vociferously and courageously lead, remain silent as pre-born children continue to be murdered.

I served Christ first !

As I say farewell, please pray for me, as I will for you, and - yes - I will pray daily for the lay people, priests and bishops that have worked so hard to destroy my good name - and my priesthood. In particular, I would like to thank, from the bottom of my heart, all of those who have faithfully supported me, aware of my situation, over these past years.

I love you all very much! Please continue to keep me in your good prayers - and also pray for our church fathers.

Farewell, my friends !

Tuesday, August 04, 2015

Cardinal Thomas Collins "Orthodox But Maybe Too Nice"?

Incoming Junior Bishop Collins 1997
It seems Cardinal Thomas Collins' reputation had preceded him when, in 1999 as St. Paul Bishop Thomas Collins, he was appointed to replace Edmonton's retiring Archbishop Joseph MacNeil. In a piece dated 03/08/99 and entitled "Orthodox but maybe too nice," Carla Yu, writing for the Alberta Report Newsmagazine, revealed, among other things, hopes expressed by the region's Catholics that the new Archbishop would reverse the decline in priestly candidates.

But what is actually revealed in that article speaks much more loudly to the current malaise of pseudo-catholicism in Toronto. Read the report below and ask yourself if the Cardinal is likely to have the fortitude and character necessary to stand up to the heretics and dissenters at the upcoming Synod on the Family. Can a leopard change its spots?


Edmonton's New Catholic Archbishop May Disappoint Hopeful Conservatives

Observers of Roman Catholic politics say Pope John Paul II's greatest legacy may turn out to be his ability to shift the church back to its orthodox roots by appointing conservative bishops. So with the imminent retirement on April 15 of Edmonton Archbishop Joseph MacNeil, a man long identified with the liberal wing of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, conservatives anticipated it was their turn for a replacement more in tune with traditional beliefs and practices.

When the Pope announced on February 18 that he had appointed St. Paul Bishop Thomas Collins to replace Archbishop MacNeil, it appeared conservative prayers were answered. Known for his devotional life and orthodox convictions, Bishop Collins raised hopes among the capital region's 295,000 Catholics that he would reverse the decline in priestly candidates and thereby avoid Archbishop MacNeil's plan to close half of the area's 162 parishes and missions.

But old acquaintance David Curtin, a Toronto journalist who at seminary had Bishop Collins as a professor and spiritual director, warns Edmonton Catholics not to hope for too much. Bishop Collins is a great teacher and friend, Mr. Curtin says, but he has a history of accommodating the church's liberal wing.

Bishop Collins is well known in Canada as a teacher and scholar. The 52-year-old entered the priesthood in 1973. In 1986 he earned his theology doctorate from the Gregorian University in Rome. He was rector of St. Peter's Seminary in London, Ont., prior to becoming bishop of St. Paul in 1997.

In his new responsibility Bishop Collins will be challenged to succeed where his predecessor has stalled. "Bishop Collins inherits a wonderful archdiocese," says Archbishop MacNeil. But he admits the priest shortage will be the new leader's greatest challenge. "We are reaching a point that's causing real concern," he says. "But if Jesus wants more priests, he will provide them."

Father Sylvain Casavan, a member of the Edmonton archdiocese vocations team, expects the new archbishop to take a less passive approach. "[Bishop Collins] said when he went to St. Paul that his goal was 50 new priests," he says. "I wouldn't mind seeing 50 candidates here, too."

Writing in the Catholic newsletter The Trumpet, editor and former Edmontonian Mark Toth warns that the new archbishop will also have to deal with the lack of leadership which has resulted in deterioration of Edmonton Catholic schools. "A whole generation of children attending Catholic schools has been deprived of their right to be instructed in their Catholic faith," he writes. "What a heavy burden for a bishop to have such a thing happen on his watch!"

For his part, Bishop Collins has indicated he is ready to deal with Edmonton's problems. He did not return calls from this magazine. But in an interview with the Western Catholic Reporter he said that in his view there are five to 10 people called to ministry in each parish who will respond positively if simply asked to consider the religious life. And through a series of Reporter articles on prayer, Bishop Collins has signalled that unlike his predecessor, who remained largely out of sight, he will focus his pastoral leadership on spiritual matters, and see and be seen.

Nevertheless, those who know Bishop Collins best question whether he is tough enough to force a new course in Edmonton. "He's a talented, prayerful and orthodox man," says journalist Curtin. "His fundamental theology course was the best in the seminary program."

But Mr. Curtin fears the new archbishop may not stand up to liberal dissenters in his new archdiocesan bureaucracy. "When I saw him exercise his authority most firmly," he says, "it was actually to clamp down on orthodox Catholics who were speaking out against real abuses." Mr. Curtin cites an example. "When the student liturgy committee passed a resolution against illicit, feminist changes in the Mass," he reports, "[Then Fr. Collins] overruled the resolution. The minutes of the meeting were recalled and all record of the resolution was erased."

Furthermore, Mr. Curtin reports, in 1995, when Cardinal Ratzinger said the church's teaching on women's ordination is infallible, some students wept openly, while others were gratified that the church had finally spoken definitively. "Fr. Collins' only public response," Mr. Curtin says, "was to issue an unprecedented condemnation of the 'triumphalistic' attitudes of the seminarians who were happy about the statement."

As a former seminarian, Mr. Curtin does not question his mentor's dedication to orthodox Catholic doctrine. "He seemed to understand the problems caused by heterodoxy in the church," says Mr. Curtin. "But when push came to shove, he resorted to platitudes about how dissenters 'mean well.' He seemed to think that effective intervention would do more harm than good."

Friday, July 31, 2015

Planned Parenthood And Polling Deceptions From Hell

Thank you Michael Voris for saying some things that I'd like to say, only my heart is too sickened by the stories I hear and the pictures I see of the little children ripped and chopped to pieces. I confess I was also disheartened by the poll figures publicized in recent days.

Saturday, July 25, 2015

Does Toronto Cardinal Thomas Collins Really Hate His Flock That Much?

Published today to

​It's a noble goal to find ways for a parish to more effectively communicate online. But I'll wager not a penny of the more than $100 million dollars raised will be spent to alert the Cardinal's flock, whether online or by any other means, to the greatest everyday (hidden) (mortal) threat to their souls.

Progress on "Project Connect" continues as parishes like St. Jerome's (shown above) work with archdiocesan staff to launch new websites. The Family of Faith campaign is funding this project, which helps all parishes in the archdiocese to more effectively communicate online.​
The Family of Faith campaign recently passed $100 million in fundraising. Read more about the campaign success in The Catholic Register.

Friday, July 24, 2015

Conference Of Catholic Bishops Has Interdict On Canon 915

The following quote pertains to The United States' Bishops Conference but it is not much of a reach to assume it also applies to the Canadian Bishops. For the Canadian prelates would it surprise anyone to think that there's also a silent interdict on the teaching of contraception?
But, then again, most of the blanket excommunications (very rightfully made) were well before the unleashing of modernist secular humanism in the Church starting in 1958.  It is widely believed that the USCCB presently has a secret, unpublished policy to ostracize any member who enforces Canon 915 against a Catholic politician, for instance.  I would tend to imagine there are also blanket "prohibitions" against interdicting other anti-Catholic organizations - just like Banned Parenthood
Excerpted from:
When Will Bishops Excommunicate Planned Barrenhood Members/Employees/Supporters?

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

Conduct Of Toronto Cardinal Thomas Collins Not "Worthy Of A Christian"

Within the body of the Church Herself is a “perverse lust for self-destruction” according to retired Vatican Cardinal Walter Brandmueller. The Cardinal recently gave an interview in Germany and spoke candidly about the widespread dissent of Germany's Catholic Bishops. Perhaps one of our intrepid Canadian Catholic media could engage our own Cardinal Collins in a similar conversation about Canada's schismatic Bishops.

The Vatican Cardinal’s remarks zeroed in on the agenda of too many Bishops of "undermining the procreation of life in different ways and in putting into question the natural sexual identity of man and woman." Clearly this is a direct reference to decades old opposition to the Church's teaching on contraception vis a vis Humanae Vitae with its consequent epidemic of abortion, divorce, homosexuality and gender ideology. 

It is well known that the Catholic Bishops of Germany have from the very beginning laid siege to that watershed 1968 papal encyclical. But unfortunately an unofficial schism took place not only in Germany as a result of such rebellion. In Canada it played out likewise in mirror fashion—and in time. The same playbook was used, that of the autonomy of conscience.  

A policy of adherence to "political correctness"—rather than doctrine—by the Catholic Bishops has become predominant in Canada, just exactly as Cardinal Brandmueller describes, because of the risk of "execution by the Media." [Or was it perhaps also due to cowardice in facing the huge numbers of rank and file Catholics practicing the intrinsic evil of contraception?] Our own Cardinal Collins fits well into this PC scheme, although he does fancy—and often likes to portray—himself as an orthodox prelate.

But in fact Cardinal Collins has slipped into that same “dynamic of silence" which characterizes the majority of Bishops referenced by Cardinal Brandmueller, as they "silently watch the execution" taking place. Apparently the Vatican Cardinal holds to the same opinion as do I, that no one can claim “such conduct is worthy of a Christian...especially when dealing with fundamental questions concerning the teaching of Faith and Morals of the Gospel of Christ.”

He explains further by way of questioning: “For what purpose did we [Bishops] receive the Sacrament of Confirmation?” and again, “...did not the Bishops at their consecration promise that they would proclaim faithfully the Gospel of Christ and would preserve, pure and entire, the Deposit of the Faith according to the Tradition as held by the Church, always and everywhere?”

Why then does Cardinal Collins—as well as possibly every other Bishop in Canada—maintain such a silence about Humanae Vitae in his current Toronto Diocese and in his former Diocese of Edmonton? Why, in the midst of such a "self-destructive crisis" as Cardinal Brandmueller describes, would Cardinal Collins hold his peace, never issuing even so much as a pastoral letter to his sheep on this linchpin issue of chastity in similar fashion to other conscientious and truly orthodox Western Bishops who have made efforts to curb the crisis and protect the souls of those under their care? 

If the Cardinal’s courage be lacking, then why would he not simply and very briefly include the clear truth of Catholic teaching regarding the intrinsic evil of this practice on an Examination of Conscience brochure which the Diocese already publishes for his flagship Day of Confessions? Or why, during a recent exercise of lectio divina, on the subject of marriage and children, would he not expound on the Church's position, failing to make even one direct reference to Humanae Vitae and warn of the evils of contraception? Or why would he be seen to be a slacker on protecting Catholic children from "sex-ed," one of the evil fruits of the sexual revolution, even to the extent of stonewalling parents and cooperating with governing sexual perverts in the dissemination of ever-more evil programs to destroy chastity? It appears that Protestants must lead the charge to expose this evil.

It strains the imagination to come to any explanation other than the one proposed by Cardinal Brandmueller who went yet further and called for a “de-secularization” of the Church, demanding a flight from worldly thinking and contrivances to instead “follow the Truth of the Faith.”  Insisting that Bishops be a sign of contradiction to the culture at large rather than “preaching ‘Christianity light’...we should have the courage to demand a program which is in firm contrast to the societal mainstream of today and lives out fully” the commandments.

In a final exhortation, ready-made for Toronto's failing prelate, Cardinal Brandmueller exclaimed, “The Church can and must proclaim the Natural Moral Law which has been perfected by the Gospels and which is understandable for the man of good will...Thereby, the Church should not allow herself to be deflected by the [growing] resistance against her message.”

Cardinal Collins must repent of his failures publicly, make amends and immediately undertake a reformation of his Diocese in order to turn back the effects of this "self-destructive" rebellion of which he continues to be a part. Either that or RESIGN and make way for a worthy prelate who will undertake a reconstruction of an authentic Catholicism in Toronto diocese.

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Roman Catholic Church Infiltrated By Marxists And Homosexuals

In a lengthy interview published yesterday on YouTube by USA Survival Michael Hichborn of the Lepanto Institute discusses his investigative findings on infiltration in the Roman Catholic Church by Marxists and homosexuals. It's worth a watch since it helps form the bigger picture of the Church in crisis.

Saturday, July 11, 2015

Population Growth Dramatically Slows But U.N. Keeps Hyping It

Received this newsletter today from Steven Mosher of PRI.

Never Say “Die”

Even as Population Growth Dramatically Slows, the U.N. Keeps Hyping “World Population Day”
By Steven Mosher

On July 11th, the United Nations will celebrate its 26th World Population Day. The point of this annual exercise is to raise money to promote abortion, sterilization and contraception among poor and vulnerable women by alarming us about the dangers of global population growth.

The problem with this narrative is that, in many regions of the world, the population is declining, not growing. About half the world’s population lives in “low-fertility” countries, where women have fewer than 2.1 children on average over their lifetimes. Low-fertility countries now include all of Europe (except Iceland), the Americas (17 countries), and most of Asia (19 countries). The list of low-fertility countries include China, the United StatesBrazil, the Russian FederationJapan and Viet Nam.

 In other words, growth rates have dramatically declined from the late 1960s when the global population grew at a rate of 2.1% each year. That rate is now about 1% a year. The UN’s low variant projection (historically the most accurate) indicates that it will peak at around 8.3 billion in 2050. Even the medium variant projection shows population growth slowing to 0.1% by the century’s end, and turning negative beyond 2100. In either case, the population of the world will never double again.

As these numbers suggest, fertility rates have dipped to all-time lows. The U.N.’s medium variant  projection estimates that women are now averaging 2.45 children over their reproductive lifetime, while the low variant pegs this at only 2.05. The global average was 4.97 just 60 years ago. Under either variant, this number will be well under replacement by century’s end. After all, global replacement fertility—the rate needed to replace the current generation and prevent population decline—is 2.23 children per woman over her reproductive lifetime.

Read the rest here.

Friday, July 10, 2015

Wynne's Sex Ed Curriculum Inadequate: Should Be Withdrawn, Doctor Says

From Teresa Pierre of PAFE

July 9, 2015                          

                               Our Teens Deserve the Real Facts of Life

Dr. Nadine Nyhus is a psychiatrist who presented to the Waterloo board in support of Trustee Cindy Watson's recent motion asking for presentations on the s/x ed curriculum to be made to parents in September.  Dr. Nyhus strongly criticized the curriculum's failure to present the harms of early teen sexual activity and its numerous distortions or omissions of scientific fact.  In addition to presenting to the board and contacting her MPP, Dr. Nyhus wrote an article for the Kitchener Record which we strongly encourage you to read.  It is copied below.  Please "Share" the article on your Facebook, Twitter and other social media!

Best regards,

Teresa Pierre


Opinion: Sex ed curriculum inadequate and should be withdrawn, doctor says

Waterloo Region Record
By Nadine Nyhus

As a medical doctor and psychiatrist, I am struck by the lack of accurate information in the province of Ontario's new sexual education curriculum.

Ethical practice of medicine requires that risks and benefits be communicated. I believe the same should be true for talking to our teens about sex.

1. Our teens have a right to know the truth about sexually transmitted infections:

-the human papillomavirus (HPV) is the main cause of cervical, anal and esophageal cancer;

-our HPV vaccine only protects against four types of the virus (30 per cent of cancers are not protected against);

-you can contract HPV at your first experience of intercourse while using a condom;

-anal intercourse carries the greatest risk of sexually transmitted infections;

-silent chlamydia infection can cause infertility.

The curriculum is silent on all this.

The curriculum is misleading about HIV (the human immunodeficiency virus), saying "with treatment, the damage that HIV does to the body's immune system can be slowed or prevented," and that with early treatment, people with HIV "have the opportunity to live a near-to-normal lifespan."

2. Our teens have a right to know that if you are infected with HIV:

-you should never have intercourse without a condom for the rest of your life;

-you may have to adopt children;

-if female, you will not be able to breast feed;

-your ability to live in other countries will be restricted;

-you will have to take strong medications (two to four at a time) for the rest of your life;

-missed doses can result in treatment failure (viral resistant) so your life will be regimented;

-the medication can damage organs.

This curriculum significantly minimizes the reality of HIV infection. This kind of vaguely optimistic information is perhaps part of the reason for some evidence that condom use is down and the HIV infection rate is rising again among teens.

3. Our teens have a right to know the research on the value of delaying sex:

-the risk of depression and suicide attempts go up three times in teens who are sexually active;

-skin of the cervix is more vulnerable to infection in teens (so there's a greater risk of sexually transmitted infections);

-70 per cent of teens aged 15 to 17 are not sexually active (so not everyone is doing it);

-oxytocin released with sex establishes an intense bonding that will impair one's ability to make a rational decision about whether a person is a healthy partner.

4. Our teens have a right to know about the risks of pornography. It is associated with:

-increased sexual aggression/offences and acceptance of rape myths (for instance, that females like or cause rape);

-decreased condom use and increased number of sexual partners.

We need to be aware that pornography in 2015 is different than it was 20 or even 10 years ago — it is more aggressive and degrading to women. I would hope that the "experts" writing a curriculum for our children would be more concerned about children than about supporting the image that pornography is fine.

5. Our teens have a right to know that an October 2013 RCMP assessment of sex trafficking reports:

-the vast majority of trafficked victims are Canadian citizens, from all walks of life;

-girls from age 14 to 22 are at greatest risk of being trafficked (so this information should be started at Grade 7).

The curriculum, which is supposed to be all about safety, does not mention this risk.

The research is clear that trafficking increases where prostitution is legal.

Premier Kathleen Wynne says she has concerns about the new federal anti-prostitution law, and she has asked Ontario's attorney general to review it.

6. Our teens have a right to be exposed to different world views.

They need to understand that this curriculum is written from a worldview that seems to present purpose as irrelevant and pleasure as primary. Our teens need to consider that many hold a teleological worldview, one which understands things to have a purpose. For example, the scientific documentation of oxytocin release with sexual intercourse would have the purpose of enhancing bonding in a partnership that will increase the stability of the basic family unit so children have a safe place to grow up.

A new curriculum requires transparency and true collaboration. The government needs to be honest about the complete inadequacy of this curriculum and withdraw it.

Nadine Nyhus, of Cambridge, has been a medical doctor and psychiatrist for 20 years and is a mother of two.

Thursday, July 09, 2015

Four Canadian Bishops To Attend Synod Of The Family In October 2015

Blogger Lou Iacobelli recently blogged on the CCCB's announcement that the Vatican has chosen four Canadian Bishops who will attend the Synod of the Family in October. He shares the announcement in the context of the current battle in Ontario between parents and Premier Kathleen Wynne's Sex Ed plans for the fall of 2015.
The fact that the Vatican has chosen four Canadian bishops to attend the Synod of the Family is of little comfort to parents battling in a number of provinces educational policies and government laws that undermine Catholic teaching. This is bad enough. However, when the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) fails to publicly stand up against anti-Catholic thinking and governing it makes the situation even worse.
School board trustees in the province have had no say regarding the proposed new curriculum. Unless major changes are made, Catholic trustees should reject the curriculum because it contradicts the teaching of the Church on human sexuality, the family and marriage. Catholic teachers have the right to refuse to teach the curriculum and Catholic parents have the right to outright reject it. Our children must be physically, spiritually and morally protected.
From the comments section of the above posting comes a link to another very interesting entry by Iacobelli on the failure of Bishops to take appropriate action. Worth the read.

From all reports it appears that Cardinal Thomas Collins is meekly going along with Wynne`s sex-ed plans and is even stonewalling those in his flock who are sufficiently exercised to speak out. So much for Vatican II and the voice of the laity. To top it all off, we hear the general secretary of  the Ontario bishops’ conference has been actively supporting Wynne’s child abusive sex-ed program. And we wonder why there is so much indifference in the Catholic community.

But couldn`t Cardinal Collins do something about the Wynne sex-ed scandal? Of course he could, if he had the will and the courage. He has authority from God to bind spiritual powers (demons) on earth. But he clearly lacks the faith in God to exercise that authority. Perhaps if the 70,000 Catholic parents who had the courage to protest in public over Wynne`s pet project had instead camped out in front of the Cardinal`s residence, loudly insisting on his favorable intervention, His Eminence might have received a reminder of his weighty role as a Successor to the Apostles. But alas, these days Catholics themselves have little faith in such a notion.

How then shall we #WakeUpBishops in pseudo-catholic Canada?

Wednesday, July 08, 2015

Portrait of Canadian Dissident Fr. Andre Guindon

Further to my recent posting of an older article on the "sad history of apostasy amongst the Canadian Bishops" I offer another similar article by Joe Woodard.

Portrait of a Canadian Dissident

by Joseph K. Woodard

from Alberta Report, July 8, 1996

Suddenly, on October 20, 1993, Andre Guindon, age 60, priest Oblate of Mary Immaculate, theologian and professor of ethics, suffered a heart attack. His body was found seated in a chair, his cold hand gripping a book. And as he went to meet his maker, his more traditionalist critics suspected that he would have some explaining to do.

Like the American priest-theologian Charles Curran, the Swiss Hans Kung, and the American Gregory Baum, Father Guindon spent his life teaching young Catholic seminarians to spurn his Church’s moral teachings, particularly its “hang-ups” on human sexuality. He remained on the Church’s payroll, protected and even promoted by his superiors (like Ottawa Archbishop Marcel Gervais). Like his fellow liberals, Fr. Guindon eventually attracted the attention of the Vatican. But unlike them, he was saved the embarrassment of being stripped of the title of “Catholic” theologian.

Ten months prior to Fr. Guindon’s death, Rome’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a “note” on his 1986 book, The Sexual Creators, criticizing his positions on premarital sex, homosexuality and contraception. Among other things, the Vatican requested that he clarify his assertion that “the moral journey in the sexual lives of spouses, parents, sons and daughters, lesbians and gays, does not differ substantially from one lifestyle to another.” He then defended himself by saying that he had not been discussing homosexual acts, and that the Church must update its moral teachings. At the time of his death, he was awaiting a Vatican response.

“Traditional Catholics are fixated on sex,” said Father Guindon in a 1986 interview with the Ottawa Citizen. “You could kill your neighbour, and that was a sin, but as soon as someone touched his wee-wee, God Almighty would fall right down.”

Andre Guindon was born in Hull in 1933. He joined the Oblates at 20, and studied in Rome and Toulouse. He was ordained at 27, and a year later, in 1961, he was appointed moral theologian at Ottawa’s St. Paul University (which includes the diocesan seminary). Between 1978 and 1984, he served as dean of theology. With the 1986 publication of The Sexual Creators, lay traditionalists, annoyed by his incongruous assertion that homosexual love is superior to natural love, began agitating for his removal. But until his death, his superiors in the national hierarchy protected him.

“A woman does not make love to another woman, or a man to another man, because that is what is expected from everyone; or because that is what must be done to get a provider or a homemaker, or because that is how babies are made,” the teacher wrote in “Sexual Creators.” “Healthy gay persons are sexually active because they wish to express their affection to someone to whom they are attracted.”

Colleague Richard Hardy, a professor of spirituality at St. Paul University, is uncertain of Father Guindon’s legacy. “The Bishops were fairly quiet on [Bill C-33], but I don’t know if Andre had any lasting influence on them,” he says. “Still, he had a tremendous effect on our school. He was ahead of his time, and he was very disappointed that the Vatican never understood his work.” Whatever Fr. Guindon’s influence, however, the seminary’s declining enrolment is now forcing it to close its doors.

Port Colbourne, Ont., parish priest Paul McDonald, a professor of ethics at Niagara University, finds Fr. Guindon’s “sexual liberation” somewhat self-contradictory. “Is it the Church that’s been obsessed with sex, or is it fallen man?” he asks. “The sexual revolution has been obsessed with everything self-centred in sex. Father Guindon was right to say that the Church must adjust its teaching to the times; but she must always stress just those things that the times don’t want to hear. Today, we don’t want to hear that the purposes of sex are found in children and marriage.”

Link to Vatican archives (Link added by this blogger)

Tuesday, July 07, 2015

Michael Voris Backs Me Up On My Recent Posting

A few days ago I posted on the subject of a recent Talking Points Memo by Bill O'Reilly. Today I notice Michael Voris of ChurchMilitant.TV cites the incident in a larger and more insightful context.

The Church of Nice apologists are constantly saying Church Militant is mean and not kind and sweet and lollipops because we say things like "The bishops are not doing their job and the country is going to Hell because of it, not to mention millions of Catholics as well" — not that most of the Church of Nice gives Hell a second thought anyway, but that's beside the point. And yet here we have not one but two glaring examples from not us but the secular media saying the exact same thing because they are observing the exact same thing.

Short And Interesting Read On Modernism

Tantumblogo has an interesting post over at A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics asking:

How is it that modernism came back so forcefully from St. Pius X’s crushing of it?

Some interesting points brought to light here.

Another long-time query I've had, is how is it that modernism, which a good number of very solid historians and current-day commenters (for that time) were convinced had been completely shattered by the intervention of Pope Saint Pius X, came roaring back to be basically ascendant in all non-episcopal levers of power by the mid-1940s?
 Lack of vigilance.  Lack of faith. Convenience.  Conditioning.  And a firm belief that the Holy See, even in a “prudential Council,” could do no wrong?

Read the rest here.

Michael Davies wrote a good account of this subject. You can also download some interesting talks from Keep The Faith.

Friday, July 03, 2015

Sterile Sex: Trojan Horse of Modern Christian Societies

"Like my Christian counterparts of old, I maintain that the demonic plan of wreaking havoc on mankind will continue to be greatly aided as long as Christians favour or sympathize with the current contraceptive mentality of our society."
That's a quote from an article I wrote in 2007, the article that appears below. When I wrote the article I was thinking more  along the lines of an apologetic for modern day Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, who accept contraception almost universally. I also hoped to show the connection between contraception and its evil twin abortion.

What I didn't focus on in that article was the connection between the rise of contraceptive practice in society and the rise of homosexual practice. Both are unnatural, sinful practices and have been regarded as so for two millenia by the Christian religion. Since both practices were liberalized (i.e. legalized) in our society in the 1960's they have been at the heart of the culture wars, legal contraception leading quickly to legal abortion and now legalized homosexuality leading eventually to the hijacking of Christian marriage. Both evils may also be considered an evil twin under the umbrella term #SterileSex and have degraded our society immensely in the last 50 years. Taken together they may prove to be the actual undoing of our civilization.

Clearly we can see that God's first command to man is to be taken with deadly seriousness:
"Be fruitful and multiply..." 

Take a couple minutes and read this related summary from the Catechism: ARTICLE 6 


Contraception: Trojan Horse of Modern Christian Societies

There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death. Proverbs 14:12

Very early in my Christian experience I began to learn the significance of these words from Proverbs. Things were simply not as I thought they were!

I had been duped in so many ways by the world and by “the ways of man.” Having converted from atheism to Christ in an evangelical church at twenty eight years of age, I realized I had indeed passed from “death unto life” and purposed from that day forward to be skeptical of the wrong thinking of man. Little did I realize though at that early stage how much transformation and renewal God had in mind!

I propose in this little exposé to make a simple case for how modern day Christians have been thoroughly deceived on the subject of contraception, to the grim detriment of all Christian societies.
The reader may immediately tune out, exclaiming, “Ah, I see where you’re coming from. I noticed in your blogger profile that in 2004 you became a Roman Catholic. That accounts for your views on contraception.”

But I reply, “Not entirely so, and if you give me a few more minutes, I think I can give a convincing argument for the fact that, in the ENTIRE HISTORY of the Christian Church, NOT ONE credible pastor, priest, bishop, theologian, or scholar before roughly 1930-1950 believed contraception to be anything other than a damnable doctrine of the devil.”

Think about it. If you’re wrong on the subject, you’ll face God as a fifty or sixty year old Christian, historically, rather than as a two thousand year old Christian, and won’t it seem very strange why you chose to discount nearly two millennia of Christian thinking and practice? Could you explain to God why you supported a practice regarded universally and historically by Christians as “worse than sodomy, incest and adultery,” “a most unnatural wickedness, and a grievous wrong,” and “hostile to national welfare?”

There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.

Has the reader’s thinking been led in a way which only seems right but which is, in fact, contrary to the ways of God? Is it possible the reader has been deceived?

Like my Christian counterparts of old, I maintain that the demonic plan of wreaking havoc on mankind will continue to be greatly aided as long as Christians favour or sympathize with the current contraceptive mentality of our society.

I will offer ten fairly brief quotes of interest which span the gamut of Christian, specifically Reformation, history and then I will refer the reader to links of reasonably short articles which effectively make my case. [The reader is advised to take note especially of the recurrent connection between contraception and abortion.]

1. Martin Luther, Martin Luther’s Works, Volume Seven 1522
[The] exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches follows [Genesis 38:9, 10]. Onan must have been a malicious and incorrigible scoundrel. This is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity; yes, a Sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates; and, when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed.

2. John Calvin, Commentary on Genesis 1554
Besides [Onan] not only defrauded his brother of the right due him, but also preferred his semen to putrify on the ground, rather than to beget a son in his brother's name.... I will contend myself with briefly mentioning [Onan's act], as far as the sense of shame allows to discuss it. It is a horrible thing to pour out seed besides the intercourse of man and woman. Deliberately avoiding the intercourse, so that the seed drops on the ground, is double horrible. For this means that one quenches the hope of his family, and kills the son, which could be expected, before he is born. This wickedness is now as severely as is possible condemned by the Spirit, through Moses, that Onan, as it were, through a violent and untimely birth, tore away the seed of his brother out the womb, and as cruel as shamefully has thrown on the earth. Moreover he thus has, as much as was in his power, tried to destroy a part of the human race. When a woman in some way drives away the seed out the womb, through aids, then this is rightly seen as an unforgivable crime. Onan was guilty of a similar crime, by defiling the earth with his seed, so that Tamar would not receive a future inheritor.

3. Matthew Poole, 1624-1679, Presbyterian and Puritan Biblical scholar
Onan's "sin described by the Holy Ghost, that men might be instructed concerning the nature and the great evil of this sin of self-pollution, which is such that it brought upon the actor of it the extraordinary vengeance of God, and which is condemned not only by Scripture but even by the light of nature and the judgement of heathens who have expressly censured it as a great sin, and as a kind of murder.... Whereby we may sufficiently understand how wicked and abominable a practice this is amongst Christians, and in the light of the gospel which lays greater and stricter obligations upon us to purity and severely forbids all pollution both of flesh and spirit."

4. John Wesley, Commentary on Genesis 1755
Onan, though he consented to marry the widow, yet to the great abuse of his own body, of the wife he had married, and the memory of his brother that was gone, he refused to raise up seed unto his brother. Those sins that dishonour the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile actions. Observe, the thing which he did displeased the Lord--And it is to be feared, thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls.

5. Johann Peter Lange, Reformed German scholar, author of Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (24 Volumes) 1850. [A work praised by C.H. Spurgeon: “We have nothing equal to them as a series.”]
Contraception is “a most unnatural wickedness, and a grievous wrong. This sin . . . is [as] destructive as a pestilence that walketh in darkness, destroying directly the body and the soul of the young.”

6. Lutheran Church/Missouri Synod, 1923, in its official magazine “The Witness” accused the Birth Control Federation of America of spattering “this country with slime” and labeled birth-control advocate Margaret Sanger a “she devil.” Pastor Walter Maier, founding preacher of the long-running Lutheran Hour radio program, called contraceptives “the most repugnant of modern aberrations, representing a twentieth-century renewal of pagan bankruptcy.”

7. Oldenburger, Teunis, 1934, Reformed scholar & author, Birth Control for Saints and Sinners
There is no other exegesis of Scripture possible but to place contraception in the same category with prostitution, free love, homosexuality, coitus interruptus...and all other forms of unnatural coition that are indulged in simply for the purpose of play, against which both the laws of the land and those of the Church have with varying severity been enforced, beginning with Onan in Chapter 38 of Genesis and extending to our own day among all civilized countries.

8. Lewis, C. S., The Abolition of Man 1943
As regards contraceptives, there is a paradoxical, negative sense in which all possible future generations are the patients or subjects of a power wielded by those already alive. By contraception simply, they are denied existence; by contraception used as a means of selective breeding, they are, without their concurring voice, made to be what one generation, for its own reasons, may choose to prefer. From this point of view, what we call Man’s power over Nature turns out to be a power exercised by some men over other men with Nature as its instrument.

9. Dr. John R. Rice, Baptist evangelist and one of the key figures in 20th century fundamentalism. The Home; A Bible Manual of 22 Chapters 1946
The use of contraceptive devices to prevent the conception and birth of children is wrong because it goes against the clear tenor of Bible teaching…The Bible teaches that to have large families is a positive good, a blessing from God…If it is a virtue to have large families, then it is a lack of virtue to limit the family to less than what it would be if God had His way and gave the children that He wants to give to a home. Since married couples are commanded to “multiply and replenish the earth” (Gen 1:28, 9:1), then not to multiply is a sin…It seems also that we may properly infer from the general tenor of the Scripture that to want less children than God would give without human rebellion and contraceptive devices is likewise a sin.

10. A.W. Tozer, The Waning Authority of Christ in the Churches 1963
We sing of Him and preach about Him, but He must not interfere; we worship our way, and it must be right because we have always done it that way, as have the other churches in our group....What Christian when faced with a moral problem goes straight to the Sermon on the Mount or other New Testament Scripture for an authoritative answer? Who lets the words of Christ be final on giving, birth control, the bringing up of a family, personal habits, tithing, entertainment, buying, selling and other such important matters?

For further reading and insight, consult these [mostly brief] articles online.

Allan Carlson, a Lutheran historian and author, writes a short & surprising history of Protestantism & contraception

Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, makes the case that evangelicals are rethinking the issue of birth control, mostly due to implications arising out of the abortion revolution.

Pastor Matt Trewhella, pastor of Mercy Seat Christian Church in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, explains the radical restructuring of his beliefs which convinced him to get a vasectomy reversal.

When someone told Jill Stanek, Protestant, high profile pro-lifer and blogger, that the Pope had said that contraception is the root cause of abortion, she thought that it was a pretty big statement to make. She began to wonder, does the Bible say anything about contraception?

One man’s reflections about God the Father, His infinite goodness and love, and the incredible privilege bestowed on married couples of having a role in the creation of new persons.

Nate Wilson, pastor and church planter, says that too many Christian couples hear the arguments in favor of birth control and make their decision without ever having heard that there might be reasons not to practice birth control.

A lengthy article from the New York Times on the anti-contraceptive movement, mostly in the context of the USA, but insightful and well written.

From the June 2003 issues of “Chronicles—A Magazine of American Culture.” A strong appeal to Protestants to return to their former condemnation of contraception which was firmly based on the Scriptures and natural law. [opens a pdf file… scroll to p.19]

A lengthy article on the “Quiverfull” movement of evangelical Christians who refuse any attempt to regulate pregnancy. They argue that God, as the "Great Physician" and sole "Birth Controller," opens and closes the womb on a case-by-case basis. Women's attempts to control their own bodies -- the Lord's temple -- are a seizure of divine power.

Rev. Donald Sensing is pastor of the Trinity United Methodist Church in Franklin, Tennessee and in this article he argues that same-sex marriage will not cause the degeneration of the institution of marriage; it is the result of a degeneration, one that started with modern birth control.

This is an argument against contraception in strictly list format—a long list of Scripture verses and passages from the Early Church Fathers.

Dr. Donald DeMarco provides an excellent survey, useful for Catholics as well as Protestants, of the Catholic Church’s consistent and historical teaching on contraception.

Humanae Vitae
Humanae Vitae (Latin "Of Human Life") is an encyclical letter written by Pope Paul VI and published in 1968. Subtitled "On the Regulation of Birth", it re-affirms the traditional teaching of the Roman Catholic Church regarding abortion, contraception, and other issues pertaining to human life.

Canadian Law on Contraception 1892-1969

"Everyone is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to two years' imprisonment who knowingly, without lawful excuse of justification, offers to sell, advertises, publishes an advertisement of or has for sale or disposal of any medicine, drug or article intended or represented as a means of preventing conception or causing an abortion." (Section 179c of the 1892 Canadian Criminal Code)

Birth control was said to be obscene, "tending to corrupt morals." Unless an accused could prove that its advocacy had been "for the public good," he or she was liable to serve a 2-year jail sentence. Contraception was opposed by pro-natalist business, religious, and political interest groups. This law remained in effect until 1969, the same year that Canada legalized abortion.

American Law on Contraception 1873 to 1964

The "Comstock" Law, US Federal Law, passed unanimously in the United States Congress in 1873
"All persons are prohibited from importing into the United States, from any foreign country, any obscene book, pamphlet, paper, writing, advertisement, circular, print, picture, drawing, or other representation, figure, or image on or of paper or other material, or any cast, instrument, or other article of an immoral nature, or any drug or medicine, or any article whatever, for the prevention of conception, or for causing unlawful abortion. No invoice or package whatever, or any part of one, in which any such articles are contained shall be admitted to entry; and all invoices and packages whereof any such articles shall compose a part are liable to be proceeded against, seized, and forfeited by due course of law. All such prohibited articles in the course of importation shall be detained by the officer of customs, and proceedings taken against the same as prescribed in the following section: Provided, That the drugs hereinbefore mentioned, when imported in bulk and not put up for any of the purposes hereinbefore specified, are excepted from the operation of this section."

This was standing law of the United States of America until rejected by the Supreme Court in 1964, just eight years before Roe v. Wade.