Category: Politics/Social Issues


These shall fight with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because he is the Lord of lords, and King of kings, and they that are with him are called, and elect, and faithful.  Rev 17:14

Just who are these “elect”?

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the “elect” are theologically equivalent to “chosen as the object of mercy or Divine favor, as set apart for eternal life.”  In the Old Testament, these are the Hebrews, the “chosen people”; in the New Testament, the elect are members of the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ.

Lest we forget–and prosperity Gospel preachers notwithstanding–Rev Tevye reminds us that to be Chosen ain’t always a bed of roses:

Among Alaskans, Catholics are underrepresented; even the Catholic Anchor’s most generous 2015 estimate puts Catholics at 14 percent of the state’s population.

And yet, we have two Catholics for U.S. Senators: Dan Sullivan and Lisa “I Stand With Planned Parenthood and Archbishops” Murkowski.


Today’s statewide election features another two Catholics running for Governor: Mike Dunleavy and Mark Begich.

Dunleavy states that the most  important constitutional right “is the right to life, because if this right is not sacred, all other enumerated rights are meaningless.  Being pro-life is at the very center of my understanding of constitutional rights.”  Alaska Right to Life endorsed Dunleavy.




Begich, on the other hand, states that Alaska was “ahead of the curve” when it legalized abortion in 1970, and that, “as the only pro-choice candidate running for Governor, I will continue my record of fighting for women to have . . . the right to make their own health care decisions.”  Planned Parenthood endorsed Begich.

Guess which candidate spoke at a Catholic Church this past Sunday?

It is unclear to me whether Begich was merely speaking WITHIN the Sanctuary of St. Andrew Kim’s, or WITHIN AND DURING the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass itself.  It appears, however, that there are altar girls standing behind him.  These girls appear similar to the altar girls who assisted during Archbishop Etienne’s celebration of the Holy Sacrifice depicted on the Archdiocesan website:

Begich’s political appearance at St. Andrew Kim’s is scandalous on a number of levels.  First, Begich has very publicly, and very steadfastly, adhered to a pro-abortion position.  This contradicts the inalienable right to life, as enumerated in CCC 2273.  “The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law.”  Such public support for abortion is, arguably, “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin.”

Second, per Canon 915, those persons who have obstinately persevered in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.  Whether Mr. Begich is one of these unfortunates is left to the judgment of the local ordinary.  Please pray for Begich, and for our local ordinary to intervene for the salvation of Mr. Begich’s soul.  [NB: Of course, in our enlightened, antinomial ecclesial epoch–now unburdened from disordered attachments such as doctrine, tradition, and other unsavory accretions–canon law no longer guarantees what will happen, what ought to happen, or even what formerly happened; rather, it exists to execute the arbitrary will of its wielders.]

Third, if–I say IF–Mr. Begich was speaking WITHIN AND DURING the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and I dearly hope that he was not, for the sake of all involved), there are likely additional consequences, which I plan to address in another post.


Please also consider respectfully asking Archbishop Etienne to look into Mr. Begich’s untoward appearance in the sanctuary of a Catholic Church.



Homosexuality and Bishops

The Catholic Church’s perennial teaching on the four sins that “cry to heaven for vengeance”:

CCC 1867: The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are “sins that cry to heaven”: the blood of Abel, the sin of the Sodomites, the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt, the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan, injustice to the wage earner.

[NB: Most catechisms combine the Israelites’ cry with the orphans, widows, and aliens under “oppression of the poor”; hence, the number four].

For those of you who have been under a rock for the last month, Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Cardinal McCarrick from the College of Cardinals after allegations of homosexual abuse of young boys.  McCarrick is the first Cardinal to have his cardinalatial powers removed in almost 100 years. 

Then, this past weekend, Carlo Maria Vigano, former apostolic nuncio to the United States, publicly alleged that Pope Francis knew of Cardinal McCarrick’s serial homosexual abuse well before this time — at from June of 2013, when Vigano met with him in person.

Giving a press conference on a jet plane, Pope Francis refused to address the allegations.  In a papacy that has been marked by an untethered approach to questions of morality, theology, and a purportedly “impromptu, pastoral” tone, this is uncharacteristic.  Or perhaps it reveals the true character of this papacy.  Either way, our dear Holy Father needs prayers.

As Anchorage Archbishop Etienne has noted on his blog, McCarrick’s removal was “an unprecedented step signaling the gravity of these reports.”  True.  But removal does not even begin to address a looooooong line of inferential facts: that (1) McCarrick had been doing this for a long time, (2) other bishops knew about it, but either did nothing or actively covered up his misdeeds, (3) other American bishops had no problem letting McCarrick continue to operate as the face of the American Catholic hierarchy, particularly during the 2002 scandal eruption, (4) journalists and priests who attempted to address this story were intimidated, (5) a homosexual subculture (if not mafia, replete with the omerta code) exists in the American hierarchy, and (6) is spread throughout the Church, even into Rome.

One insight – formerly swept aside, but now addressed by Church Militant – was that the “seeding” of the homosexuals in American seminaries began long ago by Communist operative and Catholic convert Bella Dodd.  Interestingly, it was Bishop Sheen who piloted Dodd back into the arms of Holy Mother Church.  One imagines Dodd’s conversion story firing the vehement furnace of Bishop Sheen’s famous blasts against Communism.  But it is also remarkable that Sheen seems not to have addressed the matter of homosexuals in Catholic seminaries, at least externally.  Even more remarkable is Bishop Sheen’s long-suffering silence in the face of Cardinal Spellman’s attacks on him, now that there is accumulating evidence that Spellman lived a closeted homosexual life as Cardinal of New York.

So what does this all mean for Alaska Catholics?

I am not sure, other than this vileness has, indeed, cried to heaven for purification.  I do not know whether the seminaries attended by our Alaskan priests were corrupt, but I have heard anecdotal evidence that they were, in the recent past, hotbeds of homosexual activity.  I do not know whether any of our Alaskan bishops are part of the homosexual network, nor if they have been prevented from proclaiming the Church’s teaching on homosexuality because of threats of blackmail to expose an active homosexual lifestyle.  But these things now seem increasingly credible.

Of this I am sure: that God, Triune God, Creator and Origin of all life, will not be mocked.  Nor will the Divine Son permit His Bride, Holy Mother the Church, to be forever violated by such craven, perfidious, demon-infested men.  And I am sure that we have received such predatory clerics as our “shepherds,” at least in part, because of our own failures to live a life according Our Lord’s injunction to deny ourselves, take up our crosses, and follow Him.

Going forward, there are two other things that I fear as a result of this hellish revelation:

1. The Church’s inability to govern its own corrupt hierarchy will force the intervention of public authority (this has already happened in Chile, and seems likely to happen in Honduras).  Rather than decry this intervention of the State into Church matters, faithful Catholics – justly enraged – will cheer it on.

2. The global aspect of the corruption – which now seems to extend even unto the Roman Pontiff – will result in a global intervention.  And the likeliest apparatus to undertake this is the United Nations.

Once the bulwark of the Church has been removed as an efficacious brake on global agents of social change (e.g., George Soros), I tremble for what may follow.

May God have mercy on us, cleanse Holy Mother Church, and restore and preserve the just sovereignty of the nations of the world!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!






Sen. Murkowski must hear from Alaskans on Supreme Court vote

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski may well become a center of national attention as debate heats up over the next justice for the U.S. Supreme Court.

With Justice Anthony Kennedy stepping down after 30 years on the bench, there is now an opportunity for President Trump to appoint a solidly pro-life justice to the high court, a move that would give the conservative block a clear majority. Kennedy was long considered a “swing” vote as he often sided with decisions in favor of gay marriage and abortion. His replacement could allow the court to finally roll back key aspects of Roe vs. Wade, the court ruling that ensured legal abortion throughout the nation.

With Republicans holding a extremely narrow majority in the U.S. Senate Murkowski has emerged as a critical vote in confirming a new Supreme Court justice as activists from both sides of the abortion debate lobby legislators. A self-identified Catholic, Murkowski is also a supporter of abortion rights who has shown a willingness to disregard Catholic teaching on the sanctity of human life in the womb and the right to life of unborn babies.

National reports this week indicate that Murkowski will be under immense pressure from both sides when she deliberates how to vote on the next Supreme Court nominee.

This is no time to sit on the sidelines or quietly hope for the best. Each and every pro-life Alaskan needs to contact Murkowski and respectfully but forcefully reiterate that we want her to vote for a conservative judicial nominee who will uphold the original intent of the U.S. Constitution.

The pro-abortion side will most certainly make a strong effort to influence Murkowski. We cannot let our voice go unheard. Please contact Murkowski through letters, phone calls and emails. The more correspondence the better. She must be made aware of the fact that most Alaskans are pro-life, we are counting on her vote and we are watching closely to see how she votes.

Click here to contact Murkowski.

Lisa Murkowski, Abortion, and Holy Communion

A fine plea for human life was recently made by Alaska’s most prominent cleric, Archbishop Etienne, on his blog:

How many couples get married today already having decided how many children they will have? How many decide they do not even want children? Or, sadly, how many couples when they conceive a child decide it is ‘inconvenient’ and do not accept this gift of new life? Without judging any of those particular situations, I simply beg the questions: Can we not be more open to God? to God’s plan? Do we have the faith and love to accept God’s will in our lives, even when it ‘blows up’ our plans and trust that God’s plan is better than our own?

Regrettably, these questions do not seem to affect Alaska’s most prominent lay Catholic, who has taken to the state’s most prominent public forum to share that she doesn’t “adhere to all the tenets of my faith,” “I’m not hesitant to question when I think that my church, my religion, is not current,” and that “if you don’t like abortion, the best way to deal with it is . . . through contraception“?

Here’s what Evangelium Vitae states:

“Be Not Afraid!”

Laws which legitimize the direct killing of innocent human beings through abortion or euthanasia are in complete opposition to the inviolable right to life proper to every individual; they thus deny the equality of everyone before the law.

Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.

In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to “take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it”.


As pointed out by Michael Hichborn of the Lepanto Institute, here’s how Cardinal Ratzinger would have responded to a politician who “does not adhere” to the Church’s teaching on abortion or euthanasia:

5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

6. When “these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible,” and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, “the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it” (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration “Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics” [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.


In contrast, here’s how Cardinal McCarrick would have responded:

“Based on our consultation process –said  Cardinal McCarrick,- there is significant concern about the perception that the sacred nature of the Eucharist could be trivialized and might be turned into a partisan political battleground.”

“Expecting a minister of Holy Communion to make these judgments would create great pastoral difficulties. We do not want to encourage confrontations at the altar rail with the Sacred Body of the Lord Jesus in our hands. This could create unmanageable burdens for our priests and those who assist them and could turn the Eucharist into a perceived source of political combat,” the interim  report added.

The Washington Cardinal also said that denial of Holy Communion “could further divide our Church and that it could have serious unintended consequences. For example, it could be more difficult for faithful Catholics to serve in public life because they might be seen not as standing up for principle, but as under pressure from the hierarchy.”

“We also fear it could push many people farther away from the Church and its  teaching, rather than bringing them closer.”

“In light of these and other concerns, the task force urges for the most part renewed efforts and persuasion, not penalties,” Cardinal McCarrick’s report also said.

And here is Deuteronomy:

I call heaven and earth to witness this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Choose therefore life, that both thou and thy seed may live!

St. John the Baptist, pray for us!

Special Topic: Gender Theory – Part 2


What kind of effect does gender theory have on society?

Gender theory affects society on two levels. On the political and legislative level, gender theorists pressure for change in the physiognomy of marriage and family. They call for the legalization and social acceptance of new models of marriage and family in the name of progress, tolerance and equal rights, including the right to adopt children. This so-called “progress,” however, will only contribute to the self-destruction of the human person and society (cf. Benedict XVI, Christmas Address to the Roman Curia 2008). On the cultural level, gender theory seeks to change the governing mentalities, beginning with those most vulnerable in indoctrination: children and adolescents. Under the guise of educating them in tolerance, they are encouraged to “explore” and “experiment” with their sexuality so that they can choose that which best suits them.

Why does the church denounce gender theory as an ideology?

The church, which has always been interested in that which concerns man and woman, denounces gender theory as an ideology because she has the right and duty to intervene when the natural and supernatural good of persons and society are at stake. She has received from God a “responsibility for creation” (Benedict XVI, Christmas Address to the Roman Curia 2008, 4). For this reason, the church promotes a “human ecology” that helps nations and states to differentiate between that which constitutes true progress and that which is instead a step back, resulting in the disintegration of people and the social fabric. (Benedict XVI, Christmas Address to the Roman Curia 2008)

What is this “human ecology” that the church promotes?

In her responsibility towards creation, the church must first and foremost protect mankind, which forms part of creation. Human ecology means respect for the human person and “the natural and moral structure with which he has been endowed” (CA 38). This includes the promotion of the values or femininity and masculinity as the foundation of the humanization of persons. “Every outlook which presents itself as a conflict between the sexes is only an illusion and a danger: it would end in segregation and competition between men and women” (MW 14).

On a more concrete level, human ecology applies to social policies concerning education, family, work, access to services, civic participation and so on. On the one hand, we must combat any unjust sexual discrimination. On the other hand, and at the same time, the promotion of equal dignity “must be harmonized with attentive recognition of the difference and reciprocity between the sexes where this is relevant to the realization of one’s humanity, whether male or female” (MW 14; cf. CCC 2358). (CA 38-39; CV 51)

Gender theory has been referred to as an “ideological colonization.” What does this mean?

Gender theory has been called an ideological colonization because it attempts, using every means at its disposal, to impose a vision of sexuality, marriage and family that it inhuman, and therefore capable of enslaving people (cf. Francis, In-flight Press Conference from the Philippines to Rome January 19, 2015).  Gender theory seeks to mask this manipulation. It claims to offer greater freedom, when in reality it is its denial. It claims to help each person discover his or her sexual identity, when in reality it prevents man and woman from recognizing and accepting his or her sexual identity. It fails to recognize that the physical, moral and spiritual difference and complementarity between man and woman are directed towards the goods of celibacy or marriage and the development of family life. (CCC 2333)

What should Christians do to counteract the negative influence of gender theory? 

This task begins in the home. Christians should actively participate in the education of their children, because through it the Christian culture is passed on and progresses from generation to generation. Furthermore, the family environment has to be such that children learn to love in being freely loved, to respect others in being respected, and to know the face of God firstly through a father and mother who are attentive to them. This way, daughters and sons discover the beauty of maternity and paternity and therefore of the femininity and masculinity that they respectively embody. When these fundamental experiences are absent or lacking, there is a loss of humanity in society; society as a whole suffers and in turn becomes a creator of violence. (CSDC 242-243; MW 13-14; CCE, Educational Guidance in Human Love 1983)

Antonio Malo is Professor of Philosophy at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, Rome.

Special Topic: Gender Theory


What is gender theory?

Gender theory is a school of thought that, in its attempt to bring about “self-emancipation from creation and the Creator” (Benedict XVI, Christmas Address to the Roman Curia 2008, 1), aims to advance a libertarian or “free” approach to issues related to sexuality, marriage, and family. The distinction between sex and gender is a central element of this theory, which emerged in feminist circles in North America in the late 1960s and 1970s and has since spread throughout much of the world.

Read More

10 questions with my ‘Shoulder Angel’ about Prop. 1

My shoulder angel! Why are you here?

To remind you that “where sin has perverted the social climate, it is necessary to call for the conversion of hearts and appeal to the grace of God. Charity urges just reforms. There is no solution to the social question apart from the Gospel.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1896).

Oh no. Are you here to tell me something about Prop 1?

Yes. You cannot simply pull an ostrich on this one.

All right, all right. I guess I have to pay attention to my civic duty. So what is Prop 1?

Prop 1 is a ballot initiative for Anchorage residents that aims to keep biological sex as the basis for using public restrooms, locker rooms, and showers (“intimate facilities”).

What would Prop 1 change?

If passed, Prop 1 would do two things: (1) require Municipality of Anchorage facilities to separate their intimate facilities according to biological sex, and (2) permit private business owners and religious groups to determine their own bathroom policies without threat of lawsuit from the city or ideological groups.

Wait, what? I’ve heard of the ACLU suing the pants off of Christians before, but can the City of Anchorage bring a lawsuit against a private business owner?

Not exactly – it hears or judges the lawsuit through its Equal Rights Commission.

The whatsit?

The Equal Rights Commission is a quasi-judicial agency within the Municipality of Anchorage. It hears complaints from citizens regarding allegations of discrimination. Per municipal code, it has significant powers, including the power to subpoena and the power to levy fines. As some of your human judges have remarked, the power to fine is the power to destroy — well, that’s a paraphrase.

Are you seriously suggesting that a business owner could be fined into submission by the very government which benefits from productive, tax-paying businesses?

I don’t need to suggest it – it’s happened in quite a few places already to various business owners: Baronelle Stutzman in Washington, Jack Phillips in Colorado, Elaine Huguenin in New Mexico, Blaine Adamson in Kentucky.

They lost their businesses?

Elaine Huguenin did. Blaine Adamson won his appeal, but spent oodles of time, sweat, and money in the process. And Baronelle Stutzman and Jack Phillips are headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. There are other Christian business owners like them, too. Their lives and businesses will never be the same because they were willing to sacrifice their careers for the sake of testifying to BIblical truth about marriage.

Wait, you said “Biblical truth about marriage.” I’m Catholic, and this is about sexual orientation and gender identity. Doesn’t that mean I can put my head back in the sand now?

No. Here is what Pope Francis has to say:

“There are genuine forms of ideological colonization taking place. And one of these – I will call it clearly by its name – is [the ideology of] “gender.” Today children – children! – are taught in school that everyone can choose his or her sex. Why are they teaching this? Because the books are provided by the persons and institutions that give you money. These forms of ideological colonization are also supported by influential countries. And this is terrible!” — Pope Francis, 27 July 2016


“You, Irina, mentioned a great enemy to marriage today: the theory of gender. Today there is a world war to destroy marriage. Today there are ideological colonisations which destroy, not with weapons, but with ideas. Therefore, there is a need to defend ourselves from ideological colonisations.” — Pope Francis, 1 October 2016


“The biological and psychological manipulation of sexual difference, which biomedical technology can now make appear as a simple matter of personal choice – which it is not! – runs the risk of dismantling the energy source that feeds the covenant between man and woman, making it creative and fruitful. The mysterious bond between the creation of the world and the generation of God’s Son is revealed by his taking flesh in the womb of Mary – Mother of Jesus and Mother of God – out of love for us. This mysterious bond never fails to amaze and move us; its revelation fully illumines the mystery of being and the meaning of life. Henceforth, the mystery of human generation radiates a profound wisdom about life. Received as a gift, life             is itself exalted. Generating life regenerates us; by giving of our lives, we are enriched. — Pope Francis, 5 October 2017

Ok, ok. I get it. And, in fact, I would vote “Yes” on Prop 1, except that I am planning to be out of town on election day. So I guess that means I’m off the hook, right?

Nice try. Anchorage residents vote on Prop 1 by mail beginning on March 13, 2018.

Boy, you thought of everything, didn’t you? Angel? Where’d he go? Was that 10 questions already?

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén