Invalid Input

Invalid Input

Search the Remnant Newspaper

Chris Jackson | Remnant Columnist

The midterms are the accent point on the decline of our nation ever since it adopted the pernicious doctrine of religious liberty at its founding. The same pernicious doctrine taught by Vatican II. Namely, the absurd notion that a secular agnostic state is somehow the Catholic ideal rather than one that recognizes Our Lord and His religion as true. What are the fruits? What began as a vast majority Christian nation has now devolved in under 250 years to a nation where only 63% of adults even identify as Christian and 30% of US adults are religiously unaffiliated. On top of that, of these 63% who identify as Christian, we know that a large % are "Christian" in name only.

Soon after Nancy Pelosi’s bishop forbade her to receive Holy Communion due to her support of abortion “rights,” she hopped a plane to the Vatican. While there, she posed for a photo-op, exchanging gifts with a smiling and chummy Francis. She then went on to sacrilegiously receive Holy Communion from a priest at Francis’ own Mass.[i]

Below is a recent scene from the popular TV series, “The Chosen,” which depicts Gospel events from the life of Christ:

In this scene the TV version of Our Lord says to Mary Magdalen (after a fictionalized relapse of sin occurring after He saved her from stoning), “Did you really think you would never…sin again?”

The former Anglican Archlayperson of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, recently stated the following:

To be trans is to enter a sacred journey of becoming whole: precious, honoured and loved, by yourself, by others and by God[i]

If ever there was ever a warning of how deeply a religious body can go mad when they reject the Tradition of the Church, the Anglicans are it. The differences in the so called Church of England and the true Church of Christ started very subtly, but as we can see they have now grown into a chasm.

Rowan WilliamsRowan Williams

First, believing there is such a thing as “being trans” has no historical precedent in human history for 2,000 plus years. However, now we hear even so-called Christian religious leaders using the term as if it had been around for time immemorial. There is no such thing as “trans” as there are only male and female human persons created by God. Far from “entering a sacred journey” the path of attempting to change one’s gender[ii] is pure madness, as it is an innate reality and unchangeable characteristic that is determined at conception. In reality being, “trans” is to enter a journey of trying to deny and change reailty to unreality resulting in sure psychological damage in the process.

Far from becoming “whole” this diabolical act against nature itself ensures that there is a split in the person who attempts to take on a false persona against that person’s nature while the person’s true God-given nature will always exist and have to be repeatedly suppressed.  The canard that Mr. Williams has to tell “trans” people that they are “precious, honoured, and loved, by yourself, by others, and by God” clearly implies that non-woke Christians and their God do not love these people. Obviously the precise opposite is the case.

True happiness can only be found in conforming to your God-given gender, which has been understood to be normative by 2000 + years of human history.

God loves every soul He creates infinitely. In fact He loved them so much that He gave them a biological gender as part of their humanity. True happiness can only be found in conforming to that gender, which has been understood to be normative by 2000 + years of human history. It is trying to live in direct opposition to that God given reality that causes misery, heartache, psychoses, and sadly in many cases, suicide.

Now who is it that truly loves these people? Those who encourage their psychological destruction and bodily mutilation, not to mention the danger of losing their souls in the process? Or those who charitably tell them the truth and try to get them assistance whether it be from a priest, Christian psychiatrist, or otherwise?

They removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in the 1970’s.

Speaking of psychiatry, the reason Mr. Williams wrote the above words, in addition to a list of other Anglican signatories, was in response to the news that an upcoming ban on “conversion therapy” in Britain would not include “transgender” persons. The term “conversion therapy” has been made a scare word by the cultural Marxists to denigrate and deride any cleric or psychiatrist who dares to attempt to assist a person with same sex attraction or who is having unwanted thoughts, temptations, or desires to become the opposite sex, to work through these unnatural urges in order to align them with the natural law and Christian moral teaching. It is important to note that this was the standard practice for Catholic clerics as well as all psychologists and psychiatrists until the radical left succeeded in infiltrating the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to the point that they removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in the 1970’s.

One particular former British government advisor went even further, alleging that even praying for those suffering from same sex attraction or gender confusion should be banned:

“All prayer that seeks to change or suppress someone’s innate sexuality or gender identity is deeply damaging and causes immeasurable harm,” former government advisor, Jayne Ozanne, claimed.

“Prayer isn’t prayer if it causes you to hate yourself for being LGBT!” she also claimed. “It’s actually ‘Hate prayer.’”

“It is dangerous, damaging & must be included in a bill to [ban conversion therapy],” she went on to claim.[iii]

Ms. Ozanne made headlines in the UK’s “The Times” by saying, “I couldn’t cast out my lesbian urges, so I’ll cast out the church’s bigotry.”[iv]  

The frightening absurdity of what this woman said is overshadowed only by the fact that she was formerly an advisor (in any capacity) to the British government. The hypocrisy of Ms. Ozanne hardly needs to be pointed out. The Church is not seeking to change or suppress one’s “innate sexuality” or “gender identity,” rather the Church is seeking to confirm these God given characteristics against unnatural and damaging psychological or spiritual afflictions which attempt to force one to live in denial of them. The fact that prayer does not cause one to hate oneself, but to humble oneself to ask for help from one’s Creator and loving Father goes without saying.

Ms. Ozanne, it turns out, is a practicing lesbian and evangelical Anglican who made headlines in the UK’s “The Times” by saying, “I couldn’t cast out my lesbian urges, so I’ll cast out the church’s bigotry.”[iv]  Enough said.

Instead of standing as a clear Catholic voice showing true Christ-like compassion for these people by telling them the truth, our current pontiff instead met and listened to the entirely reasonable Ms. Ozanne[v] in a private audience.

An unforeseen twist to this story is that as I was researching it, I had refreshingly ceased thinking about Francis for quite some time. However, when I went to do an internet search to find out more about Ms. Ozanne, who should pop up in the results, but our dear Pontiff himself! I know that at this point I shouldn’t be surprised, but yet I was. Obviously, I should have known. If I find a lesbian evangelical Anglican and former British government advisor calling Christian prayers for conversion “hate prayer,” I would soon find Pope Francis.

As it turns out, instead of standing as a clear Catholic voice showing true Christ-like compassion for these people by telling them the truth, our current pontiff instead met and listened to the entirely reasonable Ms. Ozanne[v] in a private audience in the Pope’s own private chapel at the Casa Santa Marta in Rome! By the way, Cardinal Zen, whom the pope sold out to the Communist Chinese by approving their fraudulent Communist bishops, thereby marginalizing further the true underground loyal Catholics in China, is still waiting for an audience the pope refuses to give him.

The left-wing press then used the visit to state in a Reuters headline, “Pope shows 'concern' on discredited gay conversion therapy.”

The Tablet reported on November 14, 2019 that “During the meeting, which took place after Mass in the Pope’s private chapel at the Casa Santa Marta in Rome, Ms Ozanne presented the Pope with a copy of her memoir, Just Love, and the findings of a 2018 survey into faith and sexuality.[vi]

The left-wing press then used the visit to state in a Reuters headline, “Pope shows 'concern' on discredited gay conversion therapy.” The article went on to state:

An Evangelical lesbian who met with Pope Francis on Thursday said the Catholic leader had shown warmth and concern over her objections to “conversion therapy”, a widely discredited effort often used by religious figures to turn gay people straight.

Pope Francis “seemed to understand what conversion therapy was,” Jayne Ozanne, a British Christian, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation by phone from the Vatican.

“I thought he was extremely warm, he was very pastoral,” she said. “He seemed concerned … I felt very embraced.”[vii]

Of course the Vatican followed up this news by clarifying the need for those suffering from same sex attraction and gender dysphoria to not act on such unnatural inclinations, but to pray for assistance of the Holy Spirit to overcome these crosses and to make use of Catholic psychiatrists if necessary.

Just kidding. Instead the article relayed the following news…

 “The Vatican did not respond to requests for comment.”

Please do not refrain from praying for conversion of Ms. Ozanne, Great Britain, our Pope and all people who suffer from the afflictions mentioned in this article. Doing so not only provides graces to those souls but fulfills our charitable obligation as Christians to do so.

Watch the Latest from RTV - GloBA’ALism: Is Pope Francis Dancing with the Devil?


[ii]             Before someone says that “sex” is the correct term and not gender, I quote American Heritage dictionary which states as an acceptable definition of gender, “Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, by which most organisms are classified on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions; sex.” The terms used to be indistinguishable. Recently, cultural Marxists have attempted to split the meanings making “gender” a social construct of masculine and feminine which have no relation to the biology of whether one is male or female. As the radical left Wikipedia tells us “Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to femininity and masculinity and differentiating between them. Depending on the context, this may include sex-based social structures and gender identity.”



[v]             Sarcasm.



It is sad that in our current age we are afflicted with such a Pontiff who, instead of reinforcing the disciplines and rites of the Church meant for our edification, seems intent on tearing them down. As a result of the frequent scandalous actions of our current pontiff, there are sadly those who have, or are tempted to, go the way of Luther by throwing the baby out with the bathwater. This includes those who would disparage the pious disciplines of fasting and abstinence during Lent as arbitrary stumbling blocks that Holy Mother Church has invented to damn souls. In fact, the exact opposite is true.

As we continue to practice our Traditional Catholic Faith this Lent, it is important to remember why we fast and abstain and the history of these practices, which go back to apostolic times. As we see how severe the rules were in the past, we can appreciate how much understanding the Church has already shown in curtailing the previous more strict practices, but at the same time we see how She has every right to govern the required form of penances of Her children. For penance is obligatory, not optional, in order to live the Catholic life.

The following chapter from the book, “The Visible Church: Her Government, Ceremonies, Sacramentals, Festivals and Devotions” does this splendidly. This book used to be a textbook for Catholic Schools in 1922, back when they were Catholic. I now leave you with the wise words of the Rt. Rev. John F. Sullivan, D.D.  I hope they will provide the same assistance to you during this Lent as they did to me.

Chris Jackson

I came across an old song some time ago from the 1980’s which I had never heard before.  The lyrics were tragic, haunting, and yet beautiful at the same time. Considering myself somewhat a connoisseur of 80’s music, I supposed that the song may have been fairly obscure and not a great hit, which is why I had never heard of it. Intrigued by the song, I started to do some research on it.

Boy was I wrong. Much to my surprise, not only was this song a hit, it rose to the number three song in the country for three weeks from May to June of 1982 behind only "Don't Talk to Strangers" by Rick Springfield and "Ebony and Ivory" by Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder.  Not only that, the song was even more popular overseas. The song was number one in Australia for six weeks, Canada for four weeks, Ireland for three weeks, and the United Kingdom for one week.  It also made the top ten in Belgium, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Norway. In addition it made the top ten for the year of 1982 on Billboard's Adult Contemporary chart.

The initial reaction from the bishops to Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis’ Motu Proprio severely restricting the Latin Mass and Traditional sacraments, wasn’t as bad as expected. Many conservative bishops held off enforcing any restrictions while they studied the document, or else they went further and exempted their dioceses from the restrictions under canon law. 

However, after Archbishop Roche, the Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship, issued implementation guidelines for Traditionis Custodes entitled “Responsa ad dubia” on December 4, 2021[i], things have not gone so well. Since these guidelines were published, several bishops have started to forbid the Traditional form of all sacraments except the Mass in their diocese[ii], while others have gone further and forbidden even the old Mass in their parish churches.[iii] Still other more liberal bishops have even taken the opportunity to forbid their priests from saying even the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin or facing the altar (ad orientem).[iv]

See Part I here

In Part I of this article, I pointed out that on January 18, 2022, La Croix reported that new documents on the Ecclesia Dei communities are due in March. If the Ecclesia Dei priests take a stand in not saying the New Mass, and continue to say the Latin Mass, it is foreseeable that they will incur disciplinary action from Rome. I also went on to point out the absolutely miserable state of the Novus Ordo liturgy in most dioceses since its implementation in 1970 as admitted by Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis as well as their complete lack of ability to do anything about it.[v]

It is in this context that we must analyze what options Traditional Catholics will have for Mass, the sacraments, religious instruction, etc. if Archbishop Roche and Francis eventually place all Traditional priests under suspension. The alternatives could soon be reduced to either assisting at abuse laden Novus Ordo Masses with heretical pastors or Traditional Latin Masses with priests who were unjustly suspended for the crime of doing what Catholic priests have always done.

Bad news is brewing as to the future of Ecclesia Dei communities in light of Pope Francis’ promulgation of Traditionis Custodes, which attempts to severely restrict the celebration of the Traditional Mass in dioceses as well as eliminates the use of all other Traditional sacraments with the goal of the eventual abolition of all 1962 Rites. On December 3, 2021, Lifesite News reported the following:

As the potentially dark days of Traditionis Custodes approach us, it might be opportune to remember a time long ago when the Latin Mass was changed and then eventually violently suppressed by liturgical reformers. Those reformers were part of the English Reformation. The goals, policies, and tactics of these so-called reformers may ring a bell. The quotations used in this article are taken from the book, “Elizabeth and the English Reformation: The Struggle for a Stable Settlement of Religion,” written by William P. Haugaard in 1968.

Page 1 of 17