Our Motto:

The Connecticut Catholic Corner Motto: Romans 14:16 "Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil."

All articles owned by Connecticut Catholic Corner

© 2007-2015 All articles owned by Connecticut Catholic Corner *except EWTN press releases(see sidebar)*

August 3, 2015

Bishop Huonder persecuted for quoting Sacred Scripture

Image from:
The persecution of Catholics and of the Catholic Church are growing day by day.  

Though the Church is no stranger to persecution, its still difficult (at least for me) to witness the insanity of the secular world attacking the Catholic Church and Her clergy for reading the Bible


Over in Switzerland, Bishop Huonder has once again (he must be used to this by now) become the focus of an attack by gay Nazi's the "Pink Cross" for reading Sacred Scripture and denouncing gay 'marriage'.  

The good Bishop has in the past been called assorted names for not wanting 4 year old's in public school to be subjected to sex education so graphic its offensive to most adults! 

Last Friday, the Bishop of Chur gave a talk based on Catholic teaching and Sacred Scripture against same sex 'marriages' and the gay Nazi's Pink Cross brigade showed its tolerance for others who believe differently than they do by demanding an apology and seeking criminal charges for a 'hate crime' against the Catholic Bishop for reading the Bible.

The 73 year old Bishop Huonder dared to read a few passages in Sacred Scripture from Leviticus stating that same sex sexual relations are an abomination to God and hence these scripture back up Catholic teaching.  
At no time did the Bishop say the Catholic Church was calling for the death penalty for homosexuals under the old covenant Jewish law- but you wouldn't know that from the insanity coming out of the hateful intolerant gay Pink Cross organization in Switzerland. The focus of the Bishop's talk was FAMILY and what constitutes a marriage (1 man + 1 woman) not the death penalty required under Jewish Old Testament Law. 

For daring to read two verses of Leviticus from the Bible, the gay Nazi's Pink Cross brigade want the Bishop arrested under  "hate crimes" because "representatives of the church do not live in a legal vacuum".  

Since when is a member of clergy (be it Catholic or Protestant) not allowed to read the Bible in a church or anywhere else?  Has society learned nothing from history?  Are we always doomed to repeat the worst of history while tossing out the best?  

The Catholic Church and other Christian communities are built on the teachings of God - how would a Christian community exist if it were forbidden from reading its own Sacred texts? 

But that is the intent isn't it?  

To silence Christianity, keeping people in the dark so that evil prevails.

What is this world coming to when clergy can no longer read the Bible for fear of arrest?  

We are in a time of martyr making.  

Pray for Bishop Huonder and pray for the ignorant people belonging to the 'Pink Cross' that they might gain wisdom before their own doom.

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


August 1, 2015

Why did the Catholic Church flip-flop on weddings?

Over at the National Catholic Register, Patti Armstrong writes an article asking clergy and laity whether or not Catholics should attend a wedding outside the Catholic Church between a baptized Catholic and a non-Catholic. 

The reason behind the debate is because the Code of Canon Law states: “Only those marriages are valid which are contracted before the local [bishop], pastor or a priest or deacon delegated by either of them who assist, and before two witnesses” (1108 §1).Canon law does not prohibit Catholics from attending invalid weddings, Father Pacwa [EWTN] explained, but he said that Catholics must discern carefully. “Every situation will call upon our reserves of prayer, discernment and evaluation,” he said. “And a good confession before making any decision is always a good idea.”According to him, maintaining peace within families is very important, but there is also the question of motive: “Are they trying to put me in an uncomfortable position to prove their point? Or do they simply not see that there is an issue at stake?”
Many opinions are given...but little Catholic documentation. 

I'd like to share the clear teachings the Church once held and taught to Catholics on the subject of 'mixed marriages', weddings outside the Church and Catholics assisting or participating in such marriages. 

I've mentioned many times, that I collect and adore old Catholic books.  These are the sort of books that weigh a ton and were published by the Church for teaching.  One such book is "The Manual of The Holy Catholic Church; Embracing The Beautiful Teachings and The Light From the Altar", published in 1906 by the Catholic Art and Publication Office of Chicago, Ill. published with the approbation of The Most Rev. James Edward Quigley, D.D. Archbishop of Chicago in 1906.  It is this book I am quoting from today (highlights are mine).

"It is frequently asked if it is allowable for Catholics to act as bridesmaids or groomsmen at any marriage, whether in a church or in a private house at which the ceremony is conducted by a Protestant minister, or at a purely civil marriage?    'As to the question, viz., whether Catholics may lawfully act as bridesmaids or grooms at Protestant or civil marriages, we should answer; A Catholic is at liberty to act as official witness to a lawful marriage contract, if the assistance does not imply assent to conditions otherwise forbidden in conscience.  Hence if two persons, who are not baptized, choose to marry before a magistrate, exercising their natural right, which a Catholic reasonably respects, he is at liberty to attest such a marriage by his presence as an official witness, just as he might attest to any other lawful and solemn contract.  Here there is no denial of faith.   No Catholic is, however, at liberty to act as official witness to a marriage unlawful before God, such as the marriage ceremony of a divorced party already rightly married according to Christian or the natural law; or a party that is Catholic and publicly denies his or her faith by neglecting the sacramental rite in favor of a purely civil ceremony before the magistrate, unless there be no priest to perform the rites of the Church; or a party that is leading a scandalous life which would justify the prospect of shame, divorce, or neglect; for though such person may not pretend to any religious convictions, and protest their mere intention to make a natural mutual contract, yet prudence and respect for the moral order should forbid a Catholic to assist at such marriage contracts.   A third principle, already explained in the answer to the question whether a double religious ceremonial is permissible, forbids Catholics to take part in any marriage ceremony which bears the character of religious worship other than that of the Catholic Church.  Hence a Catholic may not lawfully assist at a marriage in a Protestant church which is intended to have a religious aspect." 

I'd like to point out that one type of "unlawful marriage" is (according to another passage in this book there are several different types of "unlawful" marriages) a marriage between a Catholic and a non-Catholic outside the Church without proper permission.

The part that says "No Catholic, is however, at liberty to act as official witness to a marriage unlawful before God..." begs to be answered (at least in my mind) how could a once considered "unlawful marriage" suddenly become lawful when nothing has changed but the opinion of the Church?  

If God thought these marriages were "unlawful" for centuries and the Church forbid Catholics from participating in them what changed?  Did God change His opinion on what an unlawful marriage is or did the Church change it's opinion thus changing its teaching?  What basis was used to change this point of view?

I guess the question then would be 'what constitutes a witness'?  

Guests at a wedding are witnesses to the ceremony, are they not?

What was once forbidden is now celebrated.  

To see the complete turn around on this Catholic teaching to what is now allowed visit:

Reading all of this brings several questions to my mind...

First, are we better off now having completely turned around the Church's position on mixed marriages and ceremonies than we were decades ago?

How many Catholics attend the weddings of people who are 'remarrying' after a divorce without an annulment? Do they discuss this in Confession with their priest?  If they did...what would he tell them?

And finally, is it any wonder at all, that progressives wrongly believe and hope that one day the Church will change its teachings on gay 'marriage'? 

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


July 30, 2015

Woman threatens to sue Church to be godFATHER to nephew

A confused Catholic woman in Spain, who thinks and is pretending to be a man, has been denied the possibility of being a godparent [make that 'godfather' to be precise] to her nephew. 

Alex Salinas is a 21 year old female (DNA don't lie) who is going through life pretending to be a man. 

Salinas is planning on suing the Catholic Church for "discriminating" against her because she says she's a man and believes the Church is not allowing her to be a godFATHER based on her documents [that were changed a few months ago] that say she's a man even when her DNA and genitalia says she's a woman.  

Got that?  

A woman, pretending to be a man, wants to force Christ's Holy Catholic Church to deny a truth [her DNA is female] and accept a lie [that she is a he] as a truth and then allow her errr...him to be a godfather.  

Insanity.  Pure insanity. 

The Church hasn't said it turned her down as godFATHER because of her declarations she is a man.  

The priest reminded Salinas that to be a godparent a person must "be Catholic, be confirmed, have received the holy sacrament of the Eucharist and, at the same time, live a life congruent with faith and the mission they are assuming."

I think its pretty clear that Salinas is not living a life "congruent" with the Catholic faith.  Salinas isn't even living a life "congruent" with her own DNA and body parts!  

Don't you just love "assigned female at birth, but is now living as his authentic self as a man"?  

The ridiculousness of the statement "assigned female at birth" is only out-done by the hordes of delusional people who actually believe this tripe.  She wasn't "assigned female at birth", she was determined by her DNA at her conception to be female.  She will always be female.  No drugs, no surgeries, no wearing men's clothes, no government documents...NOTHING will change her DNA from female to male.  She is female.

There is nothing "authentic" about denying DNA [scientific proven fact] in order to live a fantasy you've made up in your head and then attempt to force everyone else in the world to believe.  

Instead of getting mental help to accept who SHE really is...she [like other transgenders and their supporters] demands that the world reject scientific fact of her DNA and instead believe whatever fantasy she's cooked up.  And if we don't accept her fantasy, she will sue us. 

I want to ask "How ridiculous can we get?" but I'm terrified of what the answer might be.

If Salinas is so confused as to what she actually is, how in the world could she be a good godparent [even godmother at this point] teaching and living the Catholic faith to a child? 

Quote: "Salinas predicts filing a complaint before the courts because he does not consider it "just" for the Church to treat him "like someone different."
How ironic.  Her DNA is female, the Church accepts that she is female and she "predicts" suing the Church because she is being treated "like something different".  If the Church said to a man...say President Obama, 'We refuse to accept you are a man, we are going to call you a woman', the world would be rightly outraged because the Church would be denying a truth - a scientific fact proven by DNA.  

Yet when a mentally disordered person denies the scientific fact of their DNA for a lie, the world is supposed to accept the lie as truth and pretend we don't all know the woman is a woman no matter what her "documents" say. 


When will the world come back to reality and stop living in a fantasy realm where everyone makes up their own 'truth' and then attempts to force the rest of us to believe it?

God help us.

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


July 24, 2015

Patheos' Kathy Schiffer fails to take down Michael Voris

It's summer and Patheos Catholic's blogger Kathy Schiffer has once again stepped into it by going after Michael Voris half cocked. 

She starts by showing her ignorance in referring to Michael Voris as a "controversial blogger"!  :)  

Then she attempts to take Voris down over a Vortex episode from earlier this week... 

Her complaint about this Vortex episode?  I think its that the seminary didn't like Voris saying "gay" when the person in question said "same-sex attracted" [is there a difference in meaning here?], but I can't be sure, Schiffer never actually makes any point in her blog post.  

Here is the statement she claims to have received from Sacred Heart seminary...

So is it the use of the word "gay" rather than "same-sex attracted" that has Schiffer riled up or the number of homosexuals in the seminary?  Who can tell?

Schiffer then shifts gears to going after Voris personally, with a trip down memory lane in the life of Michael Voris along with the name change from "Real Catholic TV" to "Church Militant" and then she goes on about how Michael came back more fully to his Catholic faith with the deaths of his brother and mother.  What has any of that got to do with the Vortex episode that upset Schiffer so much?  Answer:  ZERO, NADA, NOTHING.  

This Vortex episode and the seminary statement are just her jumping off tools to the heart of the matter...her attempt to take down or put Michael Voris in his place. 

She fails.

Michael Voris clearly and perfectly takes down every point the stir the original Vortex episode caused...including the drivel from Kathy Schiffer. 

Here it is...

[From] TRANSCRIPT:   Out of the gate, allow us to say that the Vortex we produced earlier this week where we briefly touched on comments about same-sex attraction made to seminarians at the archdiocese of Detroit major seminary has caused quite the stir in the archdiocese.
As we predicted in the Vortex episode (it turns out more accurately than we knew), some would take this report as picking on or singling out Detroit’s seminary. And as we said then, and repeat: not true. We said then — and again repeat — this was one example of a persistent problem in the Church establishment: the catering to the feelings of homosexual men, also more clinically stated — men with same-sex attraction.
We correctly reported that a priest on staff told seminarians not to go in and out of the bathroom showers in towels because it posed a potential occasion of sin for other seminarians who may have same-sex attraction. They should wear their bathrobes instead. In other words, there are men in the seminary for whom the sight of other men half-dressed (which is a normal, everyday occurrence in a dormitory-like setting) could be a temptation to impurity, or at least impure thoughts.
Men studying for the priesthood who are tempted by such sights should not be in seminary.  As Fr. John Hardon often said — and many others have repeated because they understand the common sense reality — the most dangerous place for a man with homosexual tendencies is a seminary. We used this as nothing more than just one example as a springboard to discuss the much larger issue of how homosexuality is practically catered to by many leaders in the Church today and the great damage that catering is doing.
That was it. That was our point, a point we have stressed over and over again — much to the chagrin and rage of many clerics, but also the quiet and joyful support of many other clerics who understand the reality of the homosexual subculture in the clergy. In fact, our example of what the priest told the entire assembled house of seminarians amounted to less than 20 percent of that Vortex. More than 80 percent of it went on to lay out the case that for decades in the U.S., priests and bishops have set the stage for this ocean of homosexuality to overwhelm the Church, both culturally as well as inside the Church. Not one single, sane, understanding person would disagree with that assessment.
That Vortex episode resulted in a flurry of comments and back-and-forth e-mails and phone calls among all kinds of people in the archdiocese. We took great interest in one particular correspondence which was sent our way by multiple sources, both within and outside the archdiocese.
It was a 700-word e-mail to the entire faculty/staff of the seminary by the priest who made the comments we reported on. Out of charity we did not publicize his name. And unless it becomes necessary, we will continue to adhere to that. However, we are going to share some of his e-mail to the faculty/staff with you to show you how it completely evades the question we were raising.
First, he flat out admits that the event we reported was correct in its essence. He said, "The issue arose because I saw several of the men go to the shower from their room with only a towel wrapped around them. I received complaints from other seminarians about this."
That's what we reported.
Next: "I said, in these words or words of identical meaning: Please wear bathrobes to the shower for decorum's sake and for the sake of charity. As an example of what the wider needs of the community might be, I used as an example of potential uncharity the following example: What if unknowingly one of your brothers suffered from SSA? Your lack of modesty would be uncharitable considering your neighbor's needs."
That too is what we reported.
But the priest in question throughout his e-mail to the entire faculty/staff at Sacred Heart Major Seminary bashed our report. He spent a large amount of his e-mail saying he was pretty sure who had contacted us and then trashing the fellow who was eventually kicked out. He even said at one point that the way we reported it sounds pretty darn close to how the former seminarian talked about the situation.
Normally, we would never follow up on a report like this because it isn't worth the effort. But one phrase in his e-mail to the entire faculty/staff so jumped out that it needs to be unpacked. It is this: "As an aside, in a group of sixty men, the notion that none of the men suffer from homosexual ideation is naïve. It may be helpful for Mr. Voris to grow up."Excuse me, Father, but you just underscored our point. We need no lecture that there are men in seminaries who have homosexual tendencies. In fact, we would prefer to have been naïve in this regard. The presence in decades gone by of the strong homosexual subculture is all too evident — Detroit included, with its weekly gay Mass which has been allowed to continue for over 40 years. We know very well the issue and dangers posed by this. We report on it almost everyday.What grabbed us about your e-mail was the lack of any mention that you do your best to screen outmen who have this tendency — as the Vatican has said over and over, all the way back in the modern ear to Pope John XXIII and virtually every pope since then. Far from our being naïve, it seems that you are the one demonstrating the naïveté. You tell men in your charge studying to offer themselves as living sacrifices to God that they should put on bathrobes so as not to be occasions of sin for fellow seminarians.Further, you made a deal out of it by announcing to the entire seminary. Why didnt you announce that if any among them are bothered by seeing other men in towels that perhaps the seminary is not the place for them?
Pope John XXIII said such men should not be in seminary. When he was still Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope Benedict said the same thing and then repeated it again as Pope, as did his predecessor Pope John Paul. The seminary is not the place for any man who has homosexual tendencies, even if hes not acting on them. Havent leaders learned this lesson yet? The Vatican itself has warned about this repeatedly.We neither think nor said that Sacred Heart Major Seminary is a hotbed for, as you put it, a significant or even nominal presence of homosexually oriented men." Never said that. Never implied it. Never went there.
We weren't talking about the seminarians. We were referencing your approach, not them. You formulated your approach to the situation of men in towels as being uncharitable to those who might have SSA. Your own words again from your e-mail to the entire staff/faculty in this regard: "I brought this up at the house meeting because I want the men to learn, recognizing the charity they are called to grow in, consists in not simply considering their own druthers, but to be cognizant of the needs of the wider family."What about the charity that should be extended to the SSA man? He should not be allowed to remain in an environment where normal, usual behavior is an occasion of sin for him. Is there not charity demanded from the formation team to remove him from such a spiritual danger? What about giving further some consideration to the idea that he might not be alone in his tendency? You yourself said it would be naïve to expect in a house of 60 men to expect that none of them suffer from SSA.What if two or more men with this emotional, psychological disorder somehow come to encounter each other? There is precedent (and there is a lot of it in the Detroit archdiocese — but we will leave that aside for the time). What about the horrible possibility that instead of being dismissed from the seminary, that he, God forbid, would be ordained? Catholics expect that their leaders send them good and holy priests, not let loose suffering souls on them in positions of leadership who can wreak havoc on the innocent sheep. Again, much precedent.This is the attitude of leaders that we presented as a topic and nothing else: that homosexuality gets too much of a pass by those in the Church today.
So, all this said, in response to your e-mail to the entire faculty/staff (which was shared with us by multiple sources), we are extending you a personal invitation to come on our Mic’d Up show next week and have a man-to-man conversation about all of this — all these issues we raised.
Does Sacred Heart Seminary take pains to screen out men with homsoexual tendencies as the Vatican as well as various popes have said all seminaries should?
Is it appropriate to announce that all the seminarians put on bathrobes instead of kindly suggesting that men affected spiritually should simply withdraw?
Near the end of your e-mail to the faculty/staff, you wrote, "I realize some of the topics we cover may be offensive to pious ears, but not addressing them is even more problematic."
We agree. In light of the constant scandals regarding homosexuality and the clergy, these issues need to be talked about. So many people are constantly pounding the dialogue drum — so let’s dialogue.

And that was that!  ;)  

Well done Church Militant...keep up the great work!

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


July 23, 2015

Virgin Mary statues and images moving around the globe

Over night in my email I received two stories about "moving Mary miracles" according to some anyway. 

Personally, I don't see it, but I'm going to share them for others to judge for themselves. 

What I will say, in this first one...if true about the miracles of healing [deaf 33 years now can hear, lame can walk, stroke victim in perfect health now and husbands returning to wives - marriages healed etc], it would not surprise me and I would be more inclined to believe this story then the next one.  

One woman calls this the "second Lourdes"...maybe it will be. 

More on this story here:


Now this one... Mary's moving lips during prayer... 

I think its just the camera/optical illusion, but again, you decide...

More on this story here:


There were a few other "Mary miracles" in my email...but they were simply too much for me specifically to share here.  You can find them in this Yahoo article if you're interested in that sort of thing:

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner

July 21, 2015

2nd PP video calls for "less crunchy" methods of abortion

Another Planned Parenthood "doctor" gets caught negotiating prices for baby parts.  

She's very concerned about someone "low balling" the price of baby parts and her not getting the best price.  

After she's haggled over money...she then talks which methods would be best for getting 'whole specimens' (baby parts).  She's looking for a "less crunchy" method that won't ruin specimens.  

If the specimen is or less money.  

And she's doing this because...ha...ha...ha...she wants...


I pray that the powers that be in Congress put an end to funding this human butchering business and arrests are made. 

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


EWTN Press Release: Achieving Holiness

EWTN: You Can Achieve Holiness Regardless of Your Job or Marital Status

 How did a Mennonite end up crossing the Tiber? Dr. Ryan Topping talks about his faith journey to the Catholic Church. Join Host Marcus Grodi for “The Journey Home”! Airs 8 p.m. ET, Monday, July 20—exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

Explore the #Cathedral that enshrines the remains of St. James the Greater. Learn about its construction and the popular 450-mile pilgrimage route which has brought so many to this great Cathedral. You won’t want to miss “The Temple of the Stars”! Airs 11 p.m. ET, Saturday, July 25—exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

They have served the poor living in poverty-stricken areas of the Deep South. Chad McEachern joins Host Fr. Mitch Pacwa to discuss the Edmundite Mission and its legacy. “EWTN Live” airs 8 p.m. ET, Wednesday, July 22—exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

How can we integrate prayer time with our busy schedules? Leila Lawler shares tips for families with busy lives, and fun ways that help their children get equally involved. Join Co-Hosts Jim & Joy Pinto for “At Home with Jim & Joy”! Airs 2 p.m. ET, Thursday, July 23—exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

What is “Biking For Vocations”? Former 1996 Olympic Handball Team member Fr. Joseph Fitzgerald will discuss how his outreach is encouraging young men to seek out the priesthood and religious life. Join Co-Hosts Fr. Mark Mary and Doug Barry for “Life on the Rock”! Airs 8 p.m. ET, Friday, July 24---exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

Their early teachings impact our liturgy and morals today. Author Marcellino D'Ambrosio presents the early Church’s legacy and its teachings through his exciting historical narrative, "When the Church Was Young: Voices of the Early Fathers." Join Host Doug Keck for “EWTN Bookmark”! Airs 9:30 a.m. ET, Sunday, July 26---exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

What is #OpusDei? Learn how #SaintJosemariaEscrivá founded this international organization through which thousands of ordinary people lead lives of holiness, regardless of their occupation or marital status. Don’t miss “A Gift of God”! Airs 4 a.m. ET, Wednesday, July 22---exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

He served the poor tirelessly in #SouthAmerica. A look at the life and mission of Fr. Joseph Walijewski, a priest from Wisconsin and his recent cause for Beatification and Canonization. “Fr. Joe Walijewski: A Pencil in Our Lord’s Hand” airs 10 p.m. ET, Sunday, July 26---exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

She had everything the world has to offer, but left it all behind for Christ. In a very special 3-episode EWTN miniseries interview, Host Doug Keck talks with Mother Dolores Hart about her early life and conversion to #Catholicism, her ascent to Hollywood fame, the sensation she and the young Elvis Presley created with his first on-screen kiss, and her transition into religious life at the Abbey of Regina Laudis. You won’t want to miss “Mother Dolores Hart: From Hollywood to Holy Vows”! Airs 6:30 p.m. ET, Monday-Wednesday, July 27-29---exclusively on EWTN! Find EWTN at

July 20, 2015

Catholic surfing (7/20/15)

I'm an insomniac.  

When I can't sleep I "Catholic surf" the Internet. Most of the time I find some really wonderful things.  Sometimes I find very disturbing things. 

You'll see both in today's post. 

1) My first stop is a virtual tour of St. John Cantius Catholic Church in Chicago- WOW!  I spent a great deal of time enjoying this virtual tour...

When you click the tour to begin, wait a few seconds it will get going on its own and allow you a full view of everything - up close to the altar and even up into the balcony. 



Sadly my Catholic surfing was mostly all downhill after that...

2) The Catholic Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Georgia is a full on "gay pride" Catholic parish...


3)  Our Lady of Lourdes in Daytona, Florida seems to feel that all religions are equal... 


4) And the Paulist Center in Boston, MA... in place of a crucifix they have a "naked floating Jesus" floating passed a tree?... I think- you tell me, what does it look like to you?

They also have a "cube altar" and dancing girls...[what I don't see in any of their photos is a Tabernacle]

And they refer to the Dalai Lama as "his holiness"...

To end on a more uplifting note... from my last post [The Archdiocese of New Orleans has a gay problem], the Archdiocese of New Orleans has not only shut down its LGBT "fact" page on its website, it also shut down its LGBT Catholic Ministry Facebook page that flaunted its "gay pride"... 

Buh-bye!  I couldn't be happier about that!  :)

I am planning on making "Catholic surfing" a regular feature on this blog. 

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...