Apparition of the Queen of the Rosary, June 27th, 2015, Received by Edson Glauber

Our_Lady_Of_The_Rosary_With_St_DominicRe-printed from:


Today during the apparition the most Blessed Mother didn’t give a message, but showed me an important vision: she appeared holding the Infant Jesus in her arms. In her right hand was a rosary which shone brightly, to her right was St Peter with a book and keys, and to her left St Paul, who held a book and a sword. They were enveloped in a light which was not as strong as the light radiating from the Infant Jesus. Below them was the globe representing the whole world.
During the apparition the Infant Jesus asked St Peter to hand him the keys and he obeyed. As soon as he had given the keys St Peter knelt and kept his head bowed in prayer. Where he was, the light that had been radiating disappeared and it became darker, only remaining bright where the Virgin was with Jesus and St Paul.
At this moment the globe below them began to be wrapped around by a large crown of thorns which wanted to dominate everything. I understood these to be difficult moments which the Church and the world were to go through, times of trial, spiritual darkness and great confusion. Our Lady, seeing what was happening and as Mother of the Church, concerned for the salvation of all, lowered her right hand in the direction of the globe, and her rosary slowly moved towards the world and around the globe. Our Lady’s rosary kept moving, turning around the world and shining brightly. I understood that she was causing her children throughout the world who believed in her apparitions and messages, to pray more and to intercede for the Church of her Divine Son and for humanity. The rosary was descending lower and lower, radiating such a strong light that the horrible crown of thorns was driven away from the globe, leaving it and being destroyed, leaving only the rosary as a sign of victory over evil and the difficult times. It was at this moment that Our Lady looked at St Paul who, as if understanding what she was saying to him, went to where St Peter was, and kneeling beside him, prayed together with him. And where St Peter was again became bright with that light. Our Lady then looked at her Divine Son and prayed to him on behalf of the Church and the world. The Infant Jesus, seeing that humanity was praying and accepted his most Holy Mother’s request, listened to her request to give the keys to St Peter once again, but the Infant Jesus gave the keys into Our Lady’s hands, who as Mother of the Church gave them into the hands of St Peter. She and the Infant Jesus gave us their blessing and the vision ended.

Words of Wisdom Regarding Same-Sex Marriage Ruling From Surprising Source

by Janet Boynes
The Supreme Court made the decision to legalize gay marriage throughout our nation. While it deeply grieves me to see how far we have strayed, it doesn’t surprise me. We are living in times where our faith will be tested. These are times in which we will be ridiculed for our beliefs and perhaps even incarcerated for holding the Word of God as our voice of truth.
As someone who has walked away from homosexuality and now has a ministry that helps men and women who desire to come out of this lifestyle, I have the responsibility to stay grounded in what I know is true. But it doesn’t stop there; you, also have the responsibility to remain steadfast without caving in to the pressures of this world.
The Supreme Court cannot redefine what they didn’t create. Marriage is a covenant, a sacred bond between a man and a woman instituted by and publicly entered into before God. Marriage is intended to be a lifetime commitment since it was established by God.
Marriage represents a serious vow that should not be entered into lightly or unadvisedly. It involves a solemn promise or pledge, not merely to one’s marriage partner, but before God. Marriage is also a human agreement between a man and a woman; it is the most intimate of all human relationships resulting in a “one-flesh” union.
So, what happens now? We pray and we act. We pray that the Holy Spirit will open the eyes of the lost. Honestly, I cannot expect them to understand the truth if the truth has not been revealed to them. I was once lost in sin, I once wanted to get married to a woman, BUT I had an encounter with God. It changed everything. So, yes, we continue to pray. In the words of Billy Graham, “It is the Holy Spirit’s job to convict, God’s job to judge, and my job to love.”
We must act and continue to be a beacon of light in a dark world. We continue to stand for God’s word in spite of the backlash. We stand alongside those who will be unjustly targeted by the gay community and we fight for our religious freedoms. We must continue to be bold, strong, and uncompromising in our faith and walk as a true Christ followers. We must be as bold as lions and meek as lambs. And we must never forget that although we may lose a few battles, He has already won the war.
Janet Boynes is the founder of Janet Boynes Ministries, a nondenominational outreach that ministers to individuals questioning their sexuality and those who wish to leave homosexuality. As the author of Called Out, Boynes chronicles her story of living as a lesbian for 14 years until God called her out of that lifestyle. Read more of her story here.

Our Lady Speaks Specifically of the “Apostles of the Light of Her Immaculate Heart” as the New Means by Which She Shall Speak to the World


Let me reveal my plan to save the nations.  I will not be able to save all because their darkness resists my light.  Only those who are swept up into my light will experience my saving action.

Also, my saving actions will vary, at least in their external forms.  When a persecution breaks out do not some suffer martyrdom and some are preserved.  Yet all were guided by my light.  So, it will be with the events.  All will be touched differently, even those who are filled with my light.  There will be no uniform result.  Yet my light will be effective in every one who trusts and believes in me.

How can I pour out this light?  Usually, I choose messengers, appear to them, provide signs and wonders, give messages and attract many to come.  In this way, light goes forth and love for me increases.  I will not neglect this means, but controversies arise and enemies speak out.  Much of the light is lost or diminished.  Limits are set and the welcome sign is taken down.  People even wonder if the blessing they experienced was true.

So, I must use another plan.  This is exactly why I speak.  Catholics are used to apparition sites which have strengthened their faith.  Even if they have not personally visited there, they have read and heard the stories.  The events strengthen their faith.  They know that I love them and have visited them.

In this age of darkness, I will use another plan.  No one will be able to block my path of light.  Listen closely to what I am doing because the light is at your doorstep.  Do not wait for another apparition.  They are true and valid but I must act more quickly.   Realize this, all the light which usually flows from these sites is now readily available everywhere.  I am ready to break through into everyone’s heart, especially your own.  The normal ways are stymied and I must create new ways that no one can block.

Let my light break forth right now, in every heart that believes, in every soul that is reading these locutions.  Let the light break forth now.  This will be the greatest sign, that all are filled with new light with no need of an apparition.

Comment:  Our Lady’s light is available right now within your heart.

Orthodox Christians Must Now Learn To Live as Exiles in Our Own Country


No, the sky is not falling — not yet, anyway — but with the Supreme Court ruling constitutionalizing same-sex marriage, the ground under our feet has shifted tectonically.

It is hard to overstate the significance of the Obergefell decision — and the seriousness of the challenges it presents to orthodox Christians and other social conservatives. Voting Republican and other failed culture war strategies are not going to save us now.

Discerning the meaning of the present moment requires sobriety, precisely because its radicalism requires of conservatives a realistic sense of how weak our position is in post-Christian America.

The alarm that the four dissenting justices sounded in their minority opinions is chilling. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia were particularly scathing in pointing out the philosophical and historical groundlessness of the majority’s opinion. Justice Scalia even called the decision “a threat to democracy,” and denounced it, shockingly, in…

View original post 900 more words

A Tragic Ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States Legalizes Same-Sex “Marriage” Throughout the Nation

 A “tragic day for marriage and our nation” – USCCB

In what can only be described as a tragic blow to the sacred institution of holy matrimony, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that couples of the same gender may legally be married to one another.  Not unlike Roe v. Wade, which legalized the heinous practice of abortion, this current decision not only violates the intrinsic moral code that arises from Natural Law, it additionally severs ties with thousands of years of tradition and conventional wisdom pertaining to the institution of marriage.

This most unfortunate decision will have far-reaching consequences and will negatively affect the lives of millions of innocent children, all of whom possess the fundamental right of being raised by the traditional male / female, husband / wife team.

Children are the human personification of the sacred and inviolable conjugal love of their biological parents.  This new court ruling fundamentally undermines the true meaning and purpose of holy matrimony.

Sadly, today is not simply a “victory” for those who regard themselves as progressive “civil-rights advocates;” it is also a victory for moral relativism, which denies the existence of objective, universal and absolute moral truths and axioms.

What follows is a reproduction of the official statement of Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, president of the United States Council of Catholic Bishops:

“Regardless of what a narrow majority of the Supreme Court may declare at this moment in history, the nature of the human person and marriage remains unchanged and unchangeable. Just as Roe v. Wade did not settle the question of abortion over forty years ago, Obergefell v. Hodges does not settle the question of marriage today. Neither decision is rooted in the truth, and as a result, both will eventually fail. Today the Court is wrong again. It is profoundly immoral and unjust for the government to declare that two people of the same sex can constitute a marriage.

“The unique meaning of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is inscribed in our bodies as male and female. The protection of this meaning is a critical dimension of the “integral ecology” that Pope Francis has called us to promote. Mandating marriage redefinition across the country is a tragic error that harms the common good and most vulnerable among us, especially children. The law has a duty to support every child’s basic right to be raised, where possible, by his or her married mother and father in a stable home.

“Jesus Christ, with great love, taught unambiguously that from the beginning marriage is the lifelong union of one man and one woman. As Catholic bishops, we follow our Lord and will continue to teach and to act according to this truth.

“I encourage Catholics to move forward with faith, hope, and love: faith in the unchanging truth about marriage, rooted in the immutable nature of the human person and confirmed by divine revelation; hope that these truths will once again prevail in our society, not only by their logic, but by their great beauty and manifest service to the common good; and love for all our neighbors, even those who hate us or would punish us for our faith and moral convictions.

“Lastly, I call upon all people of good will to join us in proclaiming the goodness, truth, and beauty of marriage as rightly understood for millennia, and I ask all in positions of power and authority to respect the God-given freedom to seek, live by, and bear witness to the truth.”

Before Her Glorious Renewal, Mother Church Must be Purified

coredemptrixBy Jayson M. Brunelle

In 1917, Our Lady appeared to three shepherd children at Fatima, Portugal, in a remote village area referred to as the Cova da Iria, in order to announce to the Church and the world that God wished to establish, in and throughout the world, devotion to Mary’s Immaculate Heart.  It is important to note that the events of Fatima, after a thorough investigation conducted by the Catholic Church, were definitively judged by the Church to be worthy of belief.  This, in itself, is quite extraordinary, as the criteria that must be met for official “approval” of the universal Church in such matters is most strict and has rarely been afforded to similar alleged “apparitions.”

In another collection of messages  from Our Lady, received via interior locution by the late Don Stefano Gobbi, and which have been compiled, in their entirety, in the 18th Edition of the book, “To the Priests, Our Lady’s Well-Beloved Sons” (which, as should be noted, has received not only several Imprimaturs [the official statement by a bishop that any particular manuscript contains nothing contrary to faith or morality, as contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith, which is safeguarded by the Magisterium of the Church] from two prestigious Roman Catholic Bishops, and two Cardinals [including + Donald W. Montrose, D.D., Bishop of Stockton; + Francesco Cuccarese, Archbishop Emeritus of Pescara-Penne; Cardinal Ignace Moussa Daoud, Patriarch emeritus of Antioch for Syrians, Prefect emeritus of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches; and + Bernardino Cardinal Echeverria Ruiz, O.F.M., Archbishop Emeritus of Guayaquil, Apostolic Administrator of Ibarra], but additionally, personal endorsements, high praise and accolades from the latter two Cardinals!!), Our Lady speaks extensively about these times, in which we are currently living, as “the end-times,” that period of human history which is spoken about in St. John’s Book of Revelation.  Further, she states that these times are far worse than the times of “the deluge,” when God, in His righteous anger, chastised humanity through the great flood.  According to Sacred Scripture, Noah and his family were the only righteous and God-fearing people left in the land; thus, God instructed Noah to build a great ark, in order that he and his family might be protected, and that they might re-populate the earth by taking into the ark one male and one female of every type of creature.

Noah, being the upright and God-fearing man that he was, immediately began construction, despite the ridicule of his neighbors and, eventually, all the town’s people.  Yet, much to the chagrin and regret of these naysayers, Noah and his family were saved while everyone else perished in this completely unforeseen chastisement that God had planned for the world, to purify and renew it.

God made a vow that He would never again chastise the world by water;  Yet, numerous saints and mystics, throughout the two thousand-year history of Christendom, have prophetically foretold of a second great chastisement by FIRE.  Given the radical political, economic, cultural and planetary instability that only grows worse and more fragile with each passing day, we have every reason to believe that these “signs of the times” are very clearly pointing to the reality of the Great Chastisement and Purification that Christ’s Mystical Body, the Church, must undergo before it can rise gloriously triumphant, via the blood of the countless Christian martyrs that will have given their lives in witnessing to the Truth of Christ Jesus as the Son of God.

We are now witnessing, with our own eyes, the beginnings of a complete economic, political, social and global breakdown, which, in my humble opinion, will very probably lead to the Third World War, which would undoubtedly be a chastisement, permitted by God, of “fire falling from the sky, sparing neither priests nor faithful.” (Message of Akita, Japan, to Sr. Agnes)

Our Lady very clearly explains to Fr. Gobbi that the ark that we must enter into, in order to be kept safe from the great tempest of these wicked times, is none other than her own Immaculate Heart.  Furthermore, the “key” that gains us entrance into this safe refuge is a solemn Act of Consecration to Mary’s Immaculate Heart.  For more information on Consecration to Mary’s Heart, click here.

It is the belief of this author that only a small portion of the so-called “Third-Secret of Fatima,” which was meant to be revealed to the world in 1960, but which was delayed until the Jubilee year of 2000, was actually revealed.  This author’s beliefs regarding this “partial” disclosure have to do with events that we are now witnessing within the Church Hierarchy.

A small but powerful grouping of European Archbishops have held, in private and by invitation only, a secret “shadow council,” wherein they have discussed making very serious, critical changes to official, de fide, Church teachings on such issues as (1) permitting artificial contraception; (2) acknowledging same-sex unions (by replacing Pope St. John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body” with a new, updated, “Theology of Love”); (3) permitting every form of co-habitation;  (4) permitting divorced and re-married Catholics, that is, remarried outside the Church with no annulment of the first Catholic and Sacramental marriage (and who, for that reason, are living in an habitual state of sin), to partake of the holy Eucharist.

This “Shadow Council,” held by the heads of the German, French and Swiss Councils of Catholic Bishops, took place at the Gregorian Pontifical University in Rome.  According to Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register, “Around 50 participants, including bishops, theologians and media representatives, took part in the gathering, at the invitation of the presidents of the bishops’ conferences of Germany, Switzerland and France — Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Bishop Markus Büchel and Archbishop Georges Pontier… One of the key topics discussed at the closed-door meeting was how the Church could better welcome those in stable same-sex unions, and reportedly “no one” opposed such unions being recognized as valid by the Church.”  Click here for the full text of this heart-stopping article.

Moreover, all of these things have been predicted by Our Lady herself in numerous Church APPROVED apparitions, such as those at La Salette, France and Akita, Japan.  Before Benedict XVI became pope, he confirmed that the message of Akita was essentially the same as the Third Secret of Fatima, which would explain quite well why this Third Secret was suppressed for as long as it was, and why, according to the thesis of this author, only a portion of the message has been revealed.  In order to better understand the potential contents of the Third Secret, let us, on the information provided by the then Cardinal Ratzinger, take a closer look at the message of Akita:

“If men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the Bishops and the priests.

“The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see Cardinals opposing Cardinals, Bishops against other Bishops. The priests who venerate Me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres (other priests). Churches and altars will be sacked. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises, and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.

“The demon will be especially implacable against the souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of My sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them.

Thus, it seems, at least to this author, that the Third Secret very likely contained information that Our Lady has revealed elsewhere regarding internal strife within the Church Hierarchy itself, and such information, if disseminated, would thwart the plans of those members of the Roman Curia who have, indeed, been seduced by Satan, and are working to abolish the true Christ and His true Church, and to replace it with a false Christ and a false Church.  Indeed, Our Lady speaks to Fr. Gobbi about the efforts of “Ecclesiastical Freemasonry” – that is, Freemasonry having infiltrated into the very summit of the Church of Rome, in order to destroy the faith and the Church from within.  Hence, it is only in hindsight that we see what a tremendous gift Pope St. John Paul II was to the Church, particularly in having established the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is a “sure norm” for teaching the TRUE faith of the Church.

Thus, the “little faithful remnant” comprising the TRUE Church of Christ will have at Her disposal everything She needs in order to stay faithful to Her Lord and Savior, Who founded His Church on the Rock of St. Peter, and Who solemnly promised that “the gates of hell” would never prevail against Her.

Let us, then, take up our weapons – Holy Mass / Eucharist, the daily recitation of the Rosary, the wearing of the Scapular, the miraculous medal worn around the neck and distributed as a mini-catechism of the four dogmas and the fifth doctrine of Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood, the daily reading of Sacred Scripture and the practice of our dearly beloved Catholic faith in the public square, for all to see.  May we be at least as vocal as the shrieking voices of Satan’s pawns, who, while preaching “Tolerance, Tolerance…” are anything but tolerant of the tried and true Christian traditions upon which this Constitutional Republic was built.

A Prayer Mother Theresa had on One of her Walls

Mother Theresa

Mother Theresa at 99th birthday.

 People are often unreasonable, illogical and self-centered. . .

Forgive them anyway.

If you are kind, people may accuse you of selfish, ulterior motives. . .

Be kind anyway.

If you are successful, you will win some false friends and true enemies. . .

Succeed anyway.

If you are honest and frank, people may cheat you. . .

Be honest anyway.

What you spend years building someone could destroy overnight. . .

Build anyway.

If you find serenity and happiness, they may be jealous. . .

Be happy anyway.

The good you do today, people will often forget tomorrow. . .

Do good anyway.

Give the world the best you have, and it may never be enough. . .

Give your best anyway.

You see, in the final analysis, it’s between you and God. . .

It was never between you and them anyway.

Exploring the Ethics of Homosexual Rights: Distinguishing Between Persons and Actions

Arkansas and Indiana have taken the lead in restoring some sanity to the law in passing the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” on Tuesday that would protect the religious rights of business owners from being forced to provide goods or services to gay couples planning a “wedding” ceremony.

Certainly, numerous vocal “gay rights activists” are seeing this as an act of discrimination, when, in reality, it is anything but.  The purpose of this common-sense law is to protect persons who are opposed to same-sex “marriage,” on religious grounds, from being “forced” by the law to violate their conscience, and thereby participate in what they believe to be a seriously immoral act.

Clearly, anyone who truly understands the Christian faith knows that the entirety of Christian morality is premised on the two-fold command to love the Lord God with all one’s heart, soul, strength and mind; and to love one’s neighbor as Christ has loved us, which, ultimately, is to be willing to lay down one’s own life for one’s neighbor.  Indeed, a famous acronym, well-known to many Christians, and which is meant to serve as the recipe for true joy and happiness in life, is based on the word “JOY;” for, the “J” stands for “Jesus,” whom we are to love in the first place, over and above anyone and / or anything; “O” stands for “others,” whom we ought to love after Christ, yet over and above ourselves; and the “Y” stands for “yourself,” whom we are to love in the last place, after Jesus and others.

Moreover, according to the teachings of the Christian faith, Christ so radically identifies with every single human person that it is clearly stated in Sacred Scripture, in the passage describing the Final Judgment, and the separation of the wheat from the chaff, or the goats from the lambs, “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'” (Mt 25:40)  In truth, the authentically Christian response to any and all persons ought always be one of love and acceptance, especially when the individual in question is suffering any form of unjust persecution, even and especially when said persecution might be based on a so-called “morally questionable” or “unacceptable” lifestyle.  Let us recall Mary Magdalen, who was caught in an adulterous act (clearly, according to many moral theologians, the sin of adultery is considered to  be just as sinful as a homosexual act… and, in some cases, even more so; for, in addition to the illicit carnal act amongst the two persons involved, at least one is, or possibly both are, married to another, who must grieve the infidelity.  Thus, this is a sin of double malice.  And while the Mosaic law permitted for such women to be punished with stoning, Christ, Who happens to be present – cryptically writing in the sand – utters one of the most profound and oft quoted statements from Sacred Scripture: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” (Jn 8:7). Slowly, they all drop the stones they were going to throw, beginning with the oldest – and presumably, the “wisest,” and moving progressively to the youngest of them.  “Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No, Lord,” And Jesus said, “Neither do I. Go and sin no more” (Jn 8:11).

This Scripture passage, not unlike so many others in the New Testament, testifies to the radically merciful nature of Christ’s mission.  Moreover, Christ Himself states that “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (Jn 3:17).  And if Christ is to be the exemplar for all Christians to emulate, then would it not be great hypocrisy to go around casting stones…, uh, rather, ‘judgment’ upon others?  Yet, we must not forget the last thing Christ said to Magdalen: “Go and sin no more.”

Christians believe that Christ literally took every sin that had ever been committed and that would ever be committed upon Himself; and that, in so doing, he became a “curse” for us, in our place, as St. Paul writes in his letter to the Galatians: “But Christ has rescued us from the curse pronounced by the law. When he was hung on the cross, he took upon himself the curse for our wrongdoing. For it is written in the Scriptures, “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.”  Yet, this passage, while meant to serve as an explanation, is itself in need of an explanation! What can this possibly mean?

It means that Christ endured an experience that was infinitely more painful than anything that could have been inflicted upon him physically via a traditional Roman crucifixion, even if Christ’s Crucifixion was, indeed, among the most physically agonizing of experiences a human being could ever possibly endure.  It must first be understood that Christ, Who exists from all eternity, despite having assumed a true, authentic human nature, very likely enjoyed the absolute fullness of the Beatific Vision – that is, the bliss of gazing upon the Beloved of His perfect human soul – the joy of lovingly gazing upon His Father, and experiencing the perfect reciprocity of the Eternal Father’s love for Him, the Incarnate Son, throughout the majority of His life on earth.  Yet, in the Garden of Olives, Christ states, “My soul is sorrowful, even to the point of death” (Mt. 26:38).  Most theologians agree that this moment marks the beginning of Christ’s Sorrowful Passion; that is, the point at which Christ, in perfect obedience to the Divine Will of His Heavenly Father, and in the single most radical act of self-emptying – or what theologians refer to as Christ’s kenosis – looses His vision and knowledge of the Father’s divine and perfect love for Him.  Thus begins Christ’s experience of “God-Forsakenness” – “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” (“My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?”) Moreover, the significance of these specific words, which prophetically comprise the beginning of Psalm 22, would not have been lost on any Jews present during the Crucifixion, who would have immediately recognized them as the prophetic Psalm which clearly predicts the rejection and crucifixion of God’s “Suffering Servant,” a prophecy being carried out before their very eyes.

In order for Christ’s kenosis, or self-emptying, to be as absolute as possible, God permits Christ to subjectively feel and experience that absolute rejection and aloneness experienced by souls that have unequivocally said “No” to God’s final and definitive offer of Divine Mercy, and have subsequently damned themselves to an eternity of God-forsakenness, lovelessness and abject isolation. Viktor Frankle, founder of the third Viennese school of Psychotherapy, often states that his brand of psychotherapy had already best and most succinctly been described by, of all people, the atheistic philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche, who once stated that, “He who has a ‘Why’ to live for can bear with almost any ‘How.'”  Here, Christ subjectively experiences the loss of His ‘Why,’ the loss of all meaning, purpose and/or identity, thereby rendering the Passion the agonizing hell that it is.  The Creed’s description of Christ’s “descent into hell” couldn’t be a more accurate depiction or description of what Christ must have endured.

Thus, getting back to our original topic, it seems that any authentic Christian would whole-heartedly reject the notion of rejecting anyone on any grounds. Moreover, any earnestly loving parent whose ever had to endure the tremendous agony and challenge of assisting a substance-addicted child knows all too well that, at certain times, the greatest love that you can have for an individual may, indeed, be a very “tough-love,” that can come across or be perceived as no love at all. That is, if I see my child starting down a road of poor, self-defeating choices, I have a duty and an obligation, as a parent, to do everything in my power to assist my child in getting back on the right track.  It could be alcohol.  It could be drugs.  It could be neglect of something that he or she has an obligation to attend to or take good care of, such as: one’s studies in a high-school or college setting; one’s self, as in a clinical depression; one’s child or children – my grandchildren.  It could be a decision to start spending time with the wrong crowd.  Or, it could be an unhealthy, misguided relationship – and we all know that unhealthy and misguided relationships can take many possible forms, not excluding those of the homosexual variety.

There is no question regarding the unselfish love that any authentic follower of Christ is called to: “whatever you do to the least of My brothers, you do unto me” (Mt 25:40); “This is my commandment: that you love one another as I have loved you” (Jn 15:12).

Further, any informed and intelligent Christian should know and understand that, in almost every situations, same-sex attraction is not a “choice;”  why would anyone in their right mind choose a course of action that would make them prime candidates for discrimination and / or rejection??!!  Thus, the plight of the homosexual Christian is not unlike that of so many other Christian persons who must bear a burden that, all too often, seems far too heavy for a weakened human will.  We, as a society, must support and love our gay brothers and sisters, as they the according to the sometimes seemingly overwhelming challenges of the Christian faith.  For, while love and support ought always to characterize the authentic Christian response to each and every individual, we must, at the same time, heed the words of Sacred Scripture, which condemn the homosexual act – not the person – as an “abomination:”  “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22); and St. Paul’s Letter to the Corinthians: Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1st Corinthians 6:9-11).

Yet, to legally oblige Christians to directly or indirectly support what they believe is an objectively immoral activity, and further, to participate in it, is a violation of their primary and authentic “right” and duty to abide by the dictates of their conscience and / or the tenets of their religious beliefs.

It is the conviction of this author that so much of the chaos in this arena stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of “gay rights.”  To explain this, let us break down the very concept of a “right.”  A genuine “right” is something that is owed to, or due, a person, or a group of persons.  Certainly, gay individuals, not at all unlike any other grouping of individuals, from every walk of life, have a fundamental right to be treated with the same respect, civility, decency and dignity as any other person.  Yet, it in no way logically follows that a gay person’s right to be treated justly and with dignity ought to be conceded to the “acts” or to the “lifestyle” of the person who is gay.  We must, then, distinguish between the persons (who ought always to be respected and loved with the very love of Christ), and the actions of those same persons (which I have every right to disagree with, particularly when those actions are condemned by my religion [or my conscience] as immoral).  Moreover, I, as a Christian, have the “right” to decline my own participation in those actions which I believe, and my Bible teaches, to be immoral.  If I happen to own a bakery on the corner of 8th and Main, and a gay couple wishes to elicit my services in baking their “wedding cake,” I, as a practicing Christian, have every right to  decline my services, as to agree to bake the cake would be a tacit, unspoken agreement with, or at least a form of support of the event that is taking place.  Thus, in making this cake for this couple, I become complicit in an act which is intrinsically immoral – from the vantage point of my own faith.  If there is any immorality taking place here, it is the gay couple demanding my participation in their celebration, which contradicts my beliefs and renders me complicit in an act which, according to my belief system, is intrinsically immoral.

Further, significant clarification is needed in order to shed light onto the erroneous philosophical presuppositions which place alleged “Gay Rights” on an equal footing with various other authentic civil rights, such as the right of African-Americans to be treated with the same dignity and respect that any white person could justly expect to be treated with; and the right of women to cast their ballot for the political candidate of their choosing.  Being treated in a humane fashion and not being unjustly discriminated against based on the color of one’s skin is a fundamental, basic right that ought always to be afforded to every person.  The expectation to be treated with equality and to not be discriminated against on the basis of one’s ethnicity is, indeed, an actual “civil right.” Moreover, the expectation to be able to cast a ballot and to vote for the political candidate of one’s choosing, and to not be unjustly prevented from participating in this democratic process as a consequence one’s gender, is, indeed, an actual “civil right.” In both instances, individuals are being denied basic rights not on the grounds of a lifestyle choice, or a behavior, or an action (or series of actions), but rather, the discrimination arises from some quality or attribute of that person – a quality or attribute over which the person has no control.  Thus, in both examples, the individuals are being discriminated against based on an attribute that has absolutely no moral connotation or denotation.

Unlike skin color and gender, both of which are attributes, a freely chosen homosexual lifestyle – which must be distinguished from a mere homosexual attraction, upon which one may freely choose not to act based upon one’s moral convictions – is hardly an attribute over which the individual has no control. Convicted felons cannot vote as a consequence of the behavior that led to their felony conviction.  Behavior has consequences; this we all know and agree with.  Yet, due to what Pope Benedict XVI has referred to as the “Dictatorship of Moral Relativism,” which is the prevailing and ubiquitous attitude that there do not exist any objective, absolute or universal moral codes, norms or mores that would be applicable to all persons of all times and all places, morality becomes relegated to the realm of mere opinion; thus, that which may be “immoral” for me might not be “immoral” for you, and, as the name implies, morality is made “relative” to each individual.  This clearly obliterates any such thing as objective right vs. objective “wrong,” and, at long last, we can all finally free ourselves from that nagging yet so unnecessary guilt we tend to experience when we do something that our parents taught us was “bad.” Damn conscience.  To heck with conscience – we should all just agree with Freud that conscience is merely the “introjection” of the moral code of our primary care-givers.  For, if that truly is all that morality is, then, in all sincerity, I would whole-heartedly agree with trashing it!  Yet, such is not the case, thank God!

Okay, so I’ve introduced the philosophical stance of moral relativism which numerous persons use to justify their obliteration of any such thing as an absolute, objective or universal morality.  How would I, as a believer in objective, absolute and universal morality, respond to moral relativism?  Well, I might point out that when one flushes morality down the toilet, s/he is additionally, necessarily & simultaneously flushing any and all concepts of “justice” down with it, as justice is nothing other than the objective, absolute & universal moral reality whereby each member of society renders onto the other that which is his due.  If morality is hogwash, then so too is justice. Thus, our employers could work us to the bone with all sorts of promises of time and a half, and then, come payday, not cough up a dime, because, ultimately, my employer’s “concept” of justice may not be in accord with my “concept” of justice.  Once we make things willy-nilly and purely subjective (or purely “relative” to the individual), we single-handedly do away with all justice, as, “What I consider to be “just” may not be what you consider to be “just,” and so on, and so forth, et cetera…”

One more example of taking moral relativism to its logical conclusion: If Hitler truly believed, in his heart of hearts, the his Nazi programme of Eugenics was, indeed, a “morally good and upright thing,” then, according to moral relativism, who am I to say he’s “wrong?”  Wouldn’t that be an imposition of “my subjective morality” upon him?  This leads us straight into one of the most ironic and tell-tale conclusions regarding Moral Relativism: almost everyone who espouses this philosophy falls prey to the self-inconsistent trap of having recourse to objective, absolute & universal morality in their effort to “enforce” subjectivism.  For instance, say I am invited to a psychological conference to give a talk on Moral Relativism, and after the address, I begin to field questions from the audience.  One man, in particular, has had his hand raised for some time, and seems fairly annoyed.  I then call on the man, inviting him to pose his question or make his comment.  The man proceeds: “Ya know, you really are something else.  With all this talk on Objective morality and such.  Who in the hell do you think you are, going around and imposing your morality on everyone else.  You ought to be respectful of the various beliefs of persons of differing cultures.  It’s people like you that make me sick.  That’s all.”  To this, I respond with the following: “Whether you realize it or not, you, Sir, have just made a tacit appeal to an objective morality, in commanding that I “ought” to be more respectful of people of differing beliefs.  For, anytime the word “ought” is used, a tacit appeal is being made to an objective, absolute and universal code of morality, that is binding on persons of all places, times and cultures.  Not only do I agree that I “ought” to be more respectful, but I additionally agree with your tacit, unspoken appeal to an objective moral code, that recognizes the universal, absolute and objective moral goodness of the virtue of tolerance.

Finally, to tie all of this up, I would like to propose that it is impossible for any human person, or group of human persons, to possess a “right” to engage in any activity that is immoral.  Yet, in order to make this assertion, I must further qualify what, precisely, I mean by “immoral.”  An immoral act, according to what many philosophers refer to as the “Natural Law,” is any act that somehow thwarts the goal-oriented nature of moral acts.  With regard to human sexuality, the teleological purposes are life and love.  Thus, the conjugal act must, at the very least, be open to the possibility of the emergence of new human life, as love is fecund and fruitful.  In order for any conjugal activity to meet this criteria, clearly the partners must be male and female; they must not be using any type of artificial birth control; et cetera.  For the “Love” criteria to be met, the couple must have already stated publicly their intentions to love each other in good times and in bad, for better or worse, in sickness and health, until death do they part.  The totality and reciprocity of the mutual gift of each of the spouses to the other is the bedrock upon which the conjugal act becomes the physical expression.  Moreover, we must not forget that as human persons, we truly are body-soul composite beings.  Thus, people often make the mistake of thinking they may do one thing with their bodies and quite another with their souls.  Such is not the case.   Human sexuality speaks the body-language of committed love.  Thus, as body-soul composites, it is entirely possible to tell lies with the body language of conjugal love.  The body language of such conjugal love is nothing other that , “I give my whole self, all that I am and all that I have, to you, and to you alone, forever.”  Essentially, the language of human sexuality is a reiteration of the solemn promises that were made by the couple to each other, on the day of their wedding.

Based on the above, it becomes quite clear that there are many “lies” that the body can tell.  In the case of an extra-marital affair, we are attempting to give a gift that has already been given, and which belongs to someone else.  In the case of pre-marital sex, we are making a most solemn promise with our bodies that we’ve yet to make publicly.  And, in the case of homosexual intercourse, we are violating the laws of nature, as no child can ever become the “personification” of this misguided love.

Sadly, we have entered into an era of unprecedented immorality, which, necessarily and invariably, will lead to the single greatest persecution of Christians that the world has ever seen.  Precisely because evil has become good, and good has become evil, we, the “remnant faithful,” can expect to be subjected to every sort of persecution imaginable.  Indeed, this author has already been the victim of unjust discrimination on countless occasions, and has even been unjustly terminated from employment based on my uncompromising Christian stance.  Yet, this is our moment – the moment to stand up before a Godless nation and a sinful world – and to boldly and joyously proclaim Christ Jesus, and His Mystical Bride, the Church, as “the Way, the Truth and the Life” (Jn 14:6).