Showing posts with label Scandal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scandal. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Francis poses with group that promotes homosexual fornication and same-sex "marriage"
Gloria TV reports:
"After the Ash Wednesday General Audience, Pope Francis posed with the homosexual English LGBT+Catholics Westminster.
The groups’ leader, Martin Pendergast, called the meeting 'one more evidence' that Francis is pro-gay, IndCatholicNews.com (March 11) writes.
Westminster Cardinal Vincent Nichols is close to “LGBT+ Catholics Westminster” although they promote homosexual fornication, gay pseudo-marriage and gay marches.
The Catechism states that homosexual acts are of 'grave depravity' and 'intrinsically disordered'.
As the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has stated:
"Moral conscience requires that, in every occasion, Christians give witness to the whole moral truth, which is contradicted both by approval of homosexual acts and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons. Therefore, discreet and prudent actions can be effective; these might involve: unmasking the way in which such tolerance might be exploited or used in the service of ideology; stating clearly the immoral nature of these unions; reminding the government of the need to contain the phenomenon within certain limits so as to safeguard public morality and, above all, to avoid exposing young people to erroneous ideas about sexuality and marriage that would deprive them of their necessary defences and contribute to the spread of the phenomenon. Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil.
In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection."
The CDF has also taught clearly that, "All support should be withdrawn from any organizations which seek to undermine the teaching of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which neglect it entirely. Such support, or even the semblance of such support, can be gravely msinterpreted...Special attention should be given to the...use of Church buildings by these groups, including the facilities of Catholic schools and colleges. To some, such permission to use Church property may seem only just and charitable; but in reality it is contradictory to the purpose for which these institutions were founded, it is misleading and often scandalous." (Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons).
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
The Church remains spotless even when Her members sin...
In these times of scandal it is critical to remember that the Church remains spotless even when Her members sin. There is absolutely no doubt that the human history of the Church, like all of human history, has its dark pages. But if anyone cares to take an objective look at this history, one must quickly acknowledge that the doctrine of the Church has always implicitly condemned abuses introduced by Her members.
In the words of Dr. Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "There were sinners in the Church yesterday and there are sinners in the Church today. But the Church Herself, in her divine teaching, emerges gloriously unspotted in a history stained by human weaknesses, errors, imperfections, and sins." In the words of the great Cardinal Journet:
"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood.'" (Acts 20:28).
Do not use scandals as an excuse to leave the Church. Faithful Catholics need to stay and pray, to fight against the forces of dissent and perversion.
Our Lady has assured us that, in the end, her Immaculate Heart Will triumph. In the end, Our Lady's heel* will crush the Devil's head.
* See here
In the words of Dr. Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "There were sinners in the Church yesterday and there are sinners in the Church today. But the Church Herself, in her divine teaching, emerges gloriously unspotted in a history stained by human weaknesses, errors, imperfections, and sins." In the words of the great Cardinal Journet:
"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood.'" (Acts 20:28).
Do not use scandals as an excuse to leave the Church. Faithful Catholics need to stay and pray, to fight against the forces of dissent and perversion.
Our Lady has assured us that, in the end, her Immaculate Heart Will triumph. In the end, Our Lady's heel* will crush the Devil's head.
* See here
Labels:
Cardinal,
Church,
Dissent,
Even,
Homosexual,
Immaculate Heart,
Journet,
Mary,
Members,
Perversion,
Remains,
Scandal,
Sin,
Spotless,
When
Tuesday, April 03, 2018
Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew: Holy Cross College's resident clown
Crux Now is reporting that:
"A Massachusetts bishop has called the notions of a New Testament scholar in his diocese “highly offensive and blasphemous,” and has called on his Jesuit college to ask him to publicly disavow his writings on the sexuality of Jesus.
Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew, the chair of New Testament Studies at the College of the Holy Cross, has published articles claiming Jesus was a 'drag king' and said the relationship between the Father and Son was homosexual and masochistic in nature.
In one article, Liew said the centurion who approaches Jesus to heal his servant was actually speaking about his lover and described the relationship as 'pederastic.' Liew said the biblical author affirmed the relationship, adding this 'may also be consistent with Matthew’s affirmation of many sexual dissidents in her Gospel.'
Bishop Robert J. McManus of Worchester said he was 'deeply troubled and concerned' that someone who authored such things holds an endowed chair at the Catholic institution.
After the professor’s controversial writings - published a decade ago - were highlighted in a March 26 article in The Fenwick Review, an independent opinion journal based at the College of the Holy Cross, an online petition calling for Liew’s ouster gained over 10,000 signatures."
Sign this petition here.
Pope Saint John Paul II, in his Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae, had this to say:
§ 3. "In ways appropriate to the different academic disciplines, all Catholic teachers are to be faithful to, and all other teachers are to respect, Catholic doctrine and morals in their research and teaching. In particular, Catholic theologians, aware that they fulfil a mandate received from the Church, are to be faithful to the Magisterium of the Church as the authentic interpreter of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition."
If one is to be faithful to Christ and His Church, one cannot assert that what the Magisterium teaches is false and that the faithful may reject Magisterial teaching and replace it with their own opinions or those of theologians. In his encyclical letter Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II explains that, "Dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God." (No. 113).
When a Catholic dissents from Church teaching, he is not in living communion with the mind of Christ, which is made known to us through His Church's Magisterium. Such a person is not, therefore, in a proper condition to receive the sacraments. Pope John Paul II has stated this clearly: "It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is compatible with being a 'good Catholic' and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error." (Address to the U.S. Bishops, Los Angeles, September 16, 1987). See also Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1395).
Some erroneously hold that, "No school that regulates ideas can justly call itself a university."
The late Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, who was a classically-educated Jesuit scholar and a brilliant philosopher, would have disagreed. For he explained that, "The trouble with this understanding of academic freedom is that it takes for granted as a truth what is a falsity, indeed a complete illusion, namely, that academic freedom is absolutely immune from any reasonable bounds, limitations or restrictions. No human freedom is absolutely immune to restriction. Freedom is no longer freedom when it is reduced to being the unhindered pursuit of one’s whims and desires. This is especially true of freedom exercised in the field of philosophy where conflict with the authentic and infallible teachings of the Church is foreseeable. A true understanding of academic freedom, therefore, is in order so as to distinguish it clearly from academic license.
Academic freedom derives from the rational nature of man. It is rooted in the intellectual activity of man whereby he is called to a dominion and stewardship of the universe through a conquest of truth. Positively, then, academic freedom is a generous guarantee to the unimpeded access to the evidence of truth in any given science. Thus, academic freedom is always bounded by the canons and axiomatic truths of each discipline of learning. Thus, again positively, academic freedom is both purposive and responsible. It has its own built-in rules; its requirements are conditioned by pre-defined directions towards the truth of its particular science. The moral right to academic freedom arises from the inviolability of the proper action necessary to its scientific achievements of truth, founded on man’s connatural inner dynamism of the human intelligence’s hunger for truth. Negatively, academic freedom means at the very least the immunity from unreasonable restrictions, both from within and from outside the academic community, of the right to communicate the results of one’s researches through lectures and publications, and the right to be immune from unreasonable restriction in the pursuit of the teaching profession.
We are now in the position to ask, ‘How is academic freedom violated?’ Scholars, scientists and philosophers hold that whenever one of their members ventures consciously and freely to teach as truths doctrines that contradict the clearly established dogmas or unconditional truths of their disciplines, then such a member of the university is abusing his academic freedom, putting it at the service of stupidities or known falsehoods instead of using it to advance the horizons of truth. Now every science has its dogmas, theology, philosophy and all the natural sciences. Dogmas are not only the ultimate answers to some fundamental questions; they also prompt further questioning and research, leading thus to enlarged, more profound truth....a Catholic university that allows professors and lecturers to attack the authentic teachings of the Church, whether they are infallibly defined or not, is not faithful to the best canons of scholarship, nor to the Church or its own students who have a right in justice to receive the divinely revealed truths in their pristine purity." (The Antichrist, pp. 166-167).
Many Catholic institutions have devaluated the faith and have become enslaved to a narrow (and conceptually flawed) notion of academic freedom. And why have these institutions sold out to secularism? Again, Fr. Miceli, S.J., explains: "Gradually, over the years the essential purpose of the Catholic university has been radically changed. Lusting after secular academic excellence, huge student bodies, expensive science complexes, notoriety, publicity, political clout and financial power, the leaders of Catholic universities somehow lost sight of the unearthly purpose and spirit of the Catholic university. Thus, in today’s Catholic university, intellectualism is preferred to Catholicism; scientism to faith, relativism to truth, immanentism to transcendence, subjectivism to reality, situationism to moral integrity and anarchism to authority. The essential purpose of the Catholic university has de facto been changed, despite the lip service that is still paid to the original Catholic ideal. Conduct flows from convictions and when the conduct is consistently depraved [Such as allowing controversial plays like the Vagina Monologues, my note] it is because the convictions have been corrupted. For example, Judas, forerunner of the Antichrist, had radically changed his deepest convictions about the person and mission of Christ before he sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver. No virtuosity at contorted rationalization can mask the massive turning away from the Catholic ideal that has taken place in the Catholic universities of the United States. The light and love of the world have made tragic advances against the light and love of Christ." (The Antichrist, p. 161).
Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew is a clown offering not the fine wheat of Catholic truth but rather asinine opinions which were hatched in a warped mind.
Sign the petition to have this fool removed from his teaching position at Holy Cross.
"A Massachusetts bishop has called the notions of a New Testament scholar in his diocese “highly offensive and blasphemous,” and has called on his Jesuit college to ask him to publicly disavow his writings on the sexuality of Jesus.
Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew, the chair of New Testament Studies at the College of the Holy Cross, has published articles claiming Jesus was a 'drag king' and said the relationship between the Father and Son was homosexual and masochistic in nature.
In one article, Liew said the centurion who approaches Jesus to heal his servant was actually speaking about his lover and described the relationship as 'pederastic.' Liew said the biblical author affirmed the relationship, adding this 'may also be consistent with Matthew’s affirmation of many sexual dissidents in her Gospel.'
Bishop Robert J. McManus of Worchester said he was 'deeply troubled and concerned' that someone who authored such things holds an endowed chair at the Catholic institution.
After the professor’s controversial writings - published a decade ago - were highlighted in a March 26 article in The Fenwick Review, an independent opinion journal based at the College of the Holy Cross, an online petition calling for Liew’s ouster gained over 10,000 signatures."
Sign this petition here.
Pope Saint John Paul II, in his Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae, had this to say:
§ 3. "In ways appropriate to the different academic disciplines, all Catholic teachers are to be faithful to, and all other teachers are to respect, Catholic doctrine and morals in their research and teaching. In particular, Catholic theologians, aware that they fulfil a mandate received from the Church, are to be faithful to the Magisterium of the Church as the authentic interpreter of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition."
If one is to be faithful to Christ and His Church, one cannot assert that what the Magisterium teaches is false and that the faithful may reject Magisterial teaching and replace it with their own opinions or those of theologians. In his encyclical letter Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II explains that, "Dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God." (No. 113).
When a Catholic dissents from Church teaching, he is not in living communion with the mind of Christ, which is made known to us through His Church's Magisterium. Such a person is not, therefore, in a proper condition to receive the sacraments. Pope John Paul II has stated this clearly: "It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is compatible with being a 'good Catholic' and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error." (Address to the U.S. Bishops, Los Angeles, September 16, 1987). See also Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1395).
Some erroneously hold that, "No school that regulates ideas can justly call itself a university."
The late Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, who was a classically-educated Jesuit scholar and a brilliant philosopher, would have disagreed. For he explained that, "The trouble with this understanding of academic freedom is that it takes for granted as a truth what is a falsity, indeed a complete illusion, namely, that academic freedom is absolutely immune from any reasonable bounds, limitations or restrictions. No human freedom is absolutely immune to restriction. Freedom is no longer freedom when it is reduced to being the unhindered pursuit of one’s whims and desires. This is especially true of freedom exercised in the field of philosophy where conflict with the authentic and infallible teachings of the Church is foreseeable. A true understanding of academic freedom, therefore, is in order so as to distinguish it clearly from academic license.
Academic freedom derives from the rational nature of man. It is rooted in the intellectual activity of man whereby he is called to a dominion and stewardship of the universe through a conquest of truth. Positively, then, academic freedom is a generous guarantee to the unimpeded access to the evidence of truth in any given science. Thus, academic freedom is always bounded by the canons and axiomatic truths of each discipline of learning. Thus, again positively, academic freedom is both purposive and responsible. It has its own built-in rules; its requirements are conditioned by pre-defined directions towards the truth of its particular science. The moral right to academic freedom arises from the inviolability of the proper action necessary to its scientific achievements of truth, founded on man’s connatural inner dynamism of the human intelligence’s hunger for truth. Negatively, academic freedom means at the very least the immunity from unreasonable restrictions, both from within and from outside the academic community, of the right to communicate the results of one’s researches through lectures and publications, and the right to be immune from unreasonable restriction in the pursuit of the teaching profession.
We are now in the position to ask, ‘How is academic freedom violated?’ Scholars, scientists and philosophers hold that whenever one of their members ventures consciously and freely to teach as truths doctrines that contradict the clearly established dogmas or unconditional truths of their disciplines, then such a member of the university is abusing his academic freedom, putting it at the service of stupidities or known falsehoods instead of using it to advance the horizons of truth. Now every science has its dogmas, theology, philosophy and all the natural sciences. Dogmas are not only the ultimate answers to some fundamental questions; they also prompt further questioning and research, leading thus to enlarged, more profound truth....a Catholic university that allows professors and lecturers to attack the authentic teachings of the Church, whether they are infallibly defined or not, is not faithful to the best canons of scholarship, nor to the Church or its own students who have a right in justice to receive the divinely revealed truths in their pristine purity." (The Antichrist, pp. 166-167).
Many Catholic institutions have devaluated the faith and have become enslaved to a narrow (and conceptually flawed) notion of academic freedom. And why have these institutions sold out to secularism? Again, Fr. Miceli, S.J., explains: "Gradually, over the years the essential purpose of the Catholic university has been radically changed. Lusting after secular academic excellence, huge student bodies, expensive science complexes, notoriety, publicity, political clout and financial power, the leaders of Catholic universities somehow lost sight of the unearthly purpose and spirit of the Catholic university. Thus, in today’s Catholic university, intellectualism is preferred to Catholicism; scientism to faith, relativism to truth, immanentism to transcendence, subjectivism to reality, situationism to moral integrity and anarchism to authority. The essential purpose of the Catholic university has de facto been changed, despite the lip service that is still paid to the original Catholic ideal. Conduct flows from convictions and when the conduct is consistently depraved [Such as allowing controversial plays like the Vagina Monologues, my note] it is because the convictions have been corrupted. For example, Judas, forerunner of the Antichrist, had radically changed his deepest convictions about the person and mission of Christ before he sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver. No virtuosity at contorted rationalization can mask the massive turning away from the Catholic ideal that has taken place in the Catholic universities of the United States. The light and love of the world have made tragic advances against the light and love of Christ." (The Antichrist, p. 161).
Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew is a clown offering not the fine wheat of Catholic truth but rather asinine opinions which were hatched in a warped mind.
Sign the petition to have this fool removed from his teaching position at Holy Cross.
Labels:
Bishop Robert McManus,
Blasphemy,
Calls,
Clown,
Diocese,
Ex Corde Ecclesiae,
Holy Cross College,
Massachusetts,
Petition,
Pope Saint John Paul II,
Professor,
Recant,
Remove,
Scandal,
Tat-Siong Benny Liew,
Worcester
Tuesday, March 06, 2018
Time to root out every single homosexual priest...
Another scandal involving homosexual clerics reported by Newsweek here.
Some years ago, Michael Brown over at Spirit Daily got it right when he wrote, "the crisis is homosexuality. In the United States there have been allegations of sexual misconduct against approximately one priest in fifty. Of the alleged victims of these assaults, about 10,000 were male, and about a thousand female.
In April 2002, Wilton Gregory, then bishop of Belleville and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, noted that 'there does exist within American seminaries a homosexual atmosphere or dynamic that makes heterosexuals think twice' about entering the priesthood, adding that 'it is an ongoing struggle to make sure the Catholic priesthood is not dominated by homosexual men.'
It is a struggle that the Church must now decisively win.
This is not to judge those who are 'gay.' It is to judge the sin. Many are sensitive and talented people who like the rest of us have failings. Many of them yearn to be spiritual. They are skilled in many ways. They are anything but the picture of hardness and militancy we envision when we see radical 'gays' parading around Greenwich Village or San Francisco. Some of the most considerate, sensitive, and upstanding people are of this leaning -- good in other ways. We are to love them as we love anyone else. Nor can we judge them: how do we know how they got to where they are? And have we looked for the logs in our own eyes?
But we are also to hate the sin and acknowledge the truth and the truth is that those who are homosexual grapple with a disorder that requires deliverance. It is a spiritual issue. And while they struggle with that disorder they do not belong in a position of any spiritual authority.
It is better to suffer a severe priest shortage than to limp on with those who are too immersed in personal turmoil to tend to the flock -- and who in fact can pose (as has been startlingly seen) an actual danger.
Let's tell it like it is. The demonic is at work. How did the spirits invade? We note that much of the onset for this crisis was in the Sixties. During alleged messages at Akita, Japan (a partially Church-approved occurrence in which a statue wept), the Blessed Mother warned around that time that "the demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God."
Priests are exceptional men on the front line and prone to horrific temptation and assault. We must sympathize with that.
But those who are homosexual must be rooted out.."
________________
Actually, they should have never been ordained. Before entering into any state of life, a divine vocation is necessary. This because without such a vocation, it is difficult if not impossible to fulfil the obligations which pertain to that state and to obtain salvation. This is particularly true for the ministerial priesthood or any other ecclesiastical state. After all, it was Our Lord Who said: "He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber" (John 10:1).
Consequently, the man who takes holy orders without a call from God is convicted of theft in taking by force a dignity which God has not called him to and does not desire to bestow upon him. This is the teaching of Saint Paul:
"Neither doth any man take the honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify Himself that He might be made a high priest; but he that said unto Him: Thou art My Son; this day I have begotten Thee." (Hebrews 5:4,5).
It matters not then how learned or prudent or holy a man may be. No man may place himself into the holy sanctuary unless he is first called and introduced to the same by Almighty God. Jesus Our Lord was certainly the most learned and holy among all men, full of grace and truth (John 1:14), the Son of Man in Whom were (and are) hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). And yet, Jesus required a divine call to assume the dignity of the priesthood.
This is the teaching of the Council of Trent. That the Church regards the man who assumes the priesthood without a vocation not as a minister but as a robber:
"Decernit sancta Synodus eos qui ea (ministeria) propria temeritate sibi sumunt, omnes, non Ecclesiae ministros, sed fures et latrones per ostium non ingressos habendos esse" (Session 23, cap. 4).
Those who seize the priesthood without a vocation may labor and toil exhaustively. But their labors will profit them very little before God. In fact, the very works which would be considered of much merit when performed by others will deserve chastisement for such souls. Because such men are not in conformity with the divine will, not having a vocation to the state of life which they have usurped, the Lord Jesus will not accept their toils:
"I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand" (Malachi 1:10).
Not only will God refuse the gifts of their hand, He will punish the works of the minister who has entered the sanctuary without being called; without a vocation:
"What stranger soever cometh to it (the Tabernacle) shall be slain." (Numbers 1:51).
Bearing all of this in mind, please read the following which first appeared in The Wanderer and may be found at the Faithfulvoice.com website:
On October 1, 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published an instruction entitled, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Pastoral Service for Homosexual Persons, signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II.
In this Instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger writes, "It is necessary to point out that the particular inclination of a homosexual person, though not a sin in itself, nevertheless constitutes a more or less strong tendency to an intrinsically evil behavior from the moral standpoint. For this reason, the very inclination should be considered as objectively disordered." (No. 3).
This would appear to be especially significant since Canon 1040 of the Code of Canon Law states that: "Persons who are affected by a perpetual impediment, which is called an irregularity, or a simple impediment, are prevented from receiving orders." Now, irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto). It seems clear to me that a homosexual inclination, which Cardinal Ratzinger has referred to as "objectively disordered," constitutes an irregularity ex defectu.
In fact, when asked by a Bishop if it is licit to confer priestly ordination to men with manifest homosexual tendencies, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments replied with a letter signed by Jorge Cardinal Medina Estevez which stated that, "Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders."
Some years ago, Michael Brown over at Spirit Daily got it right when he wrote, "the crisis is homosexuality. In the United States there have been allegations of sexual misconduct against approximately one priest in fifty. Of the alleged victims of these assaults, about 10,000 were male, and about a thousand female.
In April 2002, Wilton Gregory, then bishop of Belleville and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, noted that 'there does exist within American seminaries a homosexual atmosphere or dynamic that makes heterosexuals think twice' about entering the priesthood, adding that 'it is an ongoing struggle to make sure the Catholic priesthood is not dominated by homosexual men.'
It is a struggle that the Church must now decisively win.
This is not to judge those who are 'gay.' It is to judge the sin. Many are sensitive and talented people who like the rest of us have failings. Many of them yearn to be spiritual. They are skilled in many ways. They are anything but the picture of hardness and militancy we envision when we see radical 'gays' parading around Greenwich Village or San Francisco. Some of the most considerate, sensitive, and upstanding people are of this leaning -- good in other ways. We are to love them as we love anyone else. Nor can we judge them: how do we know how they got to where they are? And have we looked for the logs in our own eyes?
But we are also to hate the sin and acknowledge the truth and the truth is that those who are homosexual grapple with a disorder that requires deliverance. It is a spiritual issue. And while they struggle with that disorder they do not belong in a position of any spiritual authority.
It is better to suffer a severe priest shortage than to limp on with those who are too immersed in personal turmoil to tend to the flock -- and who in fact can pose (as has been startlingly seen) an actual danger.
Let's tell it like it is. The demonic is at work. How did the spirits invade? We note that much of the onset for this crisis was in the Sixties. During alleged messages at Akita, Japan (a partially Church-approved occurrence in which a statue wept), the Blessed Mother warned around that time that "the demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God."
Priests are exceptional men on the front line and prone to horrific temptation and assault. We must sympathize with that.
But those who are homosexual must be rooted out.."
________________
Actually, they should have never been ordained. Before entering into any state of life, a divine vocation is necessary. This because without such a vocation, it is difficult if not impossible to fulfil the obligations which pertain to that state and to obtain salvation. This is particularly true for the ministerial priesthood or any other ecclesiastical state. After all, it was Our Lord Who said: "He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber" (John 10:1).
Consequently, the man who takes holy orders without a call from God is convicted of theft in taking by force a dignity which God has not called him to and does not desire to bestow upon him. This is the teaching of Saint Paul:
"Neither doth any man take the honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify Himself that He might be made a high priest; but he that said unto Him: Thou art My Son; this day I have begotten Thee." (Hebrews 5:4,5).
It matters not then how learned or prudent or holy a man may be. No man may place himself into the holy sanctuary unless he is first called and introduced to the same by Almighty God. Jesus Our Lord was certainly the most learned and holy among all men, full of grace and truth (John 1:14), the Son of Man in Whom were (and are) hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). And yet, Jesus required a divine call to assume the dignity of the priesthood.
This is the teaching of the Council of Trent. That the Church regards the man who assumes the priesthood without a vocation not as a minister but as a robber:
"Decernit sancta Synodus eos qui ea (ministeria) propria temeritate sibi sumunt, omnes, non Ecclesiae ministros, sed fures et latrones per ostium non ingressos habendos esse" (Session 23, cap. 4).
Those who seize the priesthood without a vocation may labor and toil exhaustively. But their labors will profit them very little before God. In fact, the very works which would be considered of much merit when performed by others will deserve chastisement for such souls. Because such men are not in conformity with the divine will, not having a vocation to the state of life which they have usurped, the Lord Jesus will not accept their toils:
"I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand" (Malachi 1:10).
Not only will God refuse the gifts of their hand, He will punish the works of the minister who has entered the sanctuary without being called; without a vocation:
"What stranger soever cometh to it (the Tabernacle) shall be slain." (Numbers 1:51).
Bearing all of this in mind, please read the following which first appeared in The Wanderer and may be found at the Faithfulvoice.com website:
On October 1, 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published an instruction entitled, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Pastoral Service for Homosexual Persons, signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II.
In this Instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger writes, "It is necessary to point out that the particular inclination of a homosexual person, though not a sin in itself, nevertheless constitutes a more or less strong tendency to an intrinsically evil behavior from the moral standpoint. For this reason, the very inclination should be considered as objectively disordered." (No. 3).
This would appear to be especially significant since Canon 1040 of the Code of Canon Law states that: "Persons who are affected by a perpetual impediment, which is called an irregularity, or a simple impediment, are prevented from receiving orders." Now, irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto). It seems clear to me that a homosexual inclination, which Cardinal Ratzinger has referred to as "objectively disordered," constitutes an irregularity ex defectu.
In fact, when asked by a Bishop if it is licit to confer priestly ordination to men with manifest homosexual tendencies, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments replied with a letter signed by Jorge Cardinal Medina Estevez which stated that, "Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders."
Monday, December 04, 2017
The church of heresy, schism and scandal is going to make itself voluntarily the slave of the beast and the dragon which have conquered it
No serious Catholic can ignore the heterodoxy of Francis. See here.
Church Militant is confirming that Pope Francis has officially approved the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia that opens Holy Communion to the divorced and civilly remarried in some instances, directly contradicting Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law, arguably making this interpretation binding on the consciences of the faithful.
In a Papal Rescript granted on June 5, 2017 ex Audientia Sanctissimi to the Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin, and just now released by the Vatican in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, the Holy Father has raised to the level of “authentic Magisterium” both the private letter he wrote on September 5, 2016 to Bp. Sergio Alfredo Fenoy, the Delegate of the Buenos Aires Pastoral Region of the Bishops’ Conference of Argentina, and the Criterios Basicos para la aplicación del capitulo VIII de Amoris laetitia (“Basic Criteria for the Application of Chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia“), issued on the same day by the bishops of the Buenos Aires Pastoral Region.
Some are arguing that Pope Francis is using a “back door” in order to raise to the level of official teaching what his defenders had been describing as merely new “pastoral” discipline.Tweet
The directives of the Buenos Aires bishops caused controversy last year because it interpreted the pope’s apostolic exhortation to allow Holy Communion in certain cases to those in invalid unions who deliberately engage in sexual relations. In the Pope’s September 5 letter to the bishops, he praised their interpretation.
“The document is very good and completely explains the meaning of Chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia,” he said, adding, “There are no other interpretations.”
According to experts whom Church Militant has consulted, the importance of the official decision of the Pope to elevate the referenced documents to the level of “authentic Magisterium” and order their publication in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (the official register of the Holy See, a compendium of decrees, encyclicals, appointments and other official acts of the Holy See) cannot be underestimated. The issuance of the decision through Rescript form puts to rest any more discussion regarding the official and precise interpretation to be given by the episcopal hierarchy and faithful to Amoris Laetitia.
Church Militant’s unofficial English translation of the Rescript published in Latin states:
The Supreme Pontiff decrees that the two Documents that precede [this Rescript] are to be made known by publication on the Vatican website and in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, as authentic Magisterium. From the Vatican Palace, on the 5th day of June in the year 2017. (emphasis added)
Pietro Cardinal Parolin
Secretary of State
The terms of art, “authentic Magisterium,” are especially referenced in canon 752 of the Code of Canon Law:
While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine. (Code of Canon Law Annotated, 2nd ed. Midwest Theological Forum: Woodridge, 2004, p. 586) (emphasis added)
The use by the Supreme Pontiff of the terms “authentic Magisterium” has been qualified as “very troubling” by one expert whom Church Militant consulted regarding this breaking development, because such usage is primarily employed in strictly categorizing doctrines pertaining to faith or morals, not merely ecclesiastical discipline. Consequently, some are arguing that Pope Francis is using a “back door” in order to raise to the level of official teaching what his defenders had been describing as merely new “pastoral” discipline meant to “accompany” divorced and civilly remarried faithful in their “discernment” as to whether they can receive Holy Communion despite living more uxorio (as husband and wife).
_____________________________
It was Frere Francois de Marie des Anges, in his important work entitled "Fatima: Tragedy and Triumph," who warned that:
"The Apocalypse teaches us that the "false prophet" will act exteriorly as exercising authority in the name of God and in His service, whereas he will be in reality in the service of the Beast. Our Father Superior comments:
The church of heresy, schism and scandal is going to make itself voluntarily the slave of the beast and the dragon which have conquered it
In order to bend souls and not only bodies under his domination and obtain their adoration, the political power instigated a religious power completely to his service, and thus the lamb is going to become the vehicle of error. , the spiritual animator of the empire of Satan. He will use fire from Heaven, which is the Word of God, anathema, to disarm its enemies and conquer Christians. Then the lamb will condemn what is holy and consecrate what is of the evil one. Here we are at the most extreme point of the triumph of impiety, at the hour of the most complete victory of the mystery of iniquity....'" (Fatima: Tragedy and Triumph, p. 285).
Labels:
Antichrist,
Beast,
Church,
Dragon,
False Prophet,
Francis,
Heresy,
Heterodoxy,
Itself,
Make,
Scandal,
Schism,
Slave,
Voluntarily
Friday, December 30, 2016
Father Nicola Corradi and spiritual schizophrenia...
From Sputnik News:
"Pope Francis and the Roman Catholic clergy failed to take action to sanction Rev. Nicola Corradi, the 82-year old priest arrested in late November on charges of sexually abusing deaf children, despite knowing of Carradi’s alleged exploits, according to an Argentine prosecutor.
At least 24 students of the Antonio Provolo Institute for the hearing impaired, in the Mendoza province of Argentina, sent the Pope a letter in 2014 naming Corradi as a rapist, but the Pope only acknowledged the letter this year, the Belfast Telegraph reported. Prosecutors in the case expect more victims to come forward and have argued that the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was told about the allegations.
Carradi had been reassigned from his post in Italy to Pope Francis’ native country of Argentina, where students say they were subjected to sexual abuse. "They always said it was a game: 'Let’s go play, let’s go play' and they would take us to the girls’ bathroom," one student told AP.
Four employees working at the institute, including 55 year-old priest Horacio Corbacho, were taken into custody along with Carradi. Police discovered $34,000 in Carradi’s apartment at the time of arrest.
The victims’ families claim that Vatican leaders knew about Carradi’s abuses as early as 2009. At the time, Carradi was publicly accused of assaulting students at the Provolo Institute in Italy.
On multiple occasions Pope Francis spoke of the Roman Catholic Church’s "zero tolerance" policy, but critics point out the Pope’s failure to sanction Carradi and his henchmen is abysmally inconsistent with the policy."
Inconsistent to say the least. Francis has said that Bishops who fail to act in such cases should be removed.
And this past October, he preached that, "Hypocrisy is an internal division. We say one thing and we do another. It’s a kind of spiritual schizophrenia. In addition, hypocrisy is a dissembler: they seem good and polite but they have a dagger behind their backs, right? Look at Herod: terrified inside but how politely he received the Magi! And then when he was bidding them farewell, he told them: ‘Go on your way and then come back and tell me where this child can be found so that I can go and worship him!’ To kill him! He’s a two-faced hypocrite, a pretender. Jesus when speaking to the doctors of the law, said: these say this and don’t do it:’ this is another type of hypocrisy. It is an existential nominalism: those who believe that by saying the things that everything is done. No. Things must be done not just said. And a hypocrite is a nominalist who believes that by saying it, everything is done. In addition, the hypocrite is unable to accuse him or herself: they never find a stain on themselves, they accuse others.Think about the splinter and the log right? And it’s in this way that we can describe that leaven which is hypocrisy.”
Things must be done, not just said.
Indeed.
"Pope Francis and the Roman Catholic clergy failed to take action to sanction Rev. Nicola Corradi, the 82-year old priest arrested in late November on charges of sexually abusing deaf children, despite knowing of Carradi’s alleged exploits, according to an Argentine prosecutor.
At least 24 students of the Antonio Provolo Institute for the hearing impaired, in the Mendoza province of Argentina, sent the Pope a letter in 2014 naming Corradi as a rapist, but the Pope only acknowledged the letter this year, the Belfast Telegraph reported. Prosecutors in the case expect more victims to come forward and have argued that the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was told about the allegations.
Carradi had been reassigned from his post in Italy to Pope Francis’ native country of Argentina, where students say they were subjected to sexual abuse. "They always said it was a game: 'Let’s go play, let’s go play' and they would take us to the girls’ bathroom," one student told AP.
Four employees working at the institute, including 55 year-old priest Horacio Corbacho, were taken into custody along with Carradi. Police discovered $34,000 in Carradi’s apartment at the time of arrest.
The victims’ families claim that Vatican leaders knew about Carradi’s abuses as early as 2009. At the time, Carradi was publicly accused of assaulting students at the Provolo Institute in Italy.
On multiple occasions Pope Francis spoke of the Roman Catholic Church’s "zero tolerance" policy, but critics point out the Pope’s failure to sanction Carradi and his henchmen is abysmally inconsistent with the policy."
Inconsistent to say the least. Francis has said that Bishops who fail to act in such cases should be removed.
And this past October, he preached that, "Hypocrisy is an internal division. We say one thing and we do another. It’s a kind of spiritual schizophrenia. In addition, hypocrisy is a dissembler: they seem good and polite but they have a dagger behind their backs, right? Look at Herod: terrified inside but how politely he received the Magi! And then when he was bidding them farewell, he told them: ‘Go on your way and then come back and tell me where this child can be found so that I can go and worship him!’ To kill him! He’s a two-faced hypocrite, a pretender. Jesus when speaking to the doctors of the law, said: these say this and don’t do it:’ this is another type of hypocrisy. It is an existential nominalism: those who believe that by saying the things that everything is done. No. Things must be done not just said. And a hypocrite is a nominalist who believes that by saying it, everything is done. In addition, the hypocrite is unable to accuse him or herself: they never find a stain on themselves, they accuse others.Think about the splinter and the log right? And it’s in this way that we can describe that leaven which is hypocrisy.”
Things must be done, not just said.
Indeed.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Clerical abuse in the United States alone has cost more than three billion dollars
CatholicCulture.org reports:
"The clerical abuse scandal cost American dioceses and religious orders $141,283,794 between mid-2014 and mid-2015, according to a report released by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

67% those funds were allotted to settlements ($87.1 million) and therapy for abuse victims ($8.8 million). The remaining funds were spent on attorneys’ fees ($30.1 million), support for offenders ($11.5 million), and other costs ($3.8 million), according to the 2015 “Report on the Implementation of the Charter for Protection of Children and Young People.”
These expenses brought the total cost of the clerical abuse scandal to American dioceses and religious institutes between 2004 and mid-2015 to $3,036,913,024, according to the data in the current report and previous reports. That figure does not include expenses incurred in lawsuits that were settled prior to 2004..."
More than three billion dollars spent on sexual abuse lawsuits and settlements in the United States alone. Tragic. Imagine the good that could have been done with all that money. Instead of closing Churches and Catholic schools, we could have been building them. Money that could have been spent on evangelization and building up God's Kingdom here on earth spent instead on the damage inflicted by [for the Most part] homosexual clerics who never should have been ordained in the first place.
This culture of sodomy has made extensive inroads into the Church. For nearly 25 years I've been calling on the Church to address the homosexual problem amongst the clergy.
When Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz proposed "Amendment 27" to his brothers in the Episcopate - stipulating that the "current homosexual culture" was the root cause of the sex abuse crisis - his proposal was rejected on a voice vote.
Father Charles Fiore, a Catholic priest who has fought the homosexual subculture in the Church for years, once said, "the grand taboo in U.S. culture is to focus on homosexuality."
Can we afford not to address this taboo any longer? Especially since the greater cost comes in the form of shattered lives and damaged souls created in the Imago Dei?
Year of mercy? Give me a break!
Three billion dollars! Dear Jesus, mercy.
Graph depicting the homosexual nature of most abuse cases courtesy of Renew America.
"The clerical abuse scandal cost American dioceses and religious orders $141,283,794 between mid-2014 and mid-2015, according to a report released by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

67% those funds were allotted to settlements ($87.1 million) and therapy for abuse victims ($8.8 million). The remaining funds were spent on attorneys’ fees ($30.1 million), support for offenders ($11.5 million), and other costs ($3.8 million), according to the 2015 “Report on the Implementation of the Charter for Protection of Children and Young People.”
These expenses brought the total cost of the clerical abuse scandal to American dioceses and religious institutes between 2004 and mid-2015 to $3,036,913,024, according to the data in the current report and previous reports. That figure does not include expenses incurred in lawsuits that were settled prior to 2004..."
More than three billion dollars spent on sexual abuse lawsuits and settlements in the United States alone. Tragic. Imagine the good that could have been done with all that money. Instead of closing Churches and Catholic schools, we could have been building them. Money that could have been spent on evangelization and building up God's Kingdom here on earth spent instead on the damage inflicted by [for the Most part] homosexual clerics who never should have been ordained in the first place.
This culture of sodomy has made extensive inroads into the Church. For nearly 25 years I've been calling on the Church to address the homosexual problem amongst the clergy.
When Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz proposed "Amendment 27" to his brothers in the Episcopate - stipulating that the "current homosexual culture" was the root cause of the sex abuse crisis - his proposal was rejected on a voice vote.
Father Charles Fiore, a Catholic priest who has fought the homosexual subculture in the Church for years, once said, "the grand taboo in U.S. culture is to focus on homosexuality."
Can we afford not to address this taboo any longer? Especially since the greater cost comes in the form of shattered lives and damaged souls created in the Imago Dei?
Year of mercy? Give me a break!
Three billion dollars! Dear Jesus, mercy.
Graph depicting the homosexual nature of most abuse cases courtesy of Renew America.
Labels:
Abuse,
Billion,
Clergy,
Culture,
Dollars,
Francis,
homosexuality,
Scandal,
Sodomy,
Three,
United States,
Year of Mercy
Thursday, April 09, 2015
Proud Rome, Effeminate Rome.....Don Bosco's prophecy being fulfilled
From The Independent:
"The Vatican has been embroiled in two separate, highly embarrassing, scandals.
In one, a north Italian priest has been removed from office after allegations emerged that he had been surfing the internet to find gay lovers and had been involved in gay orgies.
The other, which has generated – if possible – even more lurid press coverage in Italy, alleges a priest in the south of the country is under investigation on suspicion of murdering one of his parishioners."
Proud Rome, effeminate Rome
St. John Bosco, in prophecy, warned that the time would come when the Devil would sow discord among those closest to the Holy Father and what the Holy Father must do:
"Now Heaven's voice is addressed to the Shepherd of shepherds. You are now in conference with your advisors. The enemy of the good does not stand idle one moment. He studies and practices all his arts against you. He will sow discord among your consultors; he will raise up enemies amongst my children. The powers of the world will belch forth fire, and they would that the words be suffocated in the throats of the custodians of my law. That will not happen, they will do no harm but to themselves. You must hurry. If you cannot untie the knots, cut them. If you find yourself hard pressed, do not give up but continue until the head of the hydra of error is cut off. This stroke will make the world and Hell beneath it tremble, but the world will be safe and all the good will rejoice. Keep your consultors always with you, even if only two. Wherever you go, continue and bring to an end the work entrusted to you. The days fly by, your years will reach the destined number; but the great Queen will ever be your help, as in times past, so in the future She will always be the exceeding great fortress of the Church. [Here St. Bosco refers to the Immaculata].
He continues:
"Ah, but you, Italy, land of blessings! Who has steeped you in desolation! Blame not your enemies, but rather your friends. Can you not hear your children asking for the bread of faith and finding only those who smash it to pieces? What shall I do? I shall strike the shepherds, I shall disperse the flock, until those sitting on the throne of Moses search for good pastures and the flock listens attentively and is fed.
Of the flock and over the shepherds My hand will weigh heavy. Famine, pestilence, and war will be such that mothers will have to cry on account of the blood of their sons and of their martyrs dead in a hostile country.
And to you, Rome, what will happen! Ungrateful Rome, effeminate Rome, proud Rome! You have reached such a height that you search no further. You admire nothing else in your Sovereign except luxury, forgetting that you and your glory stands upon Golgotha. Now he is old, defenseless, and despoiled; and yet at his word, the word of one who was in bondage, the whole world trembles.
Rome! To you I will come four times.
The first time, I shall strike your lands and the inhabitants thereof.
The second time, I shall bring the massacre and the slaughter even to your very walls. And will you not yet open your eyes?
I shall come a third time and I shall beat down to the ground your defenses and the defenders, and at the command of the Father, the reign of terror, of dreadful fear, and of desolation shall enter into your city.
But My wise men have now fled and My law is even now trampled underfoot. Therefore I will make a fourth visit. Woe to you if My law shall still be considered as empty words. There will be deceit and falsehood among both the learned and the ignorant. Your blood and that of your children will wash away your stains upon God's law. War, pestilence and famine are the rods to scourge men's pride and wickedness. O wealthy men, where is your glory now, your estates, your palaces? They are the rubble on the highways and byways.
And your priests, why have you not run to 'cry between the vestibule and the Altar,' begging God to end these scourges? Why have you not, with the shield of faith, gone upon the housetops, into the homes, along the highways and byways, into every accessible corner to carry the seed of My word? Know you that this is the terrible two-edged sword that cuts down My enemies and breaks the Anger of God and of men?"
Effeminate Rome. What an indictment. This prophecy points to our own time.
"The Vatican has been embroiled in two separate, highly embarrassing, scandals.
In one, a north Italian priest has been removed from office after allegations emerged that he had been surfing the internet to find gay lovers and had been involved in gay orgies.
The other, which has generated – if possible – even more lurid press coverage in Italy, alleges a priest in the south of the country is under investigation on suspicion of murdering one of his parishioners."
Proud Rome, effeminate Rome
St. John Bosco, in prophecy, warned that the time would come when the Devil would sow discord among those closest to the Holy Father and what the Holy Father must do:
"Now Heaven's voice is addressed to the Shepherd of shepherds. You are now in conference with your advisors. The enemy of the good does not stand idle one moment. He studies and practices all his arts against you. He will sow discord among your consultors; he will raise up enemies amongst my children. The powers of the world will belch forth fire, and they would that the words be suffocated in the throats of the custodians of my law. That will not happen, they will do no harm but to themselves. You must hurry. If you cannot untie the knots, cut them. If you find yourself hard pressed, do not give up but continue until the head of the hydra of error is cut off. This stroke will make the world and Hell beneath it tremble, but the world will be safe and all the good will rejoice. Keep your consultors always with you, even if only two. Wherever you go, continue and bring to an end the work entrusted to you. The days fly by, your years will reach the destined number; but the great Queen will ever be your help, as in times past, so in the future She will always be the exceeding great fortress of the Church. [Here St. Bosco refers to the Immaculata].
He continues:
"Ah, but you, Italy, land of blessings! Who has steeped you in desolation! Blame not your enemies, but rather your friends. Can you not hear your children asking for the bread of faith and finding only those who smash it to pieces? What shall I do? I shall strike the shepherds, I shall disperse the flock, until those sitting on the throne of Moses search for good pastures and the flock listens attentively and is fed.
Of the flock and over the shepherds My hand will weigh heavy. Famine, pestilence, and war will be such that mothers will have to cry on account of the blood of their sons and of their martyrs dead in a hostile country.
And to you, Rome, what will happen! Ungrateful Rome, effeminate Rome, proud Rome! You have reached such a height that you search no further. You admire nothing else in your Sovereign except luxury, forgetting that you and your glory stands upon Golgotha. Now he is old, defenseless, and despoiled; and yet at his word, the word of one who was in bondage, the whole world trembles.
Rome! To you I will come four times.
The first time, I shall strike your lands and the inhabitants thereof.
The second time, I shall bring the massacre and the slaughter even to your very walls. And will you not yet open your eyes?
I shall come a third time and I shall beat down to the ground your defenses and the defenders, and at the command of the Father, the reign of terror, of dreadful fear, and of desolation shall enter into your city.
But My wise men have now fled and My law is even now trampled underfoot. Therefore I will make a fourth visit. Woe to you if My law shall still be considered as empty words. There will be deceit and falsehood among both the learned and the ignorant. Your blood and that of your children will wash away your stains upon God's law. War, pestilence and famine are the rods to scourge men's pride and wickedness. O wealthy men, where is your glory now, your estates, your palaces? They are the rubble on the highways and byways.
And your priests, why have you not run to 'cry between the vestibule and the Altar,' begging God to end these scourges? Why have you not, with the shield of faith, gone upon the housetops, into the homes, along the highways and byways, into every accessible corner to carry the seed of My word? Know you that this is the terrible two-edged sword that cuts down My enemies and breaks the Anger of God and of men?"
Effeminate Rome. What an indictment. This prophecy points to our own time.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Do those who produce The Catholic Free Press really understand the gravity of child sexual abuse?
Just how serious is the sin of scandal when committed by a priest? St. Alphonsus De Liguori, a Doctor of the Church and a moral theologian, explains that, "The Lord ordained in Leviticus that for the sin of a single priest a calf should be offered, as well as for the sins of the entire people. From this Innocent III concludes that the sin of a priest is as grievous as the sins of the whole people. The reason is, says the Pontiff, that by his sin the priest leads the entire people into sin ('Unde conjicitur quod peccatum Sacerdotis totius multitudinis peccato coaequatur, quia Sacerdos in suo peccato totam fecit delinquere multitudinem' - In Consecr. Pont. s. I.)
And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment.
St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
In recent posts, I have examined how Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas has had nothing but praise for the late Father Joseph Coonan, whose ministry was tarred with scandal. Specifically, Father Slavinskas said that Fr. Coonan was a "great influence" who helped "nourish" his vocation. This praise for a priest credibly accused of abusing children was published in The "Catholic" Free Press. See my posts here and here.
What does this suggest about the Worcester Diocese and most especially its official newspaper? Is there really an appreciation at the diocesan level as to the seriousness of child abuse? Such would not appear to be the case.
Meanwhile, another of Fr. Slavinskas' sisters has left comments at this Blog singing the praises of Fr. Joseph Coonan, even though the Worcester Diocese removed him from ministry years ago because the accusations against him were found to be credible. Beth Slavinskas left three comments. In these comments, she asserts that, "Father Coonan was a great priest who revitalized a lot of youths faith in the Catholic Church." And she adds, "I am saying that Fr. Coonan's time at Saint John's was positive."
Positive? For whom? As Dr. Germain Grisez reminds us, "In a loose sense, scandal refers to bad publicity; in the strict sense, it refers to leading others into sin (see CCC, 2284-2287). Jesus warns: 'If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea' (Mk 9: 42; Mt 18: 6; Lk 17: 1-2). Since clerical sexual abuse not only injures its victims as sexual abuse always does but poses a threat and obstacle to their and others' faith, the Church is injured far more by its scandalousness in this strict sense than she is by bad publicity about it."
What do you think: Do those who produce the "Catholic" Free Press really understand the gravity of child sexual abuse? If so, why would they publish comments praising a disgraced priest who was removed from ministry because the accusations that he abused children were found to be credible? The photo below is that of Fr. Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas.
And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment.
St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
In recent posts, I have examined how Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas has had nothing but praise for the late Father Joseph Coonan, whose ministry was tarred with scandal. Specifically, Father Slavinskas said that Fr. Coonan was a "great influence" who helped "nourish" his vocation. This praise for a priest credibly accused of abusing children was published in The "Catholic" Free Press. See my posts here and here.
What does this suggest about the Worcester Diocese and most especially its official newspaper? Is there really an appreciation at the diocesan level as to the seriousness of child abuse? Such would not appear to be the case.
Meanwhile, another of Fr. Slavinskas' sisters has left comments at this Blog singing the praises of Fr. Joseph Coonan, even though the Worcester Diocese removed him from ministry years ago because the accusations against him were found to be credible. Beth Slavinskas left three comments. In these comments, she asserts that, "Father Coonan was a great priest who revitalized a lot of youths faith in the Catholic Church." And she adds, "I am saying that Fr. Coonan's time at Saint John's was positive."
Positive? For whom? As Dr. Germain Grisez reminds us, "In a loose sense, scandal refers to bad publicity; in the strict sense, it refers to leading others into sin (see CCC, 2284-2287). Jesus warns: 'If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea' (Mk 9: 42; Mt 18: 6; Lk 17: 1-2). Since clerical sexual abuse not only injures its victims as sexual abuse always does but poses a threat and obstacle to their and others' faith, the Church is injured far more by its scandalousness in this strict sense than she is by bad publicity about it."
What do you think: Do those who produce the "Catholic" Free Press really understand the gravity of child sexual abuse? If so, why would they publish comments praising a disgraced priest who was removed from ministry because the accusations that he abused children were found to be credible? The photo below is that of Fr. Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Archbishop Vincent Nichols, we need Shepherds not Keystone Cops who fall asleep while on duty
Writing from the UK, my good friend Deacon Nick Donnelly of Protect the Pope reports that:
Archbishop Nichols has re-affirmed the Archdiocese of Westminster’s provision of pastoral care to homosexuals through the so called Soho Masses, while at the same time announcing that he is undertaking a review of the current provision to ensure these Masses are not occasions for opposition to the Church’s teaching on sexuality: ‘At the present time consideration is being given to the circumstances in which these Masses are celebrated to ensure that their purpose is respected and that they are not occasions for confusion or opposition concerning the positive teaching of the Church on the meaning of human sexuality or the moral imperatives that flow from that teaching, which we uphold and towards which we all strive.' (See full article here).
Deacon Nick comments: "This is good news from Archbishop Nichols,and signifies an important shift in his position on the Soho Masses. Before the Holy Father’s visit the archbishop expressed, in intemperate language, that those Catholics concerned about public dissent at the Soho Masses should ‘hold their tongues.’ Now 18 months later Archbishop Nichols has admitted the concern that the Soho Masses could be occasions for confusion and opposition to the Church’s teaching, and needs investigating. This is exactly the claim made by Daphne McLeod and Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice....Protect the Pope recommends that the archbishop includes in his review an examination of the website Queering the Church, run by a member of the organising council Terence Weldon."
So Archbishop Nichols is going to conduct a "review" to ensure that the infamous Soho Masses "are not occasions for confusion or opposition" to the Church's moral teaching regarding homosexuality? Why is it that I have an image of The Keystone Cops playing in my head? Your Excellency, Terence Weldon, who serves as an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist at these Masses, has been engaging in public dissent from the Church's teaching in this area for years.
In his latest post at "Queering the Church," Mr. Weldon writes that, "One part of conventional Catholic teaching on homosexual persons, is that our orientation is the cross that we must take up, and deal with. I disagree – orientation in itself is a gift from God, not an ordeal to survive. The cross that we carry, as I wrote in a Lenten post last year, is the disordered teaching of the Church, the persecution that it brings in discrimination bullying, gay -bashing and hate-crime murders – and the internalized homophobia that drives a disproportionate number of us to suicide, or to less extreme pathological behaviour, in addictions or in the closet....CDF documents claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that homosexuality/homosexual acts lead us away from God. That is certainly not my experience, which shows the exact reverse." (See here).
What do you think Your Excellency? Does this passage indicate that Terence Weldon is striving to conform to Church teaching or that he is openly dissenting from the same?
Archbishop Nichols has re-affirmed the Archdiocese of Westminster’s provision of pastoral care to homosexuals through the so called Soho Masses, while at the same time announcing that he is undertaking a review of the current provision to ensure these Masses are not occasions for opposition to the Church’s teaching on sexuality: ‘At the present time consideration is being given to the circumstances in which these Masses are celebrated to ensure that their purpose is respected and that they are not occasions for confusion or opposition concerning the positive teaching of the Church on the meaning of human sexuality or the moral imperatives that flow from that teaching, which we uphold and towards which we all strive.' (See full article here).
Deacon Nick comments: "This is good news from Archbishop Nichols,and signifies an important shift in his position on the Soho Masses. Before the Holy Father’s visit the archbishop expressed, in intemperate language, that those Catholics concerned about public dissent at the Soho Masses should ‘hold their tongues.’ Now 18 months later Archbishop Nichols has admitted the concern that the Soho Masses could be occasions for confusion and opposition to the Church’s teaching, and needs investigating. This is exactly the claim made by Daphne McLeod and Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice....Protect the Pope recommends that the archbishop includes in his review an examination of the website Queering the Church, run by a member of the organising council Terence Weldon."
So Archbishop Nichols is going to conduct a "review" to ensure that the infamous Soho Masses "are not occasions for confusion or opposition" to the Church's moral teaching regarding homosexuality? Why is it that I have an image of The Keystone Cops playing in my head? Your Excellency, Terence Weldon, who serves as an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist at these Masses, has been engaging in public dissent from the Church's teaching in this area for years.
In his latest post at "Queering the Church," Mr. Weldon writes that, "One part of conventional Catholic teaching on homosexual persons, is that our orientation is the cross that we must take up, and deal with. I disagree – orientation in itself is a gift from God, not an ordeal to survive. The cross that we carry, as I wrote in a Lenten post last year, is the disordered teaching of the Church, the persecution that it brings in discrimination bullying, gay -bashing and hate-crime murders – and the internalized homophobia that drives a disproportionate number of us to suicide, or to less extreme pathological behaviour, in addictions or in the closet....CDF documents claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that homosexuality/homosexual acts lead us away from God. That is certainly not my experience, which shows the exact reverse." (See here).
What do you think Your Excellency? Does this passage indicate that Terence Weldon is striving to conform to Church teaching or that he is openly dissenting from the same?
Labels:
Archbishop Vincent Nichols,
Asleep,
Deacon Nick Donnelly,
Dissent,
Duty,
homosexuality,
Keystone Cops,
Need,
Not,
Protect The Pope,
Scandal,
Shepherds,
Soho Masses,
Terence Weldon,
We
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
President of HLI: Promoting Condoms as Solution to AIDS in Africa Constitutes "Scandal of Immense Proportions."
From the Human Life International website (November 30, 2001 release):
Human Life International President Father Shenan J. Boquet sent the following message today to HLI Nigeria, the Seminarians for Life of Pope John Paul Major Seminary Awka, university students and all participants of the upcoming March for Life in Nigeria on December 1, 2011 organized by HLI Nigeria to mark the occasion of World AIDS Day:
“Greetings in the name of Christ to our dear friends and fellow defenders of life in Nigeria! We are honored to stand in solidarity with you as you encourage your leaders to remain strong in their defense of life and family. Toward this end, we offer the following points for reflection as you march for life on the occasion of ‘World AIDS Day.’
“First, we stand in solidarity not only with those who march to defend life and family, but also with those who are suffering so greatly from the ravages of HIV and AIDS, and the families of those who have been lost to this dread disease. Our first obligation as Catholics is to reach out with the love of Christ to those who are suffering – in Charity and Truth. It is in the spirit of Charity that the Church has always reached out to those who suffer and has consoled those who mourn the loss of loved ones. We are offering a Mass for those who have been affected by this terrible scourge, and for those who continue to address the spiritual and temporal needs in Nigeria and throughout Africa.
“Second, in the spirit of Truth, we must affirm the now incontrovertible fact that false solutions offered by wealthy international population control organizations do more harm than good. The promotion of condoms as a solution to the HIV-AIDS crisis is such a false solution, and the fact that these now thoroughly discredited efforts continue, despite a growing body of scientific research that demonstrates their ineffectiveness in stopping HIV and AIDS, is a scandal of immense proportions. We have also seen research lately that shows that the widespread use of oral contraception, not surprisingly, correlates with higher rates of STIs, as people become more accustomed to risky behavior and tend to forget the obvious consequences of this behavior. Only a society-wide change in behavior will stop HIV and AIDS, and such a change is only possible if members of society regain a deep respect for women, for families, and for sexuality as it was intended to be lived. It is sad, but not surprising, to find, again and again, that the more we depart from the law of God and of nature, the more we suffer spiritual and natural consequences.
“Finally, while it is very important that we make our voices heard in the streets and in the halls of our political leaders, our defense of life and family is not limited to protest and arguments based in science and reason. Our main argument is always our lived example of faith, hope and charity! When we live as our Creator has intended, even in the midst of terrible challenges and suffering, we can be hopeful, since we know that by His grace our suffering can turn into joy and flourishing. By living lives of charity we bring Christ to one another, as we see Him in one another. And we do so because of our faith, from Holy Scripture through the lives of the saints and the Magisterial teachings of our beloved Church, whose message is never limited to the necessary condemnation of sin, but is in its fullness a doctrine of true human flourishing – a positive message of faith, hope and love!
“Thank you to our friends with Human Life International Nigeria and Seminarians for Life of Pope John Paul Major Seminary Awka. You are an example to us, and we pray that you are successful not only in protecting pro-life and pro-family laws in Nigeria, but in growing a more robust Culture of Life that we in the West can look to as an example of how to go about in creating authentic, integral human development.”
This charitable message of sanity and common sense based upon solid empirical data is opposed by militant atheists such as Brian Bridson, an intellectually impoverished character who refers hatefully to the Vicar of Christ, Pope Benedict XVI as "pope ben-the-dick" while asserting in his blind rage that the Catholic clergy are "pretentious scum bags" who are "all fuc... up." (See his post entitled "More Catholic Bullshit" here).
Bear in mind that it is mental midgets such as this who accuse the Catholic Church of being unable to engage in "reason and dialogue." Ignoring the hard statistical data which are not supportive of his idiotic agenda, Mr. Bridson insists that the Church prefers that, "..people die in Africa than allow them to use condoms to prevent the spread of HIV and AIDS."
Sophocles, in Antigone 1. 1023, says, "Stubborness and stupidity are twins." How so? Dr. Montague Brown explains as he makes the distinction between tenacity and stubborness: "Tenacity is the dedicated adherence to something we know to be worthwhile. As such, tenacity is positive. It involves a clear purpose - to persevere in what is good - and welcomes new evidence and perspectives that clarify or enrich that good...Tenacity is particularly evident when the adherence required is difficult. If my perseverance requires great effort of body or mind, or if it requires me to face a great deal of peer pressure and perhaps even ridicule, then my holding fast to my good purpose shows strength of mind and courage. In such cases, there may be little to gain in terms of social standing, but much in moral standing. Tenaciously holding to what is true and good not only benefits me in terms of virtue; it also works to ensure the stability of these goods in the community....Stubborness is the uncompromising insistence on having our own way. As such, stubborness is negative. It involves a kind of blindness, along with a willful rejection of evidence and the perspectives of others. Stubborness is particularly evident when the compromise required is easy. If the evidence I need to convince me to change my mind is readily available, or if accepting another's perspective would mean giving up little of importance, then my refusal to yield is not reasonable, but is motivated by stubborness. There is little to lose except my desire to be in control. Such rigid clinging to my own will hurts the community, because I refuse to cooperate with others, and it also prevents me from becoming successful and virtuous." (Dr. Montague Brown, Ph.D, The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 162-163, Sophia Institute Press).
Don't expect intellectually cramped characters such as Brian Bridson to consider evidence which contradicts their world-view or to even consider the perspectives of others. Nothing will ever produce the slightest crack in their wall of conviction. Such people suffer from an adolescent crisis.
Human Life International President Father Shenan J. Boquet sent the following message today to HLI Nigeria, the Seminarians for Life of Pope John Paul Major Seminary Awka, university students and all participants of the upcoming March for Life in Nigeria on December 1, 2011 organized by HLI Nigeria to mark the occasion of World AIDS Day:
“Greetings in the name of Christ to our dear friends and fellow defenders of life in Nigeria! We are honored to stand in solidarity with you as you encourage your leaders to remain strong in their defense of life and family. Toward this end, we offer the following points for reflection as you march for life on the occasion of ‘World AIDS Day.’
“First, we stand in solidarity not only with those who march to defend life and family, but also with those who are suffering so greatly from the ravages of HIV and AIDS, and the families of those who have been lost to this dread disease. Our first obligation as Catholics is to reach out with the love of Christ to those who are suffering – in Charity and Truth. It is in the spirit of Charity that the Church has always reached out to those who suffer and has consoled those who mourn the loss of loved ones. We are offering a Mass for those who have been affected by this terrible scourge, and for those who continue to address the spiritual and temporal needs in Nigeria and throughout Africa.
“Second, in the spirit of Truth, we must affirm the now incontrovertible fact that false solutions offered by wealthy international population control organizations do more harm than good. The promotion of condoms as a solution to the HIV-AIDS crisis is such a false solution, and the fact that these now thoroughly discredited efforts continue, despite a growing body of scientific research that demonstrates their ineffectiveness in stopping HIV and AIDS, is a scandal of immense proportions. We have also seen research lately that shows that the widespread use of oral contraception, not surprisingly, correlates with higher rates of STIs, as people become more accustomed to risky behavior and tend to forget the obvious consequences of this behavior. Only a society-wide change in behavior will stop HIV and AIDS, and such a change is only possible if members of society regain a deep respect for women, for families, and for sexuality as it was intended to be lived. It is sad, but not surprising, to find, again and again, that the more we depart from the law of God and of nature, the more we suffer spiritual and natural consequences.
“Finally, while it is very important that we make our voices heard in the streets and in the halls of our political leaders, our defense of life and family is not limited to protest and arguments based in science and reason. Our main argument is always our lived example of faith, hope and charity! When we live as our Creator has intended, even in the midst of terrible challenges and suffering, we can be hopeful, since we know that by His grace our suffering can turn into joy and flourishing. By living lives of charity we bring Christ to one another, as we see Him in one another. And we do so because of our faith, from Holy Scripture through the lives of the saints and the Magisterial teachings of our beloved Church, whose message is never limited to the necessary condemnation of sin, but is in its fullness a doctrine of true human flourishing – a positive message of faith, hope and love!
“Thank you to our friends with Human Life International Nigeria and Seminarians for Life of Pope John Paul Major Seminary Awka. You are an example to us, and we pray that you are successful not only in protecting pro-life and pro-family laws in Nigeria, but in growing a more robust Culture of Life that we in the West can look to as an example of how to go about in creating authentic, integral human development.”
This charitable message of sanity and common sense based upon solid empirical data is opposed by militant atheists such as Brian Bridson, an intellectually impoverished character who refers hatefully to the Vicar of Christ, Pope Benedict XVI as "pope ben-the-dick" while asserting in his blind rage that the Catholic clergy are "pretentious scum bags" who are "all fuc... up." (See his post entitled "More Catholic Bullshit" here).
Bear in mind that it is mental midgets such as this who accuse the Catholic Church of being unable to engage in "reason and dialogue." Ignoring the hard statistical data which are not supportive of his idiotic agenda, Mr. Bridson insists that the Church prefers that, "..people die in Africa than allow them to use condoms to prevent the spread of HIV and AIDS."
Sophocles, in Antigone 1. 1023, says, "Stubborness and stupidity are twins." How so? Dr. Montague Brown explains as he makes the distinction between tenacity and stubborness: "Tenacity is the dedicated adherence to something we know to be worthwhile. As such, tenacity is positive. It involves a clear purpose - to persevere in what is good - and welcomes new evidence and perspectives that clarify or enrich that good...Tenacity is particularly evident when the adherence required is difficult. If my perseverance requires great effort of body or mind, or if it requires me to face a great deal of peer pressure and perhaps even ridicule, then my holding fast to my good purpose shows strength of mind and courage. In such cases, there may be little to gain in terms of social standing, but much in moral standing. Tenaciously holding to what is true and good not only benefits me in terms of virtue; it also works to ensure the stability of these goods in the community....Stubborness is the uncompromising insistence on having our own way. As such, stubborness is negative. It involves a kind of blindness, along with a willful rejection of evidence and the perspectives of others. Stubborness is particularly evident when the compromise required is easy. If the evidence I need to convince me to change my mind is readily available, or if accepting another's perspective would mean giving up little of importance, then my refusal to yield is not reasonable, but is motivated by stubborness. There is little to lose except my desire to be in control. Such rigid clinging to my own will hurts the community, because I refuse to cooperate with others, and it also prevents me from becoming successful and virtuous." (Dr. Montague Brown, Ph.D, The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 162-163, Sophia Institute Press).
Don't expect intellectually cramped characters such as Brian Bridson to consider evidence which contradicts their world-view or to even consider the perspectives of others. Nothing will ever produce the slightest crack in their wall of conviction. Such people suffer from an adolescent crisis.
Labels:
Adolescent Crisis,
Africa,
AIDS,
Atheist,
Brian Bridson,
Constitutes,
Dialogue,
Human Life International,
Immense Proportions,
Mental Midget,
President,
Promoting Condoms,
Scandal,
Solution
Thursday, November 17, 2011
What the Penn State scandal shows....
In a post published back in April of 2010, and which may be found here, I asked the question, "When will the media acknowledge the fact that the sexual abuse of children is not a 'Catholic problem'?" This post highlighted the fact that the sexual abuse of children is a far greater problem outside the Church than within it and that children are in fact much safer with a Catholic priest than with males in the general population where the rate of sexual abuse is much higher. Statistics do not lie.
Many in the media who have largely ignored this fact are deeply shocked over the Penn State scandal. But why is this so? Why are so many Americans outraged over what happened at Penn State when they have been (for the most part) uninterested in the sexual abuse which has occured in the public schools? As I said in my post last year: In her report prepared for the U.S. Department of Education entitled "Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature," Charol Shakeshaft explains that, "This analysis indicates that 9.6 percent of all students in grades 8 to 11 report contact and/or noncontact educator sexual misconduct that was unwanted." (p. 25). And then Ms. Shakeshaft puts this percentage in a proper perspective: "To get a sense of the extent of the number of students who have been targets of educator sexual misconduct, I applied the percent of students who report experiencing educator sexual misconduct to the population of all K-12 students. Based on the assumption that the AAUW surveys accurately represent the experiences of all K-12 students, more than 4.5 million students are subject to sexual misconduct by an employee of a school sometime between kindergarten and 12th grade. Possible limitations of the study would all suggest that the findings reported here under-estimate educator sexual misconduct in schools." (p. 26).
Full Shakeshaft report may be found here.
I believe the answer is that, for many, sports has become a religion. Dr. Leon Podles, in his book "The Church Impotent," explains that, "Because sports provide an initiation into masculinity, they can easily become a religion. Sports are often the way the boy puts away the soft, sheltering world of the mother and her femininity and enters the world of challenge and danger that makes him a man...For modern men, team sports are more transforming than religion because they provide a greater escape from the self. Paul Jones, a Dulwich boy who was killed in World War I, claimed that in the attempts to develop team spirit, 'Religion has failed, intellect has failed, art has failed, science has failed. It is clear why: because each of these has laid emphasis on man's selfish side; the saving of his own soul, the cultivation of his own mind, the pleasing of his own senses. But your sportsman joins the Colours because in his games he has felt the real spirit of unselfishness, and has become accustomed to give all for a body to whose service he is sworn.' Sports on this view are a better school of charity than religion, for the ultimate test of charity is the willingness to die in war...Although most players and spectators would not seriously call sports a religion, it nevertheless functions as one for them. It is 'a secular means for tapping transcendental sources and powers, or restoring some fleeting contact with the sacred, or testing whether the gods are on your side or not.' Michael Novak regards sports as a natural religion. Charles Prebish also thinks "sports is religion for growing numbers of Americans.' Religion enables man to transcend the secular, ordinary world; sports are the way that many men attain this transcendence, whether directly as an athlete or vicariously as a spectator.." (The Church Impotent, pp. 168-169).
Many men no longer go to Church because they regard any involvement in religion to be unmasculine and even effeminate. And normal, healthy men want to be masculine. Many of these have embraced sports as a substitute religion. The Penn State scandal is, therefore, all the more shocking to those who have distanced themselves from churches which have been dominated from feminism and homosexual propaganda and which have been largely effeminized. The idea of a football coach showering with boys and performing oral sex on them cannot be reconciled with the masculine ideals which are an intrinsic part of sports.
Dr. Podles notes in his book that, "Christianity revealed that the masculine identity was open to all: in Christ there was no longer male or female all could become sons of the Father by the grace of adoption. In the first millennium the masculine character of Christianity was clear. The church of the martyrs gave way to the church of the monks, but it remained clear that to be Christian involved a profound and heroic struggle, which was perhaps more natural to men, but which was also opened up to women. Men have a natural understanding of the process of and the need for conversion. They know from their childhood experiences and their inculcation in the ideology of masculinity the importance of dying to the old self and being reborn as a new self....Conversion can lead men into the Church, but the Church they enter must also have a spirituality that allows them to be both men and Christians - they cannot be real Christians unless they become real men.."
The Christian churches must offer men a spirituality which allows them to be men. Until they do, many men will continue to pursue masculine ideals elsewhere. But what the Penn State scandal has shown us is that even the "religion" of sports - the natural "religion" which so many men hold dear - is not immune to the problems which have surfaced within certain segments of the Church.
Many in the media who have largely ignored this fact are deeply shocked over the Penn State scandal. But why is this so? Why are so many Americans outraged over what happened at Penn State when they have been (for the most part) uninterested in the sexual abuse which has occured in the public schools? As I said in my post last year: In her report prepared for the U.S. Department of Education entitled "Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature," Charol Shakeshaft explains that, "This analysis indicates that 9.6 percent of all students in grades 8 to 11 report contact and/or noncontact educator sexual misconduct that was unwanted." (p. 25). And then Ms. Shakeshaft puts this percentage in a proper perspective: "To get a sense of the extent of the number of students who have been targets of educator sexual misconduct, I applied the percent of students who report experiencing educator sexual misconduct to the population of all K-12 students. Based on the assumption that the AAUW surveys accurately represent the experiences of all K-12 students, more than 4.5 million students are subject to sexual misconduct by an employee of a school sometime between kindergarten and 12th grade. Possible limitations of the study would all suggest that the findings reported here under-estimate educator sexual misconduct in schools." (p. 26).
Full Shakeshaft report may be found here.
I believe the answer is that, for many, sports has become a religion. Dr. Leon Podles, in his book "The Church Impotent," explains that, "Because sports provide an initiation into masculinity, they can easily become a religion. Sports are often the way the boy puts away the soft, sheltering world of the mother and her femininity and enters the world of challenge and danger that makes him a man...For modern men, team sports are more transforming than religion because they provide a greater escape from the self. Paul Jones, a Dulwich boy who was killed in World War I, claimed that in the attempts to develop team spirit, 'Religion has failed, intellect has failed, art has failed, science has failed. It is clear why: because each of these has laid emphasis on man's selfish side; the saving of his own soul, the cultivation of his own mind, the pleasing of his own senses. But your sportsman joins the Colours because in his games he has felt the real spirit of unselfishness, and has become accustomed to give all for a body to whose service he is sworn.' Sports on this view are a better school of charity than religion, for the ultimate test of charity is the willingness to die in war...Although most players and spectators would not seriously call sports a religion, it nevertheless functions as one for them. It is 'a secular means for tapping transcendental sources and powers, or restoring some fleeting contact with the sacred, or testing whether the gods are on your side or not.' Michael Novak regards sports as a natural religion. Charles Prebish also thinks "sports is religion for growing numbers of Americans.' Religion enables man to transcend the secular, ordinary world; sports are the way that many men attain this transcendence, whether directly as an athlete or vicariously as a spectator.." (The Church Impotent, pp. 168-169).
Many men no longer go to Church because they regard any involvement in religion to be unmasculine and even effeminate. And normal, healthy men want to be masculine. Many of these have embraced sports as a substitute religion. The Penn State scandal is, therefore, all the more shocking to those who have distanced themselves from churches which have been dominated from feminism and homosexual propaganda and which have been largely effeminized. The idea of a football coach showering with boys and performing oral sex on them cannot be reconciled with the masculine ideals which are an intrinsic part of sports.
Dr. Podles notes in his book that, "Christianity revealed that the masculine identity was open to all: in Christ there was no longer male or female all could become sons of the Father by the grace of adoption. In the first millennium the masculine character of Christianity was clear. The church of the martyrs gave way to the church of the monks, but it remained clear that to be Christian involved a profound and heroic struggle, which was perhaps more natural to men, but which was also opened up to women. Men have a natural understanding of the process of and the need for conversion. They know from their childhood experiences and their inculcation in the ideology of masculinity the importance of dying to the old self and being reborn as a new self....Conversion can lead men into the Church, but the Church they enter must also have a spirituality that allows them to be both men and Christians - they cannot be real Christians unless they become real men.."
The Christian churches must offer men a spirituality which allows them to be men. Until they do, many men will continue to pursue masculine ideals elsewhere. But what the Penn State scandal has shown us is that even the "religion" of sports - the natural "religion" which so many men hold dear - is not immune to the problems which have surfaced within certain segments of the Church.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Fr. Michael Flaherty and scandal...
In a previous post, I noted how Catholic priest and radical homosexual activist Michael Flaherty has called for a Super-Treaty Monitoring Body at the United Nations with the goal of usurping parental rights and indoctrinating children in gender-bending ideology. Now Fr. Flaherty has been appointed to preside over the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. See here.
Just how serious is the sin of scandal when committed by a priest? St. Alphonsus De Liguori, a Doctor of the Church and a moral theologian, explains that, "The Lord ordained in Leviticus that for the sin of a single priest a calf should be offered, as well as for the sins of the entire people. From this Innocent III concludes that the sin of a priest is as grievous as the sins of the whole people. The reason is, says the Pontiff, that by his sin the priest leads the entire people into sin ('Unde conjicitur quod peccatum Sacerdotis totius multitudinis peccato coaequatur, quia Sacerdos in suo peccato totam fecit delinquere multitudinem' - In Consecr. Pont. s. I.) And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment. St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
Knowing this, why hasn't the Church dealt with Fr. Flaherty in a decisive manner? Why is he still considered a priest in good standing?
Just how serious is the sin of scandal when committed by a priest? St. Alphonsus De Liguori, a Doctor of the Church and a moral theologian, explains that, "The Lord ordained in Leviticus that for the sin of a single priest a calf should be offered, as well as for the sins of the entire people. From this Innocent III concludes that the sin of a priest is as grievous as the sins of the whole people. The reason is, says the Pontiff, that by his sin the priest leads the entire people into sin ('Unde conjicitur quod peccatum Sacerdotis totius multitudinis peccato coaequatur, quia Sacerdos in suo peccato totam fecit delinquere multitudinem' - In Consecr. Pont. s. I.) And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment. St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
Knowing this, why hasn't the Church dealt with Fr. Flaherty in a decisive manner? Why is he still considered a priest in good standing?
Thursday, September 09, 2010
Pope Benedict XVI: We need conversion rather than structural change
And this is precisely what I said in a previous post with regard to VOTF's demand for "structural change":
What must change: the structure of the Church or that of the human heart?
In its document on change entitled "Discerning the Spirit: A Guide for Renewing and Restructuring the Church," Voice of the Faithful (VOTF), an organization established in the wake of the clerical abuse scandal, provides us with a glimpse of its loss of the sense of truth and of the sense of the Church.
In a desperate attempt to convince the faithful that the structure of the Church must change and become more democratic, this VOTF guide quotes the following passage from the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium: "Thus every layman, by virtue of the very gifts bestowed on him, is at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church herself." (LG, No. 33).
But the lay involvement referred to in this passage is a far different thing from the "democratic" Church envisaged by members of the flagging dissent group. If we read just a little further into the same Vatican II document, we are told that: "The laity should promptly accept in Christian obedience what is decided by the pastors who, as teachers and rulers of the Church, represent Christ." (LG, No. 37). Why doesn't the VOTF "guide" quote from that passage?
While it is true that some practices in the Church are similar to those of a representative democracy, for example, Bishops who are united with the Pope share authority with him, and their leadership is collegial (LG, No. 22), and the lay faithful have a right to make their needs and desires known while appropriately expressing their opinions (LG, No. 37), still, authority in the Church has a different foundation from authority in a representative democracy. Not to mention a different function. Leaders in a representative democracy govern in the name of the people. But within the Church, pastors govern in the name of the Lord Jesus. By appointment, mission and commission, Jesus has provided for the continuation of His royal office. The hierarchy of jurisdiction, therefore, is a divine institution (LG, No. 18). This hierarchy constitutes the external framework of that organism in which Jesus Himself lives and of which He is both the juridic and mystic Head, namely, His Mystical Body the Church.
Members of the primitive Church understood this as do faithful Catholics today. They knew that the Apostles had received from Jesus their power to teach, rule and sanctify. They understood that even Jesus’ teaching is not His own and that the Spirit does not speak on his own (Jn 7:16; 16:13). In short, they understood that everything comes from the Father (Jas 1:17-18).
Sadly, there are those who still insist that the structure of the Church must change. Father William J. Byron, SJ is one such individual. In an column written for the Catholic News Service and published in the October 26th edition of The Catholic Free Press, Fr. Byron refers to VOTF as "a reform movement." And speaking of the "structural change" which this dissent group calls for, he writes, "...faithful Catholic people want to have a voice in the selection of their parish priests and local bishops...It is worth noting that structural change never happens suddenly, but structural adjustments are happening all the time. Enlightened criticism from Voice of the Faithful will bring about structural adjustments, which eventually will lead to noticeable change. For this to happen, however, the movement needs staying power..."
VOTF is a reform movement which offers enlightened criticism? Far from it. Any authentic reform movement in the Church has its foundation in Magisterial truth and understands that it is not the Church which must change but the human heart. Writing to the Ephesians, St. Paul said, "Put off the old man who is corrupted according to the desire of error, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind: and put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth" (Eph. 4:22-24).
And as Dr. Von Hildebrand explains, "These words of St. Paul are inscribed above the gate through which all must pass who want to reach the goal set us by God. They implicitly contain the quintessence of the process which baptized man must undergo before he attains the unfolding of the new supernatural life received in Baptism." (Transformation in Christ, p.3). Dr. Von Hildebrand goes on to explain in this work of critical importance that there is a certain type of man, "who, while not lacking a certain elan, refuses to take account of his limitations and is thus driven to magnify his stature artificially." He continues: "Suppose he is present at some discussion of spiritually relevant topics: he will take part in the debate as though he were fully equipped to do so; he will claim impressions as deep as the others; he will not yield to any other man as regards intellectual proficiency or even religious stature. Thus he works himself up, as it were, to a level which he has not reached in reality - and which he may not even be able to reach, so far as it is a matter of natural capacities. He is not without zeal; but that zeal is nourished at heart by pride. He misjudges the limitations of the natural talents which God has lent him, and consequently lapses into pretense. He is fond of speaking of things which far transcend the limits of his understanding; he behaves as though a mere mental or verbal reference to such subjects (however poorly implemented with actual knowledge and penetration) would by itself amount to their intellectual possession. This cramped attitude of sham spirituality is mostly underlain by an inferiority complex, or by a kind of infantile unconsciousness. Stupidity in its really oppressive form is traceable to this pretension to appear something different from what one is in fact, and by no means to a mere deficiency of intellectual gifts." (Transformation in Christ, pp.23-24).
Why am I relating all of this? Because, Dr. Von Hildebrand teaches us that such false self-appraisals actually hinder our readiness to change or to "put on the new man" as St. Paul instructs us to do. And what Dr. Von Hildebrand refers to as a "cramped attitude of sham spirituality" is part and parcel of the VOTF movement. Members of VOTF have their own thoughts as to what must change. But this is because they fail to listen to the Word of God as given to us by the Apostle to the Gentiles. Insisting that it is not they who must "put on the new man" in Christ Jesus but that it is the Church which must change, these intellectually and spiritually cramped characters evaluate the abuse crisis within the Church and issue an arrogant vestra culpa (your fault) while refusing to issue a humble mea culpa (my fault). These sophomoric souls, anxious to assign blame to the Church for the sins of some of Her members, forget the words of the great Cardinal Journet: "All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins...The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own Blood' (Acts 20:28)."
VOTF members will no doubt continue to live in denial while loudly proclaiming the need for "structural change" within the Church even while remaining unsure as to what this actually means. This is why their movement is destined to fail. But there is another and no less important reason for their movement's decay. And it is this: most Catholics in this country understand what they themselves do not: namely, that the Church founded by Jesus Christ the Incarnate Word is a perfect society which is immutable. They know and understand this because such is the teaching of the Church. It was Pope Pius XII, in his encyclical letter Mystici Corporis, who taught that:"..The Church, which should be considered a perfect society in its own right, is not made up of merely moral and juridical elements and principles. It is far superior to all other human societies; it surpasses them as grace surpasses nature, as things immortal are above all those that perish...The juridical principles, on which also the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given it by Christ.."
Such authentic Catholics accept the teaching of Vatican I that, "...the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both as separate individuals and all together, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church which is spread over the whole world, so that the Church of Christ, protected not only by the Roman Pontiff, but by the unity of communion as well as of the profession of the same faith is one flock under the one highest shepherd. This is the doctrine of Catholic truth from which no one can deviate and keep his faith and salvation." (Dogmatic Constitution I on the Church of Christ, Session IV).
VOTF rejects this clear and unambiguous teaching of Holy Mother Church. This is why the movement is held in "low esteem" by most Catholics in this country and beyond. With all due respect for Fr. Byron, it is not the structure of the Church which must change. It is the structure of the human heart which must change. Until our hearts are conformed to that of the Sacred Heart of our Lord Jesus Christ, our criticism will never be constructive or enlightened. It will only be bitter.
Let us all pray: Sacred Heart of Jesus, make my heart like unto Thine. Amen.
What must change: the structure of the Church or that of the human heart?
In its document on change entitled "Discerning the Spirit: A Guide for Renewing and Restructuring the Church," Voice of the Faithful (VOTF), an organization established in the wake of the clerical abuse scandal, provides us with a glimpse of its loss of the sense of truth and of the sense of the Church.
In a desperate attempt to convince the faithful that the structure of the Church must change and become more democratic, this VOTF guide quotes the following passage from the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium: "Thus every layman, by virtue of the very gifts bestowed on him, is at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church herself." (LG, No. 33).
But the lay involvement referred to in this passage is a far different thing from the "democratic" Church envisaged by members of the flagging dissent group. If we read just a little further into the same Vatican II document, we are told that: "The laity should promptly accept in Christian obedience what is decided by the pastors who, as teachers and rulers of the Church, represent Christ." (LG, No. 37). Why doesn't the VOTF "guide" quote from that passage?
While it is true that some practices in the Church are similar to those of a representative democracy, for example, Bishops who are united with the Pope share authority with him, and their leadership is collegial (LG, No. 22), and the lay faithful have a right to make their needs and desires known while appropriately expressing their opinions (LG, No. 37), still, authority in the Church has a different foundation from authority in a representative democracy. Not to mention a different function. Leaders in a representative democracy govern in the name of the people. But within the Church, pastors govern in the name of the Lord Jesus. By appointment, mission and commission, Jesus has provided for the continuation of His royal office. The hierarchy of jurisdiction, therefore, is a divine institution (LG, No. 18). This hierarchy constitutes the external framework of that organism in which Jesus Himself lives and of which He is both the juridic and mystic Head, namely, His Mystical Body the Church.
Members of the primitive Church understood this as do faithful Catholics today. They knew that the Apostles had received from Jesus their power to teach, rule and sanctify. They understood that even Jesus’ teaching is not His own and that the Spirit does not speak on his own (Jn 7:16; 16:13). In short, they understood that everything comes from the Father (Jas 1:17-18).
Sadly, there are those who still insist that the structure of the Church must change. Father William J. Byron, SJ is one such individual. In an column written for the Catholic News Service and published in the October 26th edition of The Catholic Free Press, Fr. Byron refers to VOTF as "a reform movement." And speaking of the "structural change" which this dissent group calls for, he writes, "...faithful Catholic people want to have a voice in the selection of their parish priests and local bishops...It is worth noting that structural change never happens suddenly, but structural adjustments are happening all the time. Enlightened criticism from Voice of the Faithful will bring about structural adjustments, which eventually will lead to noticeable change. For this to happen, however, the movement needs staying power..."
VOTF is a reform movement which offers enlightened criticism? Far from it. Any authentic reform movement in the Church has its foundation in Magisterial truth and understands that it is not the Church which must change but the human heart. Writing to the Ephesians, St. Paul said, "Put off the old man who is corrupted according to the desire of error, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind: and put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth" (Eph. 4:22-24).
And as Dr. Von Hildebrand explains, "These words of St. Paul are inscribed above the gate through which all must pass who want to reach the goal set us by God. They implicitly contain the quintessence of the process which baptized man must undergo before he attains the unfolding of the new supernatural life received in Baptism." (Transformation in Christ, p.3). Dr. Von Hildebrand goes on to explain in this work of critical importance that there is a certain type of man, "who, while not lacking a certain elan, refuses to take account of his limitations and is thus driven to magnify his stature artificially." He continues: "Suppose he is present at some discussion of spiritually relevant topics: he will take part in the debate as though he were fully equipped to do so; he will claim impressions as deep as the others; he will not yield to any other man as regards intellectual proficiency or even religious stature. Thus he works himself up, as it were, to a level which he has not reached in reality - and which he may not even be able to reach, so far as it is a matter of natural capacities. He is not without zeal; but that zeal is nourished at heart by pride. He misjudges the limitations of the natural talents which God has lent him, and consequently lapses into pretense. He is fond of speaking of things which far transcend the limits of his understanding; he behaves as though a mere mental or verbal reference to such subjects (however poorly implemented with actual knowledge and penetration) would by itself amount to their intellectual possession. This cramped attitude of sham spirituality is mostly underlain by an inferiority complex, or by a kind of infantile unconsciousness. Stupidity in its really oppressive form is traceable to this pretension to appear something different from what one is in fact, and by no means to a mere deficiency of intellectual gifts." (Transformation in Christ, pp.23-24).
Why am I relating all of this? Because, Dr. Von Hildebrand teaches us that such false self-appraisals actually hinder our readiness to change or to "put on the new man" as St. Paul instructs us to do. And what Dr. Von Hildebrand refers to as a "cramped attitude of sham spirituality" is part and parcel of the VOTF movement. Members of VOTF have their own thoughts as to what must change. But this is because they fail to listen to the Word of God as given to us by the Apostle to the Gentiles. Insisting that it is not they who must "put on the new man" in Christ Jesus but that it is the Church which must change, these intellectually and spiritually cramped characters evaluate the abuse crisis within the Church and issue an arrogant vestra culpa (your fault) while refusing to issue a humble mea culpa (my fault). These sophomoric souls, anxious to assign blame to the Church for the sins of some of Her members, forget the words of the great Cardinal Journet: "All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins...The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own Blood' (Acts 20:28)."
VOTF members will no doubt continue to live in denial while loudly proclaiming the need for "structural change" within the Church even while remaining unsure as to what this actually means. This is why their movement is destined to fail. But there is another and no less important reason for their movement's decay. And it is this: most Catholics in this country understand what they themselves do not: namely, that the Church founded by Jesus Christ the Incarnate Word is a perfect society which is immutable. They know and understand this because such is the teaching of the Church. It was Pope Pius XII, in his encyclical letter Mystici Corporis, who taught that:"..The Church, which should be considered a perfect society in its own right, is not made up of merely moral and juridical elements and principles. It is far superior to all other human societies; it surpasses them as grace surpasses nature, as things immortal are above all those that perish...The juridical principles, on which also the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given it by Christ.."
Such authentic Catholics accept the teaching of Vatican I that, "...the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both as separate individuals and all together, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church which is spread over the whole world, so that the Church of Christ, protected not only by the Roman Pontiff, but by the unity of communion as well as of the profession of the same faith is one flock under the one highest shepherd. This is the doctrine of Catholic truth from which no one can deviate and keep his faith and salvation." (Dogmatic Constitution I on the Church of Christ, Session IV).
VOTF rejects this clear and unambiguous teaching of Holy Mother Church. This is why the movement is held in "low esteem" by most Catholics in this country and beyond. With all due respect for Fr. Byron, it is not the structure of the Church which must change. It is the structure of the human heart which must change. Until our hearts are conformed to that of the Sacred Heart of our Lord Jesus Christ, our criticism will never be constructive or enlightened. It will only be bitter.
Let us all pray: Sacred Heart of Jesus, make my heart like unto Thine. Amen.
Labels:
Archives,
Catholic Free Press,
Clerical Abuse,
Conversion,
Dissent,
La Salette Journey,
Lumen Gentium,
Metanoia,
Pope Benedict XVI,
Repentance,
Scandal,
Structural Change,
Vatican II,
VOTF
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
The Archdiocese of Boston is way too cozy with the Party of Death

There can be little doubt that the Archdiocese of Boston has a cozy relationship with the Democratic Party. Many would argue that the relationship is too cozy. In an editorial for LifeSiteNews.com entitled "The Kennedy Funeral - A Golden Opportunity or Capitulation for the Catholic Church," John-Henry Westen wrote: "Saturday's grandiose Catholic funeral for Senator Ted Kennedy has the potential to be a scandal that will make Notre Dame's Obama Day a walk in the park. With all four living former Presidents in attendance and an address from President Barack Obama, the funeral is set to be a royal crowning, right inside a Catholic Church, of a man who betrayed the most fundamental moral teachings of the faith.
What example will this give to Catholics and the rest of the world looking in? It will surely belie the Catholic teachings on the sanctity of life and sexuality. 'Surely,' they will say, 'if one of the most vociferous proponents of abortion and homosexuality in politics is so feted in the Church, the Church cannot possibly regard abortion as murder.' Would anyone so honor one who so advocated what the church officially considers an 'unspeakable crime'?"
We all know what happened. Senator Kennedy was feted by archdiocesan officials as "our brother and friend." Responding to this horrendous scandal, I wrote that, "I have nothing but love and respect for His Eminence, but it would appear that he does not deplore error and falsehood as much as he deplores disunity." See here. And because he does not deplore error as he should, because he has not offered the strong leadership which the Catholic faithful deserve, many Catholics have never considered that there is an incompatibility between their political affiliation and their religious identity. As Dr. David Carlin has said, "..when clerical leadership is weak or foolish, we can't be surprised when the quality of lay Catholicism sinks." (Can a Catholic Be a Democrat? How the Party I Loved Became the Enemy of My Religion," p. 106).
Joe Sacerdo has reported on the close relationship which Fr. J. Bryan Hehir of the Boston Archdiocese has with the DNC. He writes, "Fr. Hehir's comment on a panel that he respects the Democratic National Committee (which vehemently opposes the Catholic Church on key issues like abortion and gay marriage) validates the questions about Fr. Hehir we have been raising for some time." (See here).
How does one reconcile one's Roman Catholic faith with membership in [or identification with] the Democratic Party? Again, Dr. Carlin explains, "Another method Catholics use to validate their membership in the Democratic Party, despite the party's anti-Christian moral agenda, goes like this: they concede that abortion, for example, is morally wrong and that it's tragically wrong for the Democratic Party to support it; but then they talk about the need for 'balance' and the importance of not taking a single-issue approach to politics. 'The Democrats,' they say, 'might be wrong on a few issues, such as abortion and same-sex marriage - but they're right about so many other important issues: race, poverty, peace, education, health care, the environment, and so on. In politics we have to weigh in the balance the evil and the good...This superficially persuasive line of reasoning could have been used to support the Nazis in the 1930s. A pro-Nazi Catholic could say, 'Oh yes, it's too bad - this policy of the Fuehrer toward the Jews. We deplore the firing of Jewish professors, we deplore the Nuremberg laws, we deplore Kristellnacht. But anti-Semitism, while a great evil, isn't the only evil. Far from it. We have to balance the evil done by the National Socialists against the good they've accomplished. Hitler has revived the economy, has restored law and order, has built autobahns and Volkswagens, has won the respect and salutary fear of the international community, has once again made it possible for Germans, who had been so humiliated for so long a time, to lift up their heads and be proud of their nation. Hitler isn't perfect - no politician ever will be. The question is, 'Are the Nazis on the whole producing more good than evil? Are they better than the available alternatives - namely, socialists and communists? The answer to this question is, without doubt, yes.'
Somebody might object that my analogy exaggerates the evil of abortion, which surely isn't comparable to anti-Semitism even in its pre-genocidal stage. Yes 'somebody' might say this, but Catholics who understand the moral teaching of their own religion can't very well say it. To them, the forty million and more abortion-homicides that have taken place in the United States since the 1973 Roe decision are clearly a greater moral evil than Hitler's pre-genocide anti-Semitism of the 1930s and even, it can be argued, no less evil than the six million homicides that made up the Holocaust. Some people will scoff at this comparison, but that's simply an indication that they reject the Catholic teaching that abortion is homicide.." (Can a Catholic Be a Democrat?, pp. 119, 123-124).
Pope Benedict XVI has spoken clearly enough. And he has condemned "gay marriage" and abortion as "among the most insidious and dangerous challenges" to society. The Democratic Party advances both. It's difficult then for any faithful Catholic to understand how one of Cardinal O'Malley's top aides can have "respect" for the Democratic National Committee.
Thursday, July 08, 2010
It's not possible to be a practicing Catholic and to conduct oneself in this manner.."
Addressing the scandal of Catholic politicians who support abortion and same-sex "marriage," Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, said that, "It's not possible to be a practicing Catholic and to conduct oneself in this manner." In fact, His Excellency stated clearly that, "Neither Holy Communion nor funeral rites should be administered to such politicians. To deny these is not a judgment of the soul, but a recognition of the scandal and its effects."
And, in an obvious reference to the scandalous Kennedy funeral, Archbishop Burke asserted that when a politician is associated "with greatly sinful acts about fundamental questions like abortion and marriage, his repentance must also be public." See here.
Bearing this in mind, read what Joe Sacerdo has to say about Father Bryan Hehir and the funeral of the late Senator from Massachusetts. Joe's excellent article may be found here.
In his Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Ad Tuendam Fidem (one has to wonder if some ecclesiastics have ever read it), Pope John Paul II wrote:
"To protect the faith of the Catholic Church against errors arising from certain members of the Christian faithful, especially from among those dedicated to the various disciplines of sacred theology, we, whose principal duty is to confirm the brethren in the faith (Lk 22:32), consider it absolutely necessary to add to the existing texts of the Code of Canon Law and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, new norms which expressly impose the obligation of upholding truths proposed in a definitive way by the Magisterium of the Church, and which also establish related canonical sanctions....
Canon 750 of the Code of Canon Law will now consist of two paragraphs; the first will present the text of the existing canon; the second will contain a new text. Thus, canon 750, in its complete form, will read:
Canon 750 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.
§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church."
Is there any doubt that the Church's teaching regarding both abortion and same-sex "marriage" is a teaching which has been "set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church"? If anyone then dissents from such teachings, he or she is not in communion with the Church. In his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, No. 74, Pope John Paul II stated clearly that Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it."
This seems to be lost on some.
Canon 1184: "Unless they have given some signs of repentance before their death, the following are to be deprived of ecclesiastical funeral rites....(3) '..manifest sinners for whom ecclesiastical funeral rites cannot be granted without public scandal to the faithful."
And, in an obvious reference to the scandalous Kennedy funeral, Archbishop Burke asserted that when a politician is associated "with greatly sinful acts about fundamental questions like abortion and marriage, his repentance must also be public." See here.
Bearing this in mind, read what Joe Sacerdo has to say about Father Bryan Hehir and the funeral of the late Senator from Massachusetts. Joe's excellent article may be found here.
In his Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Ad Tuendam Fidem (one has to wonder if some ecclesiastics have ever read it), Pope John Paul II wrote:
"To protect the faith of the Catholic Church against errors arising from certain members of the Christian faithful, especially from among those dedicated to the various disciplines of sacred theology, we, whose principal duty is to confirm the brethren in the faith (Lk 22:32), consider it absolutely necessary to add to the existing texts of the Code of Canon Law and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, new norms which expressly impose the obligation of upholding truths proposed in a definitive way by the Magisterium of the Church, and which also establish related canonical sanctions....
Canon 750 of the Code of Canon Law will now consist of two paragraphs; the first will present the text of the existing canon; the second will contain a new text. Thus, canon 750, in its complete form, will read:
Canon 750 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.
§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church."
Is there any doubt that the Church's teaching regarding both abortion and same-sex "marriage" is a teaching which has been "set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church"? If anyone then dissents from such teachings, he or she is not in communion with the Church. In his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, No. 74, Pope John Paul II stated clearly that Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it."
This seems to be lost on some.
Canon 1184: "Unless they have given some signs of repentance before their death, the following are to be deprived of ecclesiastical funeral rites....(3) '..manifest sinners for whom ecclesiastical funeral rites cannot be granted without public scandal to the faithful."
Thursday, July 01, 2010
Father Emile "Mike" Boutin: Priests should not be celibate and homosexuality is not behind the sexual abuse scandals in the Church
Father Emile "Mike" Boutin, the priest charged with indecent assault and battery on a 21 year- old adult male, has said that priests should not be celibate, writing, "Should priests be celibate today? No. Celibacy should be its own charism in the Church, for those who are called to it." (See here). In another Blog post, Fr. Boutin ridicules Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone while asserting that homosexuality is not behind the sexual abuse scandals in the Church. He writes, "...contrary to Cardinal Bertone's absolutely outlandish claims, there are no studies that suggest that homosexuality is the cause of this scandal, but there certainly are plenty of studies that loudly proclaim that the attitudes of bishops like Cardinal Bertone certainly contributed to the climate that encouraged it." (See here).
Actually, many studies [such as the John Jay Study] have shown that most of the abuse which has taken place within the Church has been homosexual in nature. Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons [and others] have said that Cardinal Bertone was correct. See here.
Father Boutin's rejection of clerical celibacy is troubling. Vatican II teaches us that: "Through virginity, then, or celibacy observed for the kingdom of heaven (cf. Mt 19:12), priests are consecrated to Christ by a new and exceptional reason. They adhere to him more easily with an undivided heart (cf. 1 Cor 7: 32-34), they dedicate themselves more freely in him and through him to the service of God and men, and they more expeditiously minister to his kingdom and the work of heavenly regeneration, and thus they are apt to accept, in a broad sense, paternity in Christ. In this way they profess themselves before men as willing to be dedicated to the office committed to them - namely, to commit the faithful to one man and to present them as a chaste virgin to Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2) and thus to evoke the mysterious marriage established by Christ and fully to be manifested in the future, in which the Church has Christ as her only spouse. They give, moreover, a living sign of the world to come, by a faith and charity already made present, in which the children of the resurrection neither marry nor take wives." (Presbyterorum Ordinis, No. 16).
Actually, many studies [such as the John Jay Study] have shown that most of the abuse which has taken place within the Church has been homosexual in nature. Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons [and others] have said that Cardinal Bertone was correct. See here.
Father Boutin's rejection of clerical celibacy is troubling. Vatican II teaches us that: "Through virginity, then, or celibacy observed for the kingdom of heaven (cf. Mt 19:12), priests are consecrated to Christ by a new and exceptional reason. They adhere to him more easily with an undivided heart (cf. 1 Cor 7: 32-34), they dedicate themselves more freely in him and through him to the service of God and men, and they more expeditiously minister to his kingdom and the work of heavenly regeneration, and thus they are apt to accept, in a broad sense, paternity in Christ. In this way they profess themselves before men as willing to be dedicated to the office committed to them - namely, to commit the faithful to one man and to present them as a chaste virgin to Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2) and thus to evoke the mysterious marriage established by Christ and fully to be manifested in the future, in which the Church has Christ as her only spouse. They give, moreover, a living sign of the world to come, by a faith and charity already made present, in which the children of the resurrection neither marry nor take wives." (Presbyterorum Ordinis, No. 16).
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Former Newsweek editor slams New York Times for creating its "own version of the scandal."
Kenneth Woodward, Newsweek's former religion editor, said that the New York Times has not been fair in its recent attempts to link the Pope with Church sex abuse cover up. See here. That's really putting it mildly. The New York Times is guilty of calumny. So too is Father James Scahill*. And it is time for Father Scahill to issue an apology to our Holy Father for this calumny and to the entire Church for his blasphemous assertion that the Catholic Church - the Mystical Body of Christ Jesus - is "insidiously evil."
Throughout all of this ugly hate campaign directed against Pope Benedict XVI, our Holy Father has been [ and this doesn't surprise me in the least] a shining example of humility and grace. It was the great Saint Francis de Sales who advised, "If you are falsely accused, excuse yourself meekly, denying your guilt, for so much you owe to truth and the edification of your neighbor. But if, after your true and honest excuse, your accusers persist, give yourself no further trouble, and do not persevere in your defense, for having paid tribute to truth, now pay tribute to humility."
* See here.
Related reading: Will VOTF, the anti-Catholic dissent group, apologize for its calumny?
Throughout all of this ugly hate campaign directed against Pope Benedict XVI, our Holy Father has been [ and this doesn't surprise me in the least] a shining example of humility and grace. It was the great Saint Francis de Sales who advised, "If you are falsely accused, excuse yourself meekly, denying your guilt, for so much you owe to truth and the edification of your neighbor. But if, after your true and honest excuse, your accusers persist, give yourself no further trouble, and do not persevere in your defense, for having paid tribute to truth, now pay tribute to humility."
* See here.
Related reading: Will VOTF, the anti-Catholic dissent group, apologize for its calumny?
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
How serious is the sin of scandal when committed by a priest?

In recent posts I have examined Father James Scahill's blasphemous assertion that the Holy Catholic Church is "insidiously evil." Just how serious is the sin of scandal when committed by a priest? St. Alphonsus De Liguori, a Doctor of the Church and a moral theologian, explains that, "The Lord ordained in Leviticus that for the sin of a single priest a calf should be offered, as well as for the sins of the entire people. From this Innocent III concludes that the sin of a priest is as grievous as the sins of the whole people. The reason is, says the Pontiff, that by his sin the priest leads the entire people into sin ('Unde conjicitur quod peccatum Sacerdotis totius multitudinis peccato coaequatur, quia Sacerdos in suo peccato totam fecit delinquere multitudinem' - In Consecr. Pont. s. I.) And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment. St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
Canon 1364 of the Code of Canon Law: "...an apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication and if a cleric, he can also be punished by the penalties mentioned in can. 1336.."
Canon 1364 of the Code of Canon Law: "...an apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication and if a cleric, he can also be punished by the penalties mentioned in can. 1336.."
Friday, April 09, 2010
A Dominican puts things in perspective...
From The Tablet:
Should I stay or should I go?
Clerical-abuse scandal
Timothy Radcliffe
As the scandal of child sexual abuse and its cover-up swirls around the Church, some Catholics are considering their options as regards their very membership of the institution. Here a former Master of the Dominicans explains why the Church is stuck with him, whatever happens
Fresh revelations of sexual abuse by priests in Germany and Italy have provoked a tide of anger and disgust. I have received emails from people all around Europe asking how can they possibly remain in the Church? I was even sent a form with which to renounce my membership of the Church. Why stay?
First of all, why go? Some people feel that they can no longer remain associated with an institution that is so corrupt and dangerous for children. The suffering of so many children is indeed horrific. They must be our first concern. Nothing that I will write is intended in any way to lessen our horror at the evil of sexual abuse. But the statistics for the US, from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2004, suggest that Catholic clergy do not offend more than the married clergy of other Churches.
Some surveys even give a lower level of offence for Catholic priests. They are less likely to offend than lay school teachers, and perhaps half as likely as the general population. Celibacy does not push people to abuse children. It is simply untrue to imagine that leaving the Church for another denomination would make one’s children safer. We must face the terrible fact that the abuse of children is widespread in every part of society. To make the Church the scapegoat would be a cover-up.
But what about the cover-up within the Church? Have not our bishops been shockingly irresponsible in moving offenders around, not reporting them to the police and so perpetuating the abuse? Yes, sometimes. But the great majority of these cases go back to the 1960s and 1970s, when bishops often regarded sexual abuse as a sin rather than also a pathological condition, and when lawyers and psychologists often reassured them that it was safe to reassign priests after treatment. It is unjust to project backwards an awareness of the nature and seriousness of sexual abuse which simply did not exist then. It was only the rise of feminism in the late 1970s which, by shedding light on the violence of some men against women, alerted us to the terrible damage done to vulnerable children.
But what about the Vatican? Pope Benedict has taken a strong line in tackling this issue as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and since becoming Pope. Now the finger is pointed at him. It appears that some cases reported to the CDF under his watch were not dealt with. Isn’t the Pope’s credibility undermined? There are demonstrators in front of St Peter’s calling for his resignation. I am morally certain that he bears no blame here.
It is generally imagined that the Vatican is a vast and efficient organisation. In fact it is tiny. The CDF only employs 45 people, dealing with doctrinal and disciplinary issues for a Church which has 1.3 billion members, 17 per cent of the world’s population, and some 400,000 priests. When I dealt with the CDF as Master of the Dominican Order, it was obvious that they were struggling to cope. Documents slipped through the cracks. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger lamented to me that the staff was simply too small for the job.
People are furious with the Vatican’s failure to open up its files and offer a clear explanation of what happened. Why is it so secretive? Angry and hurt Catholics feel a right to transparent government. I agree. But we must, in justice, understand why the Vatican is so self-protective. There were more martyrs in the twentieth century than in all the previous centuries combined. Bishops and priests, Religious and laity were assassinated in Western Europe, in Soviet countries, in Africa, Latin America and Asia.
Many Catholics still suffer imprisonment and death for their faith. Of course, the Vatican tends to stress confidentiality; this has been necessary to protect the Church from people who wish to destroy her. So it is understandable that the Vatican reacts aggressively to demands for transparency and will read legitimate requests for openness as a form of persecution. And some people in the media do, without any doubt, wish to damage the credibility of the Church.*
But we owe a debt of gratitude to the press for its insistence that the Church face its failures. If it had not been for the media, then this shameful abuse might have remained unaddressed.
Confidentiality is also a consequence of the Church’s insistence on the right of everyone accused to keep their good name until they are proved to be guilty. This is very hard for our society to understand, whose media destroy people’s reputations without a thought.
Why go? If it is to find a safer haven, a less corrupt Church, then I think that you will be disappointed. I too long for more transparent government, more open debate, but the Church’s secrecy is understandable, and sometimes necessary. To understand is not always to condone, but necessary if we are to act justly.
Why stay? I must lay my cards on the table; even if the Church were obviously worse than other Churches, I still would not go. I am not a Catholic because our Church is the best, or even because I like Catholicism. I do love much about my Church but there are aspects of it which I dislike. I am not a Catholic because of a consumer option for an ecclesiastical Waitrose rather than Tesco, but because I believe that it embodies something which is essential to the Christian witness to the Resurrection, visible unity.
When Jesus died, his community fell apart. He had been betrayed, denied, and most of his disciples fled. It was chiefly the women who accompanied him to the end. On Easter Day, he appeared to the disciples. This was more than the physical resuscitation of a dead corpse.
In him God triumphed over all that destroys community: sin, cowardice, lies, misunderstanding, suffering and death. The Resurrection was made visible to the world in the astonishing sight of a community reborn. These cowards and deniers were gathered together again. They were not a reputable bunch, and shamefaced at what they had done, but once again they were one. The unity of the Church is a sign that all the forces that fragment and scatter are defeated in Christ.
All Christians are one in the Body of Christ. I have deepest respect and affection for Christians from other Churches who nurture and inspire me. But this unity in Christ needs some visible embodiment. Christianity is not a vague spirituality but a religion of incarnation, in which the deepest truths take the physical and sometimes institutional form. Historically this unity has found its focus in Peter, the Rock in Matthew, Mark and Luke, and the shepherd of the flock in John’s gospel.
From the beginning and throughout history, Peter has often been a wobbly rock, a source of scandal, corrupt, and yet this is the one – and his successors – whose task is to hold us together so that we may witness to Christ’s defeat on Easter Day of sin’s power to divide. And so the Church is stuck with me whatever happens. We may be embarrassed to admit that we are Catholics, but Jesus kept shameful company from the beginning.
* Such as The New York Times.
Many people are using this scandal as an excuse to attack Christ's Church. There is indeed a cleansing taking place within the Church. But those who would gloat should instead be offering prayer and reparation. For "the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? And if the righteous man is scarcely saved, where will the impious and sinner appear?" (2 Peter 4: 17, 18).
Indeed in our time impious men have condoned the worst form of child abuse: abortion, the killing of these innocents. What will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? Our Lady told Sister Agnes Sasagawa on October 13, 1973, the actual anniversary of the final visions and miracle of Fatima, "As I told you, 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, and bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their Confreres. The Church and altars will be vandalized. 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."
Judgment has begun with the household of God. Let him who has ears heed what the Spirit is saying.
Should I stay or should I go?
Clerical-abuse scandal
Timothy Radcliffe
As the scandal of child sexual abuse and its cover-up swirls around the Church, some Catholics are considering their options as regards their very membership of the institution. Here a former Master of the Dominicans explains why the Church is stuck with him, whatever happens
Fresh revelations of sexual abuse by priests in Germany and Italy have provoked a tide of anger and disgust. I have received emails from people all around Europe asking how can they possibly remain in the Church? I was even sent a form with which to renounce my membership of the Church. Why stay?
First of all, why go? Some people feel that they can no longer remain associated with an institution that is so corrupt and dangerous for children. The suffering of so many children is indeed horrific. They must be our first concern. Nothing that I will write is intended in any way to lessen our horror at the evil of sexual abuse. But the statistics for the US, from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2004, suggest that Catholic clergy do not offend more than the married clergy of other Churches.
Some surveys even give a lower level of offence for Catholic priests. They are less likely to offend than lay school teachers, and perhaps half as likely as the general population. Celibacy does not push people to abuse children. It is simply untrue to imagine that leaving the Church for another denomination would make one’s children safer. We must face the terrible fact that the abuse of children is widespread in every part of society. To make the Church the scapegoat would be a cover-up.
But what about the cover-up within the Church? Have not our bishops been shockingly irresponsible in moving offenders around, not reporting them to the police and so perpetuating the abuse? Yes, sometimes. But the great majority of these cases go back to the 1960s and 1970s, when bishops often regarded sexual abuse as a sin rather than also a pathological condition, and when lawyers and psychologists often reassured them that it was safe to reassign priests after treatment. It is unjust to project backwards an awareness of the nature and seriousness of sexual abuse which simply did not exist then. It was only the rise of feminism in the late 1970s which, by shedding light on the violence of some men against women, alerted us to the terrible damage done to vulnerable children.
But what about the Vatican? Pope Benedict has taken a strong line in tackling this issue as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and since becoming Pope. Now the finger is pointed at him. It appears that some cases reported to the CDF under his watch were not dealt with. Isn’t the Pope’s credibility undermined? There are demonstrators in front of St Peter’s calling for his resignation. I am morally certain that he bears no blame here.
It is generally imagined that the Vatican is a vast and efficient organisation. In fact it is tiny. The CDF only employs 45 people, dealing with doctrinal and disciplinary issues for a Church which has 1.3 billion members, 17 per cent of the world’s population, and some 400,000 priests. When I dealt with the CDF as Master of the Dominican Order, it was obvious that they were struggling to cope. Documents slipped through the cracks. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger lamented to me that the staff was simply too small for the job.
People are furious with the Vatican’s failure to open up its files and offer a clear explanation of what happened. Why is it so secretive? Angry and hurt Catholics feel a right to transparent government. I agree. But we must, in justice, understand why the Vatican is so self-protective. There were more martyrs in the twentieth century than in all the previous centuries combined. Bishops and priests, Religious and laity were assassinated in Western Europe, in Soviet countries, in Africa, Latin America and Asia.
Many Catholics still suffer imprisonment and death for their faith. Of course, the Vatican tends to stress confidentiality; this has been necessary to protect the Church from people who wish to destroy her. So it is understandable that the Vatican reacts aggressively to demands for transparency and will read legitimate requests for openness as a form of persecution. And some people in the media do, without any doubt, wish to damage the credibility of the Church.*
But we owe a debt of gratitude to the press for its insistence that the Church face its failures. If it had not been for the media, then this shameful abuse might have remained unaddressed.
Confidentiality is also a consequence of the Church’s insistence on the right of everyone accused to keep their good name until they are proved to be guilty. This is very hard for our society to understand, whose media destroy people’s reputations without a thought.
Why go? If it is to find a safer haven, a less corrupt Church, then I think that you will be disappointed. I too long for more transparent government, more open debate, but the Church’s secrecy is understandable, and sometimes necessary. To understand is not always to condone, but necessary if we are to act justly.
Why stay? I must lay my cards on the table; even if the Church were obviously worse than other Churches, I still would not go. I am not a Catholic because our Church is the best, or even because I like Catholicism. I do love much about my Church but there are aspects of it which I dislike. I am not a Catholic because of a consumer option for an ecclesiastical Waitrose rather than Tesco, but because I believe that it embodies something which is essential to the Christian witness to the Resurrection, visible unity.
When Jesus died, his community fell apart. He had been betrayed, denied, and most of his disciples fled. It was chiefly the women who accompanied him to the end. On Easter Day, he appeared to the disciples. This was more than the physical resuscitation of a dead corpse.
In him God triumphed over all that destroys community: sin, cowardice, lies, misunderstanding, suffering and death. The Resurrection was made visible to the world in the astonishing sight of a community reborn. These cowards and deniers were gathered together again. They were not a reputable bunch, and shamefaced at what they had done, but once again they were one. The unity of the Church is a sign that all the forces that fragment and scatter are defeated in Christ.
All Christians are one in the Body of Christ. I have deepest respect and affection for Christians from other Churches who nurture and inspire me. But this unity in Christ needs some visible embodiment. Christianity is not a vague spirituality but a religion of incarnation, in which the deepest truths take the physical and sometimes institutional form. Historically this unity has found its focus in Peter, the Rock in Matthew, Mark and Luke, and the shepherd of the flock in John’s gospel.
From the beginning and throughout history, Peter has often been a wobbly rock, a source of scandal, corrupt, and yet this is the one – and his successors – whose task is to hold us together so that we may witness to Christ’s defeat on Easter Day of sin’s power to divide. And so the Church is stuck with me whatever happens. We may be embarrassed to admit that we are Catholics, but Jesus kept shameful company from the beginning.
* Such as The New York Times.
Many people are using this scandal as an excuse to attack Christ's Church. There is indeed a cleansing taking place within the Church. But those who would gloat should instead be offering prayer and reparation. For "the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? And if the righteous man is scarcely saved, where will the impious and sinner appear?" (2 Peter 4: 17, 18).
Indeed in our time impious men have condoned the worst form of child abuse: abortion, the killing of these innocents. What will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? Our Lady told Sister Agnes Sasagawa on October 13, 1973, the actual anniversary of the final visions and miracle of Fatima, "As I told you, 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, and bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their Confreres. The Church and altars will be vandalized. 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."
Judgment has begun with the household of God. Let him who has ears heed what the Spirit is saying.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)