FemChurch hates orthodoxy and masculinity

Crisis Magazine on the radical feminist attack on orthodoxy and masculinity here.

Today’s radical feminism was born from Marxism. And its disciples believe that, in order to establish a Marxist society, men need to be marginalized." - Sharon Ambrose, from her essay entitled "Man Down."

And the marginalization of men continues unabated throughout our sin-sick culture. And this includes the Church.

Only effeminate, emasculated "men" are deemed acceptable in the New Church. Men who have a backbone or who act like men are deemed a threat by radical feminists who demand absolute control of a church made in their image and likeness.

While on a retreat several years ago, a Religious Sister (a Presentation Sister) told me that she hates men. Presumably this would include Jesus and His Apostles as well as Saint Joseph and every single Pope and male saint since the Church's founding.

Imagine if a priest gave a homily and proclaimed that he hated women. How would such a statement be received?

The Church is sick with a virus my friends. The virus of anti-masculinity. I have witnessed this misandry firsthand as I attempted to volunteer at my parish years ago only to be turned down so that a woman could serve instead.  The fact that I'm a military veteran who refuses to embrace the homosexual agenda is most likely a major factor in this discrimination.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke has said that, "the radical feminism which has assaulted the Church and society since the 1960s has left men very marginalized...Unfortunately, the radical feminist movement strongly influenced the Church, leading the Church to constantly address women’s issues at the expense of addressing critical issues important to men; the importance of the father, whether in the union of marriage or not; the importance of a father to children; the importance of fatherhood for priests; the critical impact of a manly character; the emphasis on the particular gifts that God gives to men for the good of the whole society.

The goodness and importance of men became very obscured, and for all practical purposes, were not emphasized at all. This is despite the fact that it was a long tradition in the Church, especially through the devotion of St. Joseph, to stress the manly character of the man who sacrifices his life for the sake of the home, who prepares with chivalry to defend his wife and his children and who works to provide the livelihood for the family. So much of this tradition of heralding the heroic nature of manhood has been lost in the Church today."

Lost because of a demonic movement which seeks to effeminize the Church and render it impotent before the Devil.

FemChurch is both Marxist and Satanic.  Rather than promoting collaboration between men and women, each sex with its unique gifts and genius, it seeks to demonize men and wage a war of misandry and domination to root out masculinity in the Church as something unholy and toxic. See

here.

And we wonder where the vocations went?

Seriously?

Former Vocations Director for the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, defrocked

Crux reports:

WORCESTER, Massachusetts - The Vatican has defrocked a priest who was named in one of the Worcester Diocese of Massachusetts’ largest sex-abuse settlements.

The diocese in a statement Thursday said Peter Inzerillo was laicized at his own request. The decision means Inzerillo 'may not function in any capacity as a priest or be referred to as a priest or as Father.'

The diocese had removed Inzerillo from ministry in 2002, and he had not had faculties for priestly ministry since that time.

Inzerillo served as director of Vocations from 1983 until 1994.

The Telegram & Gazette reports that Inzerillo was accused of sexually assaulting a 19-year-old man who was considering a vocation to the priesthood in 1985.

The victim said he told Inzerillo about being abused by a priest when he was a 13-year-old altar boy; following the disclosure, Inzerillo then also abused him.

Inzerillo was not criminally charged.
The diocese settled the case in 1999 for $300,000, and reassigned Inzerillo to a different parish.

Ordained in 1970, he served at parishes in Leominster and Fitchburg and was also headmaster at St. Peter-Marian High School. A listed number for Inzerillo was not in service Friday.

'It is my fervent prayer that Christ may bring healing and hope to anyone who has been abused by a priest or by anyone in the Catholic Church,' said Bishop Robert J. McManus.

The bishop also encouraged anyone in need of pastoral assistance as a result of clerical abuse to contact the diocesan Victims Assistance Coordinator in the Office of Healing and Prevention."

Director of Vocations...surprised? Father James Aquino, once the Director of the Permanent Diaconate Program, was arrested in Las Vegas on charges of lewd conduct, To Wit: public masturbation.  See here.

Is there really any doubt as to why sexual deviants were placed in charge of priestly vocations and Diaconate training programs?

Recruitment? Perish the thought. Meanwhile, orthodox and heterosexual men free of pathologies have witnessed their vocation relegated to the dust-bin...see here.

But the Homosexualist Lavender Mafia hasn't been able to silence us.  More than 50,000 readers visit this Blog every month.

God works in mysterious ways.

The artificial vocations crisis and Francis the "Merciful"...

Writing on the continued vocations crisis, Father John Zuhlsdorf correctly notes:

"The crisis of priestly vocations is largely artificial.   It has, in some cases, been manufactured.

Tradition is the counter-measure to the crisis.  It works where it is tried.

Also, we need to pray explicitly for vocations and keep the sound of that prayer ringing constantly in the ears of parents and their sons.  Again, I propose that every parish adopt the following prayer, to be prayed while kneeling by the entire congregation at every Sunday Mass immediately after the Gospel..."

Readers of this Blog know that I've been addressing the vocations crisis for years.  My own vocation was sabotaged by the La Salette Missionaries because I oppose the ordination of women to the priesthood.  See here.

Although I have had extensive psychological testing and screening for the United States military (as part of my security clearance for military intelligence) and have received glowing reports which indicate that I am free of any pathologies - including a homosexual inclination, when I contacted the Worcester Diocese (twice) to express my interest in discerning a priestly vocation, I received no response whatsoever.

Meanwhile, the Diocese of Worcester has ordained homosexual men to the priesthood.  For example, a psychological evaluation in 1977 prior to the ordination of Fr. Jean Paul Gagnon  indicated that the candidate had possible "sex role identification" problems. See here.

When I left a comment on Francis' Facebook page detailing my struggle to pursue a vocation to the priesthood, I received no response whatsoever.  And yet, Francis found the time to personally meet with a homosexual activist who claims to be married to another man - Simon Cazal.  See here.

But then, as a pesky orthodox Catholic who actually believes everything contained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no doubt the "merciful" Francis seems me too "rigid" and not open to change.

That's okay though.  I'd rather be a faithful member of the Common Priesthood of the Faithful than Francis' idea of a priest.

For what does it profit a man...you know the rest!

But not to worry folks, all is well.  See here.

The collapse of the priesthood in and around the Boston Archdiocese...

Father John Zuhlsdorf writes about the collapse of vocations to the priesthood in and around the Boston Archdiocese.

For years I've been writing about the duty of fostering vocations and the death wish the modernists have for the priesthood as we know it.  See here.

Francis the Divider: Open to married priests as a "solution" to priest shortage but not open toward dealing with the real problem

Virginity or celibacy for the sake of the kingdom signifies and anticipates heavenly communion. The Catholic Church teaches definitively that it is better and more blessed to remain in the state of Christian virginity or celibacy than it is to be joined in sacramental marriage.

Moreover, Pope John Paul II taught that: "Virginity or celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom of God not only does not contradict the dignity of marriage but presupposes it and confirms it. Marriage and virginity or celibacy are two ways of expressing and living the one mystery of the covenant of God with his people." (Familiaris consortio, 16, AAS 74, 1982, 98).

Vatican II, in its Decree on Priestly Training (Optatam Totius), No. 10 teaches that: "Students who follow the venerable tradition of celibacy according to the holy and fixed laws of their own rite are to be educated to this state with great care. For renouncing thereby the companionship of marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (cf. Mt 19:12), they embrace the Lord with an undivided love altogether befitting the New Covenant, bear witness to the resurrection of the world to come (cf. Lk 20:36), and obtain a most suitable aid for the continual exercise of that perfect charity whereby they can become all things to all men in their priestly ministry."

While Christ does approve of marriage for the Christian clergy, He prefers that they do not marry. Christ made this abundantly clear when He praised His Apostles for giving up "all" to follow Him: "And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold and shall possess life everlasting." (Mt 19: 27-29).

Furthermore, the Holy Spirit explains to us through St. Paul why the state of virginity or celibacy is preferable to the married state for the Christian clergy: "He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided." (1 Cor 7: 32-33).

Francis the Divider, using the "priest shortage" as a pretense, has indicated that he is open to married priests.

In an interview published Thursday in the German newspaper Die Zeit, Francis suggested that married men could be ordained as priests in rural communities facing shortages of priests. But is there really a vocations crisis?


As Archbishop Elden Curtiss explained: "There is much media hype these days about the present and projected shortage of priests and its effect on the sacramental life of the Church. It is time to pay close attention to the dioceses and religious communities reporting increasing numbers of candidates. There have to be reasons for these increases that bear objective analysis from which some conclusions can be drawn.

I personally think the vocation 'crisis' in this country is more artificial and contrived than many people realize. When dioceses and religious communities are unambiguous about ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines these calls; when there is strong support for vocations, and a minimum of dissent about the male celibate priesthood and religious life loyal to the magisterium; when bishop, priests, Religious and lay people are united in vocation ministry—then there are documented increases in the numbers of candidates who respond to the call.

It seems to me that the vocation 'crisis' is precipitated and continued by people who want to change the Church's agenda, by people who do not support orthodox candidates loyal to the magisterial teaching of the Pope and bishops, and by people who actually discourage viable candidates from seeking priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines the ministries.

I am personally aware of certain vocation directors, vocation teams and evaluation boards who turn away candidates who do not support the possibility of ordaining women or who defend the Church's teaching about artificial birth control, or who exhibit a strong piety toward certain devotions, such as the Rosary.

When there is a determined effort to discourage orthodox candidates from priesthood and religious life, then the vocation shortage which results is caused not by a lack of vocations but by deliberate attitudes and policies that deter certain viable candidates.

And the same people who precipitate a decline in vocations by their negative actions call for the ordination of married men and women to replace the vocations they have discouraged. They have a death wish for ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines them. They undermine the vocation ministry they are supposed to champion."

Although I have had extensive psychological testing and screening for the United States military (as part of my security clearance for military intelligence) and have received glowing reports which indicate that I am free of any pathologies - including a homosexual inclination, when I contacted the Worcester Diocese (twice) to express my interest in discerning a priestly vocation, I received no response whatsoever.

Meanwhile, the Diocese of Worcester has ordained homosexual men to the priesthood.  For example, a psychological evaluation in 1977 prior to the ordination of Fr. Jean Paul Gagnon  indicated that the candidate had possible "sex role identification" problems. See here.

Married priests are not the solution Francis.  The time has come for you to demonstrate some honesty and address the homosexual problem and the lack of emotional and spiritual maturity which afflicts so many clergy.

Misandry has spread like a cancer through the Church

"Today’s radical feminism was born from Marxism. And its disciples believe that, in order to establish a Marxist society, men need to be marginalized." - Sharon Ambrose, from her essay entitled "Man Down."

And the marginalization of men continues unabated throughout our sin-sick culture. And this includes the Church.

Only effeminate, emasculated "men" are deemed acceptable in the New Church. Men who have a backbone or who act like men are deemed a threat by radical feminists who demand absolute control of a church made in their image and likeness.

While on a retreat several years ago, a Religious Sister (a Presentation Sister) told me that she hates men. Presumably this would include Jesus and His Apostles as well as Saint Joseph and every single Pope and male saint since the Church's founding.

Imagine if a priest gave a homily and proclaimed that he hated women. How would such a statement be received?

The Church is sick with a virus my friends. The virus of anti-masculinity. I have witnessed this misandry firsthand as I attempted to volunteer at my parish only to be turned down so that a woman could serve instead.  My Diocese won't even let me APPLY to the priesthood.  The fact that I'm a military veteran who refuses to embrace the homosexual agenda is most likely a major factor in this discrimination.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke has said that, "the radical feminism which has assaulted the Church and society since the 1960s has left men very marginalized...Unfortunately, the radical feminist movement strongly influenced the Church, leading the Church to constantly address women’s issues at the expense of addressing critical issues important to men; the importance of the father, whether in the union of marriage or not; the importance of a father to children; the importance of fatherhood for priests; the critical impact of a manly character; the emphasis on the particular gifts that God gives to men for the good of the whole society.

The goodness and importance of men became very obscured, and for all practical purposes, were not emphasized at all. This is despite the fact that it was a long tradition in the Church, especially through the devotion of St. Joseph, to stress the manly character of the man who sacrifices his life for the sake of the home, who prepares with chivalry to defend his wife and his children and who works to provide the livelihood for the family. So much of this tradition of heralding the heroic nature of manhood has been lost in the Church today."

Lost because of a demonic movement which seeks to effeminize the Church and render it impotent before the Devil.

In the New Church, masculinity is anathema

As this article explains:

"Though the New Evangelization has been a major effort in the Catholic Church for over forty years, it has failed to stem the disastrous losses of the faithful in the U.S. The New Evangelization is faltering: since 2000, 14 million Catholics have left the faith, parish religious education participation of children has dropped by 24%, Catholic school attendance has dropped by 19%, baptisms of infants has dropped by 28%, baptism of adults has dropped by 31% and sacramental Catholic marriages have dropped by 41%.[1] Something is desperately wrong with the Church’s approach to the New Evangelization.

The New Emangelization Project has documented that a key driver of the collapse of Catholicism in the U. S. is a serious and growing Catholic “man-crisis”.[2] One third of baptized Catholic men have left the faith and the majority of those who remain “Catholic” neither know nor practice the faith and are not committed to pass the faith along to their children. Recent research shows that large numbers of young Catholic men are leaving the faith to become “Nones”, men who have no religious affiliation.[3] The growing losses of young Catholic men will have a devastating impact on the U.S. Catholic Church in the coming decades, as older Catholic men pass away and young men fail to remain and marry in the Church, accelerating the devastating losses that have already occurred.

While there are massive cultural forces outside of the Church (e.g. secularism, pluralism, anti-Christian bias, radical feminism, pornography, media saturation, etc.) and missteps within the Church (e.g. failure to make men a priority, sex abuse scandals, homosexuality in the priesthood, etc.) that have contributed to the Catholic “man-crisis”, the New Emangelization Project has conducted dozens of interviews with top Catholic men’s evangelists[4] that suggest that a core reason for the “man-crisis” is that bishops and priests have not yet made the evangelization and catechesis of men a clear priority. Men are being ignored by the Church."

Addicted to homosexuality and effeminism, the Cult of Softness has a deep and abiding hatred of real men and anything even remotely resembling masculinity.  I've addressed this truth often at this Blog-  see here for example.

In the New Church, which will accept the Man of Sin, the Cult of Softness will be the New dogma.  Already there is preparation on so very many levels.

The Latin Vulgate (see the Douay-Rheims Bible) indicates that the effeminate will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:10). But the New American Bible, which is used by the USCCB, omits the word effeminate:


1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (Latin Vulgate):

Verse 9: "Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers:

an nescitis quia iniqui regnum Dei non possidebunt nolite errare neque fornicarii neque idolis servientes neque adulteri

Verse 10: Nor the effeminate nor liers with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God.

neque molles neque masculorum concubitores neque fures neque avari neque ebriosi neque maledici neque rapaces regnum Dei possidebunt."


1Corinthians 6: 9-10 (New American Bible) posted online by the USCCB:

Verse 9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites

Verse 10: nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Why do you think this is so?  The Latin Vulgate, which we have obtained from the great St. Jerome, is the most precise translation of the Sacred Scriptures available.  There are many other problems with recent translations of the Scriptures.  But my focus here is on this passage.  Why has the word "effeminate" been dropped from 1 Corinthians 6?

Dr. Leon Podles writes, "Walter Ong, having been formed in a masculine, Jesuit, clerical milieu does not seem to be aware of how feminized Christianity had become even before the 1960s, but he saw a rapid shift in the Catholic Church in the 1960s toward even greater feminization...The contrasts of Christianity, grace and sin, life and death, have been toned down with a considerable loss of emotional power.  Without this power, the popular appeal of the liturgy has declined (even with a more accessible language) and church attendance has plummeted...Even the change from Latin to the vernacular was also a symptom of feminization, according to Ong.  Latin had been a means of maintaining a Latin culture in the Roman Catholic clergy.  A language restricted to men is common; it is a sign of masculine separation from the feminine world.  After it became a learned language, Latin was learned almost exclusively by men.  The system of education that used Latin and centered around Latin literature was centered around contest and disputation and was confined almost entirely to men.  The disappearance of Latin was part of the demasculinization of the clergy.." (The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity, pp. 133-135).

So crippled by radical feminism and effeminate clergy, the Church often finds herself incapable of either giving or receiving fraternal correction.  The Cotton-Candy "Church of Nice" (not the Church founded by Christ Jesus to deliver hard truths and thereby save souls), is the Church of "Who am I to judge?", the Church of empty, bland New Age homilies-  Chicken Soup for the Chicken Catholic. Because I had the audacity to stand up to several women at a parish in Baldwinville, Massachusetts who were disrespecting Our Eucharistic Lord by talking loudly and laughing before the tabernacle as people attempted to prepare for Holy Mass, I was told by the priest that I am a "large man" who is scary and that I would be "ostracized." See here.

This is a favorite tactic of liberals to silence authentic men who are not sissified and who actually possess backbone.

The Cult of Softness permeates the entire Church.  It is passive aggressive and desires total control of everything it comes into contact with.

But it cannot fight head on or on solid ground. That is its weakness.  And it is there we must take the fight.

The Diocese of Worcester and authentic charity

Not long ago, Bishop Robert McManus said that, "At the beginning of Lent, Pope Francis warned us that indifference to God and to neighbor is a real danger in the modern world. The Holy Father urged us to use Lent as a time of interior renewal to reject indifference toward others and to shun a dangerous withdrawal into ourselves. Love, he wrote, conquers indifference."

This is the same Bishop who ignores letters from faithful Catholics expressing concern over doctrinal dissent and liturgical abuse. The same Bishop who callously rescinded Robert Spencer's invitation to speak at the Catholic Men's Conference in Worcester. The same Bishop who has ignored my letters expressing interest in discerning a vocation to the ministerial priesthood. See here for example.

The same Bishop who laughed when I told him my "pastor" wouldn't allow me to have a Mass said for my departed father.

The same Bishop who had too much to drink one day, struck another vehicle, and simply took off- a hit and run as they call it- which resulted in his arrest.
Indifference to God and neighbor IS a real danger in the "modern world."
If only the Bishop could pay more than lip service to this truth. Maybe more of the clerics who serve under him would also catch on.

Oremus.

In his Encyclical Letter Caritas In Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI wrote, Charity is at the heart of the Church's social doctrine. Every responsibility and every commitment spelt out by that doctrine is derived from charity which, according to the teaching of Jesus, is the synthesis of the entire Law (cf. Mt 22:36- 40). It gives real substance to the personal relationship with God and with neighbour; it is the principle not only of micro-relationships (with friends, with family members or within small groups) but also of macro-relationships (social, economic and political ones). For the Church, instructed by the Gospel, charity is everything because, as Saint John teaches (cf. 1 Jn 4:8, 16) and as I recalled in my first Encyclical Letter, “God is love” (Deus Caritas Est): everything has its origin in God's love, everything is shaped by it, everything is directed towards it. Love is God's greatest gift to humanity, it is his promise and our hope."

The Worcester Diocese is not thriving. In fact, it is gradually disintegrating. Parishes are closing.  Many are deserting the Church.  They sense the lack of commitment toward authentic charity.  Many just don't feel welcome.

The Diocese of Worcester is betraying love.  It operates as more of a private clique where a few individuals determine who is welcome at the table and who is not.  Who gets the sacraments and who does not.  Who gets to apply for the priesthood and who doesn't. Who may participate in the life of a parish and who may not.

Saint Gregory the Great said that, "The proof of love is in the works.  Where love exists, it works great things.  But when it ceases to act, it ceases to exist."

Related reading: A deacon who sows hatred.

The Diocese of Worcester and vocations: Are orthodox candidates to the priesthood welcome?

Once again, the Diocese of Worcester is putting out the word that it is looking for men who have "thought of a vocation to the priesthood"

But is this call open to everyone?

Apparently not. See here.

As Archbishop Elden Curtis explained in an article entitled "Crisis in Vocations? What Crisis?": "There is much media hype these days about the present and projected shortage of priests and its effect on the sacramental life of the Church. It is time to pay close attention to the dioceses and religious communities reporting increasing numbers of candidates. There have to be reasons for these increases that bear objective analysis from which some conclusions can be drawn.
I personally think the vocation "crisis" in this country is more artificial and contrived than many people realize. When dioceses and religious communities are unambiguous about ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines these calls; when there is strong support for vocations, and a minimum of dissent about the male celibate priesthood and religious life loyal to the magisterium; when bishop, priests, Religious and lay people are united in vocation ministry—then there are documented increases in the numbers of candidates who respond to the call.

It seems to me that the vocation "crisis" is precipitated and continued by people who want to change the Church's agenda, by people who do not support orthodox candidates loyal to the magisterial teaching of the Pope and bishops, and by people who actually discourage viable candidates from seeking priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines the ministries.

I am personally aware of certain vocation directors, vocation teams and evaluation boards who turn away candidates who do not support the possibility of ordaining women or who defend the Church's teaching about artificial birth control, or who exhibit a strong piety toward certain devotions, such as the Rosary.

When there is a determined effort to discourage orthodox candidates from priesthood and religious life, then the vocation shortage which results is caused not by a lack of vocations but by deliberate attitudes and policies that deter certain viable candidates.

And the same people who precipitate a decline in vocations by their negative actions call for the ordination of married men and women to replace the vocations they have discouraged. They have a death wish for ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines them. They undermine the vocation ministry they are supposed to champion." (Full article here).

Although I have had extensive psychological testing and screening for the United States military (as part of my security clearance for military intelligence) and have received glowing reports which indicate that I am free of any pathologies - including a homosexual inclination, when I contacted the Worcester Diocese (twice) to express my interest in discerning a priestly vocation, I received no response whatsoever.

Meanwhile, the Diocese of Worcester has ordained homosexual men to the priesthood.  For example, a psychological evaluation in 1977 prior to the ordination of Fr. Jean Paul Gagnon  indicated that the candidate had possible "sex role identification" problems. See here.

Related reading: Expert on Islam prevented from speaking at the Diocese of Worcester's "Catholic" Men's Conference.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke on the war against masculinity

In an article which may be found here, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke says,  "I think there has been a great confusion with regard to the specific vocation of men in marriage and of men in general in the Church during the past 50 years or so. It’s due to a number of factors, but the radical feminism which has assaulted the Church and society since the 1960s has left men very marginalized.

Unfortunately, the radical feminist movement strongly influenced the Church, leading the Church to constantly address women’s issues at the expense of addressing critical issues important to men; the importance of the father, whether in the union of marriage or not; the importance of a father to children; the importance of fatherhood for priests; the critical impact of a manly character; the emphasis on the particular gifts that God gives to men for the good of the whole society.

The goodness and importance of men became very obscured, and for all practical purposes, were not emphasized at all. This is despite the fact that it was a long tradition in the Church, especially through the devotion of St. Joseph, to stress the manly character of the man who sacrifices his life for the sake of the home, who prepares with chivalry to defend his wife and his children and who works to provide the livelihood for the family. So much of this tradition of heralding the heroic nature of manhood has been lost in the Church today.

All of those virtuous characteristics of the male sex are very important for a child to observe as they grow up and mature. The healthy relationship with the father helps the child to prepare to move from the intimate love of the mother, building a discipline so that the child can avoid excessive self‑love. This ensures that the child is able to identify himself or herself properly as a person in relationship with others; this is critical for both boys and girls.

A child’s relationship with their father is key to a child’s self‑identification, which takes places when we are growing up. We need that very close and affirming relationship with the mother, but at the same time, it is the relationship with the father, which is of its nature more distant but not less loving, which disciplines our lives. It teaches a child to lead a selfless life, ready to embrace whatever sacrifices are necessary to be true to God and to one another.

I recall in the mid-1970’s, young men telling me that they were, in a certain way, frightened by marriage because of the radicalizing and self-focused attitudes of women that were emerging at that time. These young men were concerned that entering a marriage would simply not work because of a constant and insistent demanding of rights for women. These divisions between women and men have gotten worse since then.

Everyone understands that women have and can be abused by men. Men who abuse women are not true men, but false men who have violated their own manly character by being abusive to women.

The crisis between man and woman has been made much worse by a complete collapse of catechesis in the Church. Young men grew up without proper instruction with regard to their faith and to the knowledge of their vocation. Young men were not being taught that they are made in the image of God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit. These young men were not taught to know all those virtues that are necessary in order to be a man and to fulfill the particular gifts of being male.

Making things worse, there was a very fluffy, superficial kind of catechetical approach to the question of human sexuality and the nature of the marital relationship.

At the same time, in society, there came an explosion of pornography, which is particularly corrosive for men because it terribly distorts the whole reality of human sexuality. It leads men and women to view their human sexuality apart from a relationship between a man and woman in marriage.

In truth, the gift of sexual attraction is directed toward marriage, and any kind of sexual union belongs properly only within marriage. But the whole world of pornography corrupts young people into believing that their sexual capacity is for their own entertainment and pleasure, and becomes a consuming lust, which is one of the seven capital sins.

The gift of human sexuality is turned into a means of self‑gratification often at the expense of another person, whether in heterosexual relations or in homosexual relations. A man who has not been formed with a proper identity as a man and as a father figure will ultimately become very unhappy. These poorly formed men become addicted to pornography, sexual promiscuity, alcohol, drugs, and the whole gamut of addictions..."

Now I've been saying this for years at this Blog.  The Cult of Softness has infected the clergy and Christianity is increasingly being effeminized.

Dr. Leon Podles, in his book entitled "The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity," notes that, "Many Catholic dioceses actively discourage vocations to the priesthood, in a transparent attempt to put pressure on Rome to allow the ordination of women, or at least of married men...Because Christianity is now seen as a part of the sphere of life proper to women rather than to men, it sometimes attracts men whose own masculinity is somewhat doubtful.  By this I do not mean homosexuals, although a certain type of homosexual is included.  Rather religion is seen as a safe field, a refuge from the challenges of life, and therefore attracts men who are fearful of making the break with the secure world of childhood dominated by women.  These are men who have problems following the path of masculine development..." (p. XIV).

Dr. Podles cites a study by Lewis M. Terman and Catherine Cox Miles, which included a Masculinity-Femininity test, writing, "Terman and Miles gathered data from three groups: Catholic seminarians, Protestant seminarians, and Protestant ministers.  As one might expect, men attracted to the religious life differed strikingly in their masculinity from the general male population: 'The Catholic student priests score at a point far less masculine than any other male group of their age; in their early twenties they are more feminine than the general male population at middle life.  The Protestant theological students in their middle tewnties are, however, more feminine than they and exceed in femininity the sixty-year-old man of equal education.  The adult ministerial group is barely more masculine than the Protestant theological students and less so than the student priests.  They exceed in femininity the college men of the seventh decade.'  Terman and Miles concluded that 'some dominant factors must be present in all three groups to make them, without regard to age, conspicuously and almost equally lacking in mental masculinity.'  Interestingly enough, the similarities between the Protestant and Catholic groups and the Catholic group's slightly higher scores ruled out celibacy as a major factor in a lack of masculinity..." (P. 9).

Effeminacy (and here we are not necessarily speaking of homosexuality), has become the forgotten vice in seminary formation.  This as many masculine men continue to be excluded from pursuing priestly vocations and masculinity itself is banished to the margins of the Church.

I should know.  I'm one of them.

Nemo dat quod non habet!

Writing for the Catholic Herald, Francis Rocca reports that, "Pope Francis has said that bishops should act not like ambitious corporate executives, but humble evangelists and men of prayer, willing to sacrifice everything for their flocks.

'We don’t need a manager, the CEO of a business, nor someone who shares our pettiness or low aspirations,' the Pope said yesterday. 'We need someone who knows how to rise to the height from which God sees us, in order to guide us to him.'

Pope Francis’s words came in a speech to the Congregation for Bishops, the Vatican body that advises him on the appointment of bishops around the world.
He stressed the importance of self-sacrifice in a bishop’s ministry, which he described as a kind of martyrdom.

'The courage to die, the generosity to offer one’s own life and exhaust one’s self for the flock are inscribed in the episcopate’s DNA,' he said. 'The episcopate is not for itself but for the Church, for the flock, for others, above all for those whom the world considers only worth throwing away.'

Pope Francis listed several desirable virtues in potential bishops, including a 'capacity for healthy, balanced relationships,' 'upright behaviour,' 'orthodoxy and fidelity' to Church doctrine; and 'transparency and detachment in administrating the goods of the community.'

The Pope laid special emphasis on a bishop’s ability to evangelise and pray.
In preaching the Gospel, bishops should be appealing rather than censorious, upholding Church teaching 'not in order to measure how far the world falls short of the truth it contains, but to fascinate the world, enchant it with the beauty of love, seduce it by offering the freedom of the Gospel.'" (Full article may be found here).

Pope John Paul II, in his book entitled "Rise, Let Us Be On Our Way," in a chapter entitled simply "The Shepherd," writes, "Christian tradition has adopted the biblical image of the shepherd in three forms: as the one who carries the lost sheep on his shoulders, as the one who leads his flocks to green pastures, and as the one who gathers his sheep with his staff and protects them from danger. 

In all three images there is a recurring theme: The shepherd is for the sheep, not the sheep for the shepherd.  He is bound so closely to them, if he is a real shepherd, that he is ready to lay down his life for the sheep (John 10:11).  Every year during the twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth week of Ordinary Time, the Liturgy of the Hours presents Saint Augustine's long sermon 'On the Shepherds.'  With reference to the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, the bishop of Hippo strongly rebukes evil shepherds, who are concerned not for the sheep but only for themselves.  'Let us see how the word of God, that flatters no one, addresses the shepherds who are feeding themselves, not the sheep.  'You take the milk, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fatlings; but you do not feed my sheep.  The weak you have not strenghtened, the sick you have not healed, the crippled you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought; any strong one you have killed; and my sheep are scattered because there is no shepherd.'" (pp. 63-64).

And in the chapter entitled "Courageous in Faith," the Holy Father, citing Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski, writes, "'The bishop has the duty to serve not only through his words and through the liturgy, but also through offering up his sufferings.'  Cardinal Wyszynski returned to these thoughts again on another occasion: 'Lack of courage in a bishop is the beginning of disaster.  Can he still be an apostle?  Witnessing to the Truth is essential for an apostle.  And this always demands courage.'  These words are also his: 'The greatest weakness in an apostle is fear.  What gives rise to fear is lack of confidence in the power of the Lord; this is what oppresses the heart and tightens the throat.  The apostle then ceases to offer witness.  Does he remain an apostle?  The disciples who abandoned the Master increased the courage of the executioners.  Silence in the presence of the enemies of a cause encourages them.  Fear in an apostle is the principal ally of the enemies of the cause'...Truly, there can be no turning one's back upon the truth, ceasing to proclaim it, hiding it, even if it is a hard truth that can only be revealed at the cost of great suffering.  'You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free' (John 8:32): this is our duty and our source of strength!  Here there is no room for compromise nor for an opportunistic recourse to human diplomacy.  We have to bear witness to the truth, even at the cost of persecutions, even to the shedding of our blood, like Christ Himself..." (pp. 190-191).

Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz (God love him) has displayed the courage of a real shepherd.  Back in 1996, His Excellency warned that membership in certain dissenting groups "is always perilous to the Catholic Faith and most often is totally incompatible with the Catholic Faith."  See here.

It would appear that the Bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, lacks this same courage.  When the faithful write him with concerns over liturgical abuses or doctrinal dissent, they are most often ignored.

When I wrote the Bishop expressing interest in the priesthood, I received no response whatsoever.  See here.  I guess Bishop McManus considers me worth throwing away.

If we want to "enchant the world with the beauty of love," we must first practice love ourselves.

There is an old Latin saying: Nemo dat quod non habet!

And it applies here.

"..a culture that produces weak and vacillating men will produce weak and vacillating priests.."

Some years ago, Brad Miner, in an interview with Zenit, said that: "The notion of the gentleman has been out of fashion for some time, especially because of its connection to boorish, Victorian-era stoicism..."

When asked, "What is a 'complete gentleman?", Miner responded, "First, he is an inheritor of the medieval tradition of knightly prowess, and the Victorian ideal of gentlemanly decorum. As a means for recovering a sense of the complete gentleman, I propose three archetypes: the warrior, the lover and the monk...I say that he is a warrior, because he knows there are things worth fighting for and is willing and able to fight; that he's a lover, because he treasures the woman in his life, gives her what she wants and allows her to free him from the tyranny of his own ego; and that he is a monk in that he values learning and silence.

I think the great, lost virtue in our time is restraint: the recognition that there is a difference between the public and the private. The complete gentleman practices what I call the art of "sprezzatura," which means that he is who he is and does what he does without drawing too much attention to himself in the process.

And when asked, "One commentator has described today's adolescent boys and young men as 'wimps and barbarians.' What has given rise to this phenomenon?"  Miner answered, "I suppose the 'barbarians' are the boys animated by the macho violence of hip-hop culture and the 'wimps' are the kids politicized by the various 'isms' of the New Age...There are many causes of this degradation, but it all comes down to a simple fact: Young people tend to lack a sense of calling or mission. This is partly what Michael Barone is getting at in his recent book 'Hard America, Soft America.' We have teen-agers who seem unable to cope with the rigors of competition and then 30-year-olds who are capable of running the world.

We live in a nation that has achieved an unprecedented level of luxury and in an age in which technology encourages passivity. Young people ought to be physically fit, if possible, morally responsible and intellectually active. If education does nothing but raise doubts, and culture mostly encourages predation, then the 'smart' kids will be weak and 'tough' kids will be cruel.

The antidote to this is balance and restraint. We need scholarship, devotion and self-control."

And then, referring to Cardinal Newman's famous passage describing the Victorian-era gentleman, he added, "Without question, he considered saintliness preferable to gentlemanliness, but his point of reference was an ideal of the gentleman that had long ago lost its connection to chivalry. I believe the complete gentleman recovers that connection, especially chivalry's martial quality.

Newman was reacting to the portraits of the gentleman as drawn by writers such as Lord Chesterfield, Samuel Smiles and Charles Kingsley. Having summarized their views, Newman says they are fine — as far as they go. Trouble is, they don't go far enough. It's as though the man they describe is what he is by virtue of his clothes; that gentlemanliness is merely something you wear. The biblical phrase 'whited sepulchers' comes to mind.

A real man, we might say, was in Newman's view someone who 'discerns the end in every beginning,' which means he lives more fundamentally, less superficially.

He is patient and forbearing on philosophical principles — not on the basis of social expediency; he 'submits to pain, because it is inevitable, to bereavement, because it is irreparable, and to death, because it is his destiny.' This is a flesh-and-blood man with, perhaps, emphasis on the blood..."

And when Zenit asked him, "How can men exhibit the manly virtues, but at the same time exhibit the appropriate sensitivities? In other words, what is authentic manhood"? Miner replied: "At the risk of seeming to duck the question, I have to say that each man must answer in his own way. Authenticity is inseparable from individuality. I have no 'Seven Steps to Manliness.'  But I will say this: We do well to reconsider the ancient qualities of the knight, which are loyalty, generosity, courtesy, honor, courage and restraint. It's fair to say that men in the Middle Ages mostly fell short of the ideal, as probably we will today. But for heaven's sake, let's at least aspire to a higher standard.

If I could give one rather reckless bit of advice to American men, it's this: Learn restraint, learn to fight, remember that you will die, and meditate devoutly on the fact that death is preferable to dishonor....a culture that produces weak and vacillating men will produce weak and vacillating priests."

Increasingly, the Church is being feminized and effeminized. This is a great tragedy because, as Dr. Leon Podles explains, "Since men continue to want to be masculine, they will continue (unless there are major changes in the Church) to put a greater or lesser distance between themselves and the Church....Feminism and homosexual propaganda dominate the liberal churches, and both drive men even further away. Apart from some groups of evangelical Protestants, whose commitment to Scripture has made them aware of the lack of men and led them to use tactics which have had at least initial effectiveness, all other varieties of Western Christianity are totally bent on expanding the role of women in the Church and choose to ignore the absence of the male laity....Catholic and mainline Protestant churches that cultivate a gay atmosphere...will keep heterosexual men away. Fear of effeminacy is one of the strongest motivations in men who will sometimes die rather than appear effeminate....Christianity has within it the resources that allow it to appeal to men, to show that not only will Christianity not undermine their masculinity, but it will also fulfill and perfect it."

But the Church continues capitulate to the Cult of Softness. And we wonder why vocations are drying up. I cannot even apply for the priesthood in Worcester. But the Diocese has ordained men who acted out homosexually or who committed acts of satanic pedophilia.

Rather than trying to cater to the homosexual elements within the Church, our Holy Father should be working to restore sound Catholic doctrine and pastoral practice.

Do we have to be a Church which caters to disorderly tendencies and a criminal subculture?

The crisis faced by the Catholic Church today is, as in every age, a crisis of saints.  As long as the Church continues to promote a distorted feminism and toleration of homosexuality as an ersatz "orthodoxy," the crisis will only deepen.  Events such as the "Catholic Men's Conference" might lead some men into the Church or to deepen their commitment to her in the short term, but if they do not encounter a spirituality which permits them to be both men and Christian at the same time, they will either remain marginalized Catholics or will leave the Church altogether

 

 

There are no obstacles we can't overcome in His Holy Name!

Brian Hudon, a faithful Catholic blogger loyal to the Church's Magisterium, notes that, "It's a given that the Catholic Church is in decline in the United States of America. The priesthood is aging, the average age of those who attend mass on a regular basis is rapidly increasing and there are nearly none to replace the members of either group. The Church in America is dying and no one will be left the remember it. How did this happen? You might think you know, or perhaps you think you don't, but the answers are more painfully obvious than anyone would believe and in many cases, will be more than unpopular.

A mess has been created in the Catholic Church in America. Note than I said the Catholic Church in America, not the Catholic Church of America or the American Catholic Church as there are no such things as those. But therein lies the problem. Catholics who are American have for too long attempted to put their trademark upon the Catholic Church in America, not realizing the Catholic Church is not only a foreign presence in the United States, but a foreign presence in the world. We here are exiles in the world.

Let us be clear, the Catholic Church is the one true visible presence of Jesus Christ's authority on earth. The Bible comes from the Catholic Church, Catholic meaning universal only, the one true Church founded by Christ. We do not believe in Jesus because of the Bible. We trust in the veracity of the Bible because of the authority of the Church. The Catholic Church, and the Church alone, through the authority of the Apostles of Christ's Church on earth decided what was in the Bible. We used to believe and profess this.

Unfortunately, we have now come to profess, as the lapsed Catholics we have become, that Catholicism is a faith rather than the faith. In a true syncretistic style, many believe all religions now, are more or less the same. Many foolishly and falsely believe we all worship the same God, if only differently. While even popes warn of the danger of "New Age" there is nothing more "new age" than radical ecumenism, if in fact there is ever any ecumenism that is not radical, or rather a type of veiled shame of being Catholic.

And so, we might have our children baptized, and as often have them receive first communion, and now seldom see them confirmed. Parents if they even attend mass from week to week and often don't, do not require their children to attend weekly mass as God requires them to. We allow our children to marry non-Catholics and often marry outside the Catholic faith, even while they continue to receive communion while never attending confession. And we think this all kosher because they are good people.

The marines may be looking for a few good men, but God is looking for valid Catholics, in all human persons, who live their lives in the sacraments of Holy Mother Church. Christ is right when he says the road to the kingdom of heaven is narrow and few there are who will find it. Very few we might fear. Should we believe otherwise is to call Jesus Christ a liar. But we often do that anyhow, even while desecrating and profaning the very sacraments we choose not to believe while making empty public professions.

The Creed of the Church is what we believe. It is not what what we wish for. It is not a menu. When we say "I believe" we must mean "I believe" even if we do not understand. All else that is contrary to this makes us enemies of the son of the living God, his Father in heaven and the Holy Spirit. God needs our opinions and personal beliefs no more than the earth requires our opinions of gravity when we trip and fall violently to the ground. The Creed is the physics of Catholic thinking and is not subject to opinion polls.

Among the worst forms of offense against God and the Church are in matters of sexual morality. The first directive of God in all of human history was to be fruitful. We are not however fruitful. Far from it, we are quite barren, a situation that has led directly to the current crisis in the Church. We as a Catholic people are largely producing chaff, the very chaff that the threshers will burn in unquenchable fire. Man commits few offenses so grave as impurity and contraception which produce no heirs for the Gospel.

The Church with regularity prays for vocations as it should, but it does not ask why the garden of Catholic living does not produce bountiful harvests.* Why are the fields dry and the produce so little? Why? Illegitimate births, birth control, pre-marital sex, abortion, divorce and perhaps the thing most deadly to the Church, the loveless marriage that finds no conjugal unity and procreative love in marriage which finds strength and nourishment in the sacraments of the Church. And what of this? Marriage dies without God.

A Church without sons is a Church without priests. A Church without sons is a Church without priests and a Church without sacraments. Before all things Jesus Christ, the second person of the Blessed Trinity, was a son. A Church without sons, dies. He was a son before all things in his last words, made his most faithful disciple at the Cross a son of his own mother, Mary and made her a mother again. Be fruitful God says to the first man and woman and we have not been and the Church thus withers gravely.

I had the opportunity to deliver a much abbreviated version of these concerns to the Bishop of my own diocese this past July. A Church without sons, a Church without family, has no future I told him and a room of some 70 people. Now that has come to fruition as we have been formally informed to expect changes in the Church. The fear is a logical and likely one and inevitable. There are going to be fewer priests and as a result, fewer masses. The end result will be unmistakable, even less mass attendance.

The template here is clear. The destruction of the Catholic family leads to the destruction of the Catholic Church. Like water in the hot sun the faithful will gather into ever fewer and smaller pools to face the world alone under the brutal hot sun of faithlessness, relativism, ecumenism, and sterility. Some, lukewarm, may be soaked up by the protestant residual, but many will simply resume life without God. Hardcore faith rooted in the Tradition and sacraments of the Church will become ever more the exception, than the rule.

Consider the attacks of the world upon faith, public mockery of Catholicism, false claims of science and reason, the propaganda of the culture of death including forms of artificial forms of conception, euthanasia, radical feminism, the homosexual movement, alternate forms of so-called marriage, pornography and near legal and state sanctioned forms of religious discrimination against Catholics by a rogue American state and the road to the kingdom of heaven becomes all the more narrow and difficult to navigate.

I am not proposing solutions. I am not making wild unsubstantiated suppositions. I am simply telling you the time of the day. 50 years of post-Vatican II dissolution of the Liturgy and sacramental life, of rampant birth control, cohabitation, divorce, abortion and timid ecumenism have eviscerated the Catholic faith. Lump on top of this weak and absent catechesis, rote and thoughtless reception of our Lord in Eucharistic communion without repentance in the sacrament of confession and you have a recipe for spiritual disaster."

 

Brian Hudon is doing what Vatican II instructs us to do as Catholics.  For the Council reminded us that we have a duty to clean up every environment where sin and injustice have found a home.  And this includes the local Church.  The Council said, "...the faithful must strive, as much as they can, to clean up the world's institutions and environments, if in some manner they incite to sin, in such a way that they come to conform to the principles of justice, and favour more than they impede the practice of the virtues."

 

Why does the evil in our midst continue to grow unchecked?  Because good men and women have become afraid.  It was Sir Edmund Burke who said that, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

But excessive conformism has led to the passive acceptance of evils which are fatal for the life of the Church and which fearful and timid Catholics now view as unavoidable.  The challenge, as I see it, is for Christians to once again pray for the Cardinal Virtue of Fortitude. Omnia possum in eo qui me confortat. I can do all things in Him who strengthens me. (Phil 4:13). These words are engraved on a bracelet which I wear. Do we really believe this? Or do we let others define who we are?


Issue the battle cry! Let's take back our cities!  Let's say "enough" to the "Culture of Death," the "Cult of Softness," the radical homosexual agenda, New Age Gnosticism, and all the other myriad evils which have infected Holy Mother Church.

Those who walk in the Spirit know no fear. What are we waiting for? The Lord Jesus waits. He grows tired of our excuses:


I’m not holy enough:
Is 6:1-9; Lk 5:1-11

I’m afraid I will fail:
Ex 14:10-31; Lk 15

I’ve made mistakes and I’m a sinner:
Jn 21:15-23; Mt 9:9-13; Lk 7:36-50

I’m too young:
1 Sam 3:1-18; Jer 1:4-10; Lk 1:26-38

I’m not talented enough:
1 Sam 17:32-51; Lk 1:26-38

I want to have a family:
Gn 12:1-3; Mt 12:46-50; Mk 10:28-30

I’m afraid of making a permanent commitment:
Ruth 1:15-17; Mt 28:16-20

I’m afraid of public speaking:
Ex 4:10-17; Jer 1:4-10

I’m not smart enough:
2 Cor 4:7-18; Ex 4:10-17

I’m afraid of being alone:
Ex 3:4-22; Lk 1:28-38

I want to be happy:
Ps 37:4; Mt 5:1-12; Jn 10:10; Mk 10:28-31

I can do all things in Him who strengthens me. There are no obstacles we can't overcome in His holy name. Even while others attempt to label us and dismiss us as useless, as having no worth. I knew a young man with developmental disabilities whose father told him he was "worthless." He was told by his father that the best thing for him would be a bullet in the head. When he asked me one day if he was worthless, I reminded him of his many gifts: his sense of humor, his ability to love others, his ability to pray to God and a litany of other gifts. And I assured him that he is not "worthless."

We live in a sad, broken world. There are many people who are heavily burdened with sin who are hurting. And because they are hurting, they want to hurt others. If you could read some of the comments which have been left at this Blog you would cringe. Sad time. Hurting time. And we pray for such people.

But we cannot let others define who we are. We are children of God who have access to the Holy Spirit's Gifts just by asking for them.

The Son of God loves us. What does that suggest about those who hate us?

The Spirit within us is NOT a spirit of fear!  Now is the time to act if we want to imprint the Christian character on every environment we encounter.  If we fail to rise up to this challenge, the tears of the next generation will be the fruit of our complacency and cowardice.

Is this what we want for the next generation?

*  See here. 

Bishop Robert McManus, the Diocese of Worcester, and vocations

As I noted in a previous post (see here), the Diocese of Worcester has some sort of animus against men who feel called to the priesthood but who accept, promote and defend the Church's Magisterial teaching.  There really is no denying this.  Candidates such as Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas are entirely welcome within the diocese (see here), but I am not permitted to even apply as part of a discernment process.

This is most unfortunate.  Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, "Since the ordained priesthood and diaconate provide the necessary ministries of the word and sacraments to the whole Church, every member shares a common duty to foster vocations to this service."

This duty, which pertains to all Christians, is codified in Canon Law:

"A duty rests upon the entire Christian community to foster vocations so that sufficient provision is made for the needs of the sacred ministry throughout the entire Church; Christian families, educators and in a special way priests, especially pastors, are particularly bound by this duty.  Since it is principally the concern of diocesan bishops to promote vocations, they should instruct the people entrusted to them concerning the importance of the sacred ministry and the necessity of ministers in the Church; therefore they are to encourage and support endeavors to foster vocations by means of projects especially established for that purpose." (Canon 233).

Paragraph 2 of the same Canon also states, "Moreover priests, and especially diocesan bishops, are also to be solicitous that men of a more mature age who consider themselves called to the sacred ministries are prudently assisted IN WORD AND DEED and duly prepared."

When I contacted the Worcester Diocese to express my interest in DISCERNING a priestly vocation, I received no response whatsoever.  When I wrote Bishop Robert McManus expressing my interest, again, no response.  This is promoting vocations?  This is being "solicitous" for mature vocations while assisting such in "word and deed"?

Of course not.

Every so often local parishes will offer a prayer intention for vocations.  But without any real effort to promote and foster vocations to the priesthood and religious life, such prayer intentions amount to little more than a dog and pony show.  Bishop McManus apparently has such disdain for me (pesky magisterial Catholic that I am) that when I phoned him to inform him that my "pastor" at the time (Fr. Joseph Jurgelonis) and his "pastoral staff" wouldn't schedule a Mass for my departed father, he actually laughed.

Feel the love of Christ Jesus.

Folks, if we really want to turn the tide within and outside of the Church, we will need to be more accepting of men who are orthodox in their faith and who feel called to the priesthood.  The laborers are few.  Can we afford to prohibit men faithful to the Magisterium from having a place at the table?


Related reading here.

 

 

 

The Worcester Diocese should have held onto this faithful priest

Some years ago, a faithful and dedicated priest decided to leave the Diocese of Worcester and become a Chaplain for the United States Army.  During a conversation back in 2000, this priest-friend told me that he had had enough of the nonsense within the diocese.  This was after he presided over a graveside service for my father.

This same faithful priest has a letter in this week's "Catholic" [when they feel like it] Free Press.  As usual, it is an excellent letter.  But then, this priest reads the life of Jesus Christ.  The letter is entitled  "Choose life and love, not moral decay."  Fr. Anthony Kazarnowicz writes:


"According to a survey (CFP, June 1), 83% of Catholics consider it 'morally acceptable' to use contraceptives to prevent pregnancy, 'despite church teachings to the contrary.'  The Church teaches that God designed sex for bonding between a husband and wife and for procreation.  In deciding for ourselves that it is 'morally acceptable' to unnaturally close sex to life, we have made ourselves (not God, or those whom Jesus placed in authority over us) the final arbiters of what is good and evil.  It's Satan's temptation to Adam and Eve all over again.

Next, we judged it 'morally acceptable' to separate sex from marriage.  So now, we have rampant sexual promiscuity, cohabitation before marriage and women treated as sex objects.  A pleasure-seeking 'Me Generation' was born.  Dads had live-in girlfriends; moms, live-in boyfriends.

With this denial of moral wrongdoing came the corresponding denial of sin and even a loss of a sense of sin.  Sacramental confessions dwindled.  However, divorces rose to 50% for first marriages, 65% for second marriages and higher for third marriages.

According to the survey, 53% of Catholics favor same-sex 'marriage.'  Heterosexuals who have lifeless sex are not likely to condemn lifeless homosexual sex.  Though homosexual sex is indeed unnatural, there is something even more unnatural - mothers killing their own babies by abortion - 'morally acceptable' to 35% of Catholics.

Before contraception, families were large.  But, children knew right from wrong, were disciplined, respected authority and learned sacrifice.  Families prayed together.  Confessions thrived; divorces were rare.  Most couples waited until marriage before having sex.  Parents accepted children as God's gift. Womanhood and motherhood were cherished.  Vocations to the priesthood and religious life flourished.

Contrasted are a culture of moral decay after contraception and a culture of life and love before contraception.  I pray all Catholics choose life and love."

Sadly, the Worcester Diocese has not always opted for a culture of life and love.  Back in March, I examined an article published in the dissent-friendly diocesan newspaper and written by Father John Catoir, a cleric who also has difficulty telling the truth.  This article was entitled "Birth Control Revisited."  And it was Father Catoir's assertion, while promoting a subjectivist conscience, that the Church's teaching regarding artificial contraception is "beyond the strength" of many Catholics. 

So much for the Worcester Diocese choosing a culture of life and love.

In a talk entitled "Legalism, Moral Truth and Pastoral Practice" given at a 1990 symposium in Philadelphia, Dr. Germain Grisez explained to those present that, "Theologians and pastors who dissent from received Catholic teaching think they are rejecting legalism because they set aside what they think are mere rules in favor of what they feel are more reasonable standards. Their views are thoroughly imbued with legalism, however. For dissenters think of valid moral norms as rules formulated to protect relevant values. Some even make their legalism explicit by denying that there is any necessary connection between moral goodness (which they restrict to the transcendental level of a love with no specific content) and right action (which they isolate at the categorical level of inner-worldly behavior). But whether their legalism is explicit or not, all the dissenters hold that specific moral norms admit exceptions whenever, all things considered, making an exception seems the best - or least bad - thing to do. Most dissenters also think that specific moral norms that were valid in times past can be inappropriate today, and so they regard the Church’s contested moral teachings as outdated rules that the Church should change."


Dr. Grisez reminded his listeners at the Philadelphia symposium, "During the twentieth century, pastoral treatment of repetitious sins through weakness - especially masturbation, homosexual behavior, premarital sex play and contraception within marriage - grew increasingly mild. Pastors correctly recognized that weakness and immaturity can lessen such sins’ malice. Thinking legalistically, they did not pay enough attention to the sins’ inherent badness and harmfulness, and they developed the idea that people can freely choose to do something that they regard as a grave matter without committing a mortal sin. This idea presupposes that in making choices people are not responsible precisely for choosing what they choose. That presupposition makes sense within a legalistic framework, because lawgivers can take into account mitigating factors and limit legal culpability. But it makes no sense for morality correctly understood, because moral responsibility in itself is not something attached to moral acts but simply is moral agents’ self-determination in making free choices.

Repetitious sinners through weakness also were handicapped by their own legalism. Not seeing the inherent badness of their sins, they felt that they were only violating inscrutable rules. When temptation grew strong, they had little motive to resist, especially because they could easily go to confession and have the violation fixed. Beginning on Saturday they were holy; by Friday they were again sinners. This cyclic sanctity robbed many people’s lives of Christian dynamism and contributed to the dry rot in the Church that became manifest in the 1960s, when the waves of sexual permissiveness battered her."


Dr. Grisez went on to explain that, "Pastors free of legalism will teach the faithful how sin makes moral requirements seem to be alien impositions, help them see through this illusion, and encourage them to look forward to and experience the freedom of God’s children, who rejoice in the fruit of the Spirit and no longer experience the constraint of law..They will explain that while one sometimes must choose contrary to positive laws and cannot always meet their requirements, one always can choose in truth and abide in love. They will acknowledge the paradox of freedom - that we seem unable to resist freely choosing to sin - the paradox that Saint Paul neatly formulates: ‘I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate’ (Romans 7:15). But they also will proclaim the liberating power of grace, and help the faithful learn by experience that when one comes to understand the inherent evil of sin and intrinsic beauty of goodness, enjoys the support of a community of faith whose members bear one another’s burdens, begs God for His help, and confidently expects it, then the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead raises him from his sins, and he discovers that with the Spirit’s grace one can consistently resist sin and choose life."

We would have more vocations to the priesthood in the Worcester Diocese if young men witnessed fidelity to the magisterial teaching of the Church from pastors [not to mention the diocesan newspaper] and if orthodox candidates were not excluded because of their commitment to the Church's authentic teaching, especially in the area of sexual morality.

I should know.  I'm one of the excluded.

Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas' sister: Father Coonan was a better role model than drug addicted and alcoholic singers, actors and reality show stars

In a previous post, I noted how then Deacon and now Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas was quoted in The Catholic Free Press as having said that, "Father Coonan [Fr. Joseph Coonan] was a great influence and helped nourish my vocation."  Fr. Slavinskas also credited the late Bishop Timothy J. Harrington, who was dissent-friendly, as being an inspiration.

Now Fr. Slavinskas' sister, Amy Whittemore, has left a comment at this Blog taking exception with the legitimate concerns of Catholics who find this troubling.  And all the more so since St. Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, warns, "Do not be led astray: Bad company corrupts good morals." (1 Corinthians 15: 33).  She writes:

"It sickens me that people in todays society feel the need to judge a person by who their role models or influences are. How bad is it to look up to someone who was ACCUSED of something that may or may not have happened? Fr. Coonan was an influence to my brother before any of the scandals come out. Who are we to judge others? The only one to judge is God. Father Coonan was a better role model than the ones teens look up to today such as the drug addicted alcoholic singers, actors, and reality show stars..."

Something that may or may not have happened? Fr. Joseph A. Coonan was removed from ministry at St. John's Church in 2002 after allegations of inappropriate contact with children dating back to the 1970's.  He was also charged with domestic assault and battery, assault and battery on a person over 65 years of age (his mother), and one count of intimidating a witness according to court documents.  The Worcester Diocese found the accusations to be credible and removed Fr. Coonan from any and all ministry.

Father Coonan was an influence on Fr. Slavinskas before any of the scandals came out?  And also after.  Which is why Amy's brother continued to defend Fr. Coonan after the scandals came out and even now credits him with being "a great influence" who "helped nourish" his vocation.  Recall that many men came forward with similar stories of abuse, many involving Joseph Coonan's fondness for watching boys urinate, defecate or masturbate.  Is this the stuff that nourishes vocations?

As for judging, Dr. Germain Grisez, one of the finest moral theologians of our time, explains that, "It might seem to follow that love must accept everyone, even enemies, just as they are, and to affirm them even in the error or sin which is present in them. But the law of love does not require indiscriminate affirmation of everything about other persons (see Saint Thomas Aquinas, S.t., 2-2, q.34, a.3). One's love must be like Jesus'. He loves sinners and brings them into communion with himself in order to overcome their error and sin. When the scribes and pharisees bring a woman caught in adultery to Jesus, he not only saves her from being stoned to death but warns her not to sin again (see John 8:3-11). In a true sense, Jesus is not judgmental, he sets aside the legalistic mentality, readily forgives sinners, does not condemn the world, and points out that those who refuse to acknowledge their sinfulness are self-condemned by the truth they violate (see John 3:16-21). But he realistically recognizes sinners as sinners and never accepts error as truth... Similarly, if Christians' love of neighbor is genuine, it not only permits but REQUIRES THEM both to 'hold fast to what is good' and to 'hate what is evil' (Romans 12:9)."

And again, according to Dr. Grisez, "Vatican II neatly formulates the prohibition against judging others" 'God alone is the judge and searcher of hearts; for that reason, he forbids us to make judgments about the internal guilt of anyone' (Gaudium et Spes, No. 28). This norm, however, does not preclude JUDGMENTS necessary for determining that one should try to dissuade others from committing sins or to encourage them to repent if they have sinned."

Sacred Scripture makes this abundantly clear: "should you not judge those inside the Church"? (1 Corinthians 5:12), and again: "the saints will judge the world and angels" (1 Corinthians 6:2-3), and again: "the spiritual man judges all things" (1 Corinthians 2:15), and again: "Let prophets speak and the others judge" (1 Corinthians 14:29).

Not all judging is sinful. This is just common sense. Our legal system is structured in such a way that when a person commits a crime, he or she is tried before a judge and sentenced (judged) if found guilty. Likewise, it is our right (and duty) to judge words, ideas and actions which are not in conformity with the Gospels or which fail to conform to the Magisterial teaching of Christ's Church and to expose these as fallacious and/or sinful. In so doing, we are not rendering a judgment against a person. We are following the teaching of the great Saint Augustine (Bishop, Father and Doctor of the Church), who said: "Interficere errorem, diligere errantem" - kill the error, love the one who errs. This killing of what is sinful or erroneous is necessary if our charity - our love of neighbor - is to be genuine. Otherwise, our love is counterfeit. It is a fraud.

No one at this Blog has judged Fr. Slavinskas' person.  But there are those of us who do question whether he has common sense and good judgment. 

Father Coonan was a better role model than the ones teens look up to today such as the drug addicted alcoholic singers, actors, and reality show stars?  How so?  Fr. Coonan, by all accounts, also struggled with abusing alcohol and freely chose to engage in sexual perversion.  Which is why the Worcester Diocese removed him from ministry.  The accusations, and there were many, were credible for diocesan officials.
Ms. Whittemore writes, "ShrewsburyCatholic, how dare you tell others to be 'cautious' around my brother, Fr. Jonathan Slavinskas. It angers my so much for you to say this. He has done nothing but love and give his life to the Lord. He would never, NEVER do anything to hurt someone. It is people like you who make it so hard for young men to become priests. They struggle constantly with their calling to the priesthood and what others will think of them. They have to put up with so much ridicule that it is sickening. Not all priests or men studying to become priests are gay, or child molesters or abusers.."

But no one at this Blog ever said that "all priests or men studying to become priests are gay, or child molesters or abusers."  One has to wonder why Ms. Whittemore is so defensive in this regard.  But it is nevertheless disturbing that Fr. Slavinskas would have such great praise for a priest whose ministry ended in disgrace.

Bad company corrupts good morals.  A sober warning.  And reason to be cautious.  If the Diocese of Worcester is serious about furthering vocations, why am I not permitted to discern my vocation? See here.

A response to Fernando Cavada-Guzman regarding vocations...

When God calls someone to follow Him more closely in the priesthood or religious life, that call comes softly and quietly though insistently..  This call is made known in a sincere desire to live a life dedicated to the service of God.  Pope Benedict XVI is once again asking us to pray that young people may hear the call of Christ and follow him as priests or consecrated persons.  We are reminded here that our prayers are needed because the world makes it difficult for young people to hear that call.

The same website quotes Fernando Cavada-Guzman, a layman, father, grandfather, and the vice president of communications for Serra International, as having said that, "Certainly the Lord calls, certainly he is calling now and will never cease to call, but this call needs a response from the man or woman who is called. This response is blocked today by the secularism and materialism that consume our societies - and that is where the Holy Father asks us to intervene."

Vatican II's Decree on Priestly Training (Optatam Totius) says that, "The duty of fostering vocations pertains to the whole Christian community, which should exercise it above all by a fully Christian life...All priests especially are to manifest an apostolic zeal in fostering vocations and are to attract the interest of youths to the priesthood by their own life lived in a humble and industrious manner and in a happy spirit as well as by mutual priestly charity and fraternal sharing of labor. Bishops...are to encourage their flock to promote vocations and should be concerned with coordinating all forces in a united effort to this end. As fathers, moreover, they must assist without stint those whom they have judged to be called to the Lord's work." (No. 2).


Unfortunately, this duty is not taken seriously by many within the Church. In fact, many vocations have been sabotaged by dissident priests and religious anxious to exclude those who are deemed "too rigid" or too "pre-Vatican II." Recall Michael S. Rose's book "Goodbye, Good Men." What Fernando Cavada-Guzman does not mention is that the response to the Lord’s call isn’t just blocked by “the secularism and materialism that consume our societies” but also by people who want to change the Church’s agenda and who, as a result, block or discourage candidates loyal to the magisterial teaching of the Church
Because I accept everything which is taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and because I defend the teaching authority of the Church's Magisterium, I am treated with nothing but contempt in my own diocese. I am not permitted to test my vocation to the priesthood.  In fact, when I contacted my diocese to express my interest in discerning a priestly vocation, twice I received no response.

As Archbishop Elden Curtiss explained: "There is much media hype these days about the present and projected shortage of priests and its effect on the sacramental life of the Church. It is time to pay close attention to the dioceses and religious communities reporting increasing numbers of candidates. There have to be reasons for these increases that bear objective analysis from which some conclusions can be drawn.

I personally think the vocation 'crisis' in this country is more artificial and contrived than many people realize. When dioceses and religious communities are unambiguous about ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines these calls; when there is strong support for vocations, and a minimum of dissent about the male celibate priesthood and religious life loyal to the magisterium; when bishop, priests, Religious and lay people are united in vocation ministry—then there are documented increases in the numbers of candidates who respond to the call.

It seems to me that the vocation 'crisis' is precipitated and continued by people who want to change the Church's agenda, by people who do not support orthodox candidates loyal to the magisterial teaching of the Pope and bishops, and by people who actually discourage viable candidates from seeking priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines the ministries.

I am personally aware of certain vocation directors, vocation teams and evaluation boards who turn away candidates who do not support the possibility of ordaining women or who defend the Church's teaching about artificial birth control, or who exhibit a strong piety toward certain devotions, such as the Rosary.

When there is a determined effort to discourage orthodox candidates from priesthood and religious life, then the vocation shortage which results is caused not by a lack of vocations but by deliberate attitudes and policies that deter certain viable candidates.

And the same people who precipitate a decline in vocations by their negative actions call for the ordination of married men and women to replace the vocations they have discouraged. They have a death wish for ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines them. They undermine the vocation ministry they are supposed to champion."

The late Senator Edward Kennedy received a Catholic funeral even though he dissented from the Church’s teaching.  In fact, he was eulogized by the clergy present as “our brother and friend.”  I am a cradle Catholic who has publically defended the Church’s teaching my entire life.  And I am a pariah within my own diocese.  Maybe if I supported same-sex "marriage" or abortion or contraception I too would be welcome as "brother and friend." 

No thanks.  I'll stay with the Lord Jesus and His Vicar.