Priests today (like the rest of us) need to sincerely examine their own spiritual poverty...

Father Stephen Gemme, the Pastor of Saint Bernadette Parish in Northborough, Massachusetts [Diocese of Worcester], has resigned after being accused of stealing some $230,000 to maintain his gambling addiction.  Father Gemme resigned last Thursday and the matter has been referred to the District Attorney's Office.  See here: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/northboro-pastor-stephen-gemme-accussed-embezzling-230k-gambling-addiction

As Father Roger Landry noted in The National Catholic Register, "Diocesan priests do not take a vow of poverty, but commit themselves to a simple lifestyle. In many places, this principle is given lip service, as members of the clergy drive fancy cars, frequent the finest restaurants and live in exquisite digs. Cardinal Bergoglio’s example of living in a small apartment rather than an episcopal palace, taking public transportation rather than a car with a driver and cooking for himself cannot help but lead priests to a sincere examination about the sincerity of their own spiritual poverty." See here: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/pope-francis-and-the-reform-of-the-priesthood

Jesus disciples are called to carry their cross and follow Him (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Lk 9:23). Above all, Christians are called to love as Jesus does (Jn 13: 34-35). But the cross is not popular with those who are advancing the "new religion" which will serve the New Order. The cross has never been popular with those who belong to the company of the world or the Devil. Today, countless young people (and old) have given themselves over to promiscuous sexual unions. In the mad pursuit of wealth, power, fame, and various hedonistic pleasures (euphemistically referred to as "choice" or "alternative lifestyles"), many poor souls have given themselves over to the Devil. Many who call themselves "Christian" are really living pagan lives. And their "pastors," often living disordered lives themselves, say nothing. Many of these have succumbed to materialism and hedonism. and find themselves unable to condemn sins which they have embraced.


This is, of course, nothing new. But the sexual degeneration in so-called Christian nations today is the most abominable in history. So much so that a young girl in the Ukraine is reported to have been told by Our Lady that: "The present times are worse than at the time of Noah. Then the world was scourged by a deluge of water: now the world is going to be scourge by a deluge of fire." (First apparition to Anna at Seredne, December 20, 1954). St. Louis de Montfort explains that:

"'My dear brothers and sisters, there are two companies that appear before you each day: the followers of Christ and the followers of the world.

Our dear Saviour's company is on the right, climbing up a narrow road, made all the narrower by the world's immorality. Our Master leads the way, barefooted, crowned with thorns, covered with blood, and laden with a heavy cross. Those who follow him, though most valiant, are only a handful, either because his quiet voice is not heard amid the tumult of the world, or because people lack the courage to follow him in his poverty, sufferings, humiliations and other crosses which his servants must carry all the days of their life.

On the left hand is the company of the world or of the devil. This is far more numerous, more imposing and more illustrious, at least in appearance. Most of the fashionable people run to join it, all crowded together, although the road is wide and is continually being made wider than ever by the crowds that pour along it like a torrent. It is strewn with flowers, bordered with all kinds of amusements and attractions, and paved with gold and silver.

On the right, the little groups which follow Jesus speak about sorrow and penance, prayer and indifference to worldly things. They continually encourage one another saying, "Now is the time to suffer and to mourn, to pray and do penance, to live in retirement and poverty, to humble and mortify ourselves; for those who do not possess the spirit of Christ, which is the spirit of the cross, do not belong to him. Those who belong to Christ have crucified all self-indulgent passions and desires. We must be true images of Christ or be eternally lost."

"Have confidence," they say to each other. If God is on our side, within us and before us, who can be against us? He who is within us is stronger than the one who is in the world. The servant is not greater than his master. This slight and temporary distress we suffer will bring us a tremendous and everlasting glory. The number of those who will be saved is not as great as some people imagine. It is only the brave and the daring who take heaven by storm, where only those are crowned who strive to live according to the law of the Gospel and not according to the maxims of the world. Let us fight with all our strength, let us run with all speed, that we may attain our goal and win the crown.

Such are some of the heavenly counsels with which the Friends of the Cross inspire each other.

Those who follow the world, on the contrary, urge each other to continue in their evil ways without scruple, calling to one another day after day, "Let us eat and drink, sing and dance, and enjoy ourselves. God is good; he has not made us to damn us. He does not forbid us to amuse ourselves. We shall not be damned for so little. We are not to be scrupulous. 'No, you will not die'."

Dear brothers and sisters, remember that our loving Saviour has his eyes on you at this moment, and he says to each one of you individually, "See how almost everyone deserts me on the royal road of the Cross. Pagans in their blindness ridicule my Cross as foolishness; obstinate Jews are repelled by it as by an object of horror; heretics pull it down and break it to pieces as something contemptible.

"Even my own people - and I say this with tears in my eyes and grief in my heart - my own children whom I have brought up and instructed in my ways, my members whom I have quickened with my own Spirit, have turned their backs on me and forsaken me by becoming enemies of my Cross. 'Will you also go away?' Will you also desert me by running away from my Cross like the worldlings, who thus become so many antichrists? Will you also follow the world; despise the poverty of my Cross in order to seek after wealth; shun the sufferings of my Cross to look for enjoyment; avoid the humiliations of my Cross in order to chase after the honours of the world? 'There are many who pretend they are friends of mine and protest that they love me, but in their hearts they hate me. I have many friends of my table, but very few of my Cross.' (Imit. II, 11, 1)."

At this loving appeal of Jesus, let us rise above our human nature; let us not be seduced by our senses, as Eve was; but keep our eyes fixed on Jesus crucified, who leads us in our faith and brings it to perfection (Heb 12.2). Let us keep ourselves apart from the evil practices of the world; let us show our love for Jesus in the best way, that is, through all kinds of crosses. Reflect well on these remarkable words of our Saviour, "If anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself, and take up his cross and follow me" (Mt 16.24; Lk 9.23)." (St. Louis de Montfort, Letter to the Friends of the Cross, 7-12).

Are we truly friends of the Cross and therefore friends of Christ? Or is ours a counterfeit love?

Hostility toward the Holy Mass: Preparation for the Reign of Antichrist

World Net Daily is reporting:


In what has been described as “an astonishing attack on religious freedom,” Catholics at a Navy base were banned from attending worship services because of the partial shutdown of the federal government.

In response, the Thomas More Law Center announced it has filed a lawsuit over the orders at Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base in Georgia. The legal team said a Catholic priest who serves the community on the military base “has been prohibited from even volunteering to celebrate Holy Mass without pay and was told that if he violated that order, he could be subject to arrest.” Without explanation, however, Protestant services continued.

 

“This is an astonishing attack on religious freedom by the federal government and the latest affront toward the military since the beginning of the shutdown,” said a report by the Thomas More Law Center. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington on behalf of Father Ray Leonard, a Catholic priest contracted to serve as base chaplain, and Fred Naylor, one of Leonard’s parishioners and a retired veteran with more than 22 years of service.

Leonard, a civilian serving on a contract basis, had served Tibetan populations in China for years.
“I was disallowed from performing public religious services due to the lack of religious freedom in China,” he said in an affidavit. “I never imagined that when I returned home to the United States, that I would be forbidden from practicing my religious beliefs as I am called to do and would be forbidden from helping and serving my faith community.”

Ten days ago, Leonard was ordered to stop performing all of his duties as the base’s Catholic chaplain, even as a volunteer. He was also told that he could be arrested if he violated the order. The approximately 300 Catholic families, including Naylor’s, served by Leonard at Kings Bay have been unable to attend Mass on base since the beginning of the shutdown, the legal team said.

“Additionally, Fr. Leonard was locked out of his on-base office and the chapel. Fr. Leonard was also denied access to the Holy Eucharist and other articles of his Catholic faith. The order has caused the cancellation of daily and weekend Mass, confession, marriage preparation classes and baptisms as well as prevented Fr. Leonard from providing the spiritual guidance he was called by his faith to provide.”

The legal team said the submarine base is in a remote location. It consists of roughly 16,000 acres, with 4,000 acres comprised of protected wetlands. There are approximately 10,000 total people on the base.

While there is a Catholic church located in St. Mary’s, some 16 miles away, “many of the parishioners both live and work on base and do not own a car and cannot otherwise access transportation,” the report said.

Defendants in the lawsuit are the Department of Defense, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, the Department of the Navy and the Secretary of the Department of the Navy, Ray Mabus.
For active duty service members, on-base religious services are very important due to limited transportation and minimal time off. Additionally, as service members tend to have high rates of divorce, depression and suicide, the need for readily available spiritual encouragement and guidance is critical, the legal team explained.

The Pay Our Military Act, which was enacted before the beginning of the government shutdown, provides funding for employees whose responsibilities contribute to the morale and well-being of the military. The government has been criticized for interpreting the act to not include military death benefits. Now, the Thomas More Center said, in yet another bizarre interpretation of the act, some chaplains are not considered covered by these provisions, leaving Catholic members of some military facilities without spiritual guidance.

On December 31, 1992, Our Lady told Father Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests:

"I have announced to you many times that the end of the times and the coming of Jesus in glory is very near. Now, I want to help you understand the signs described in the Holy Scriptures, which indicate that His glorious return is now close.

These signs are clearly indicated in the Gospels, in the letters of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, and they are becoming a reality during these years.

-The first sign is the spread of errors, which lead to the loss of faith and to apostasy.

These errors are being propagated by false teachers, by renowned theologians who are no longer teaching the truths of the Gospel, but pernicious heresies based on errors and human reasonings. It is because of the teachings of these errors that the true faith is being lost and that the great apostasy is spreading everywhere.

'See that no one deceives you. For many will attempt to deceive many people. False prophets will come and will deceive very many.' (Mt 24:4-5)

'The day of the Lord will not come unless the great apostasy comes first.' (2 Thes 2:3).
'There will be false teachers among you. These will seek to introduce disastrous heresies and will even set themselves against the Master who ransomed them. Many will listen to them and will follow their licentious ways. Through their offense the Christian faith will be reviled. In their greed, they will exploit you with fabrications.' (2 Pt 2:1-3)

-The second sign is the outbreak of wars and fratricidal struggles, which lead to the prevalence of violence and hatred and a general slackening off of charity, while natural catastrophes, like epidemics, famines, floods and earthquakes (see here), become more and more frequent.

'When you hear the report of wars, close at hand or far away, see that you are not alarmed; for these things must happen. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in many places. All this will be only the beginning of greater sufferings to come. Evildoing will be so widespread that the love of many will grow cold. But God will save those who persevere until the end.' (Mt 24:6-8, 12-13)

-The third sign is the bloody persecution of those who remain faithful to Jesus and to His Gospel and who stand fast in the true faith. Throughout this all, the Gospel will be preached in every part of the world.
Think, beloved children, of the great persecutions to which the Church is being subjected; think of the apostolic zeal of the recent popes, above all my Pope, John-Paul II, as he brings to all the nations of the earth the announcement of the Gospel.

'They will hand you over to persecution and they will kill you. You will be hated by all because of me. And then many will abandon the faith; they will betray and hate one another. Meanwhile, the message of the kingdom of God will be preached in all the world; all nations must hear it. And then the end will come.' (Mt 24:9-10, 14)

-The fourth sign is the horrible sacrilege, perpetrated by him who sets himself against Christ, that is, the Antichrist. He will enter into the holy temple of God and will sit on his throne, and have himself adored as God.

'This one will oppose and exalt himself against everything that men adore and call God. The lawless one will come by the power of Satan, with all the force of false miracles and pretended wonders. He will make use of every kind of wicked deception, in order to work harm.' (2 Thes 2:4,9)


'One day, you will see in the holy place he who commits the horrible sacrilege. The prophet Daniel spoke of this. Let the reader seek to understand.' (Mt 24:15)

The Holy Mass is the daily sacrifice, the pure oblation which is offered to the Lord everywhere, from the rising of the sun to its going down.
The sacrifice of the Mass renews that which was accomplished by Jesus on Calvary. By accepting the protestant doctrine, people will hold that the Mass is not a sacrifice but only a sacred meal, that is to say, a remembrance of that which Jesus did at His last supper. And thus, the celebration of Holy Mass will be suppressed. In this abolition of the daily sacrifice consists the horrible sacrilege accomplished by the Antichrist.

[Saint Alphonsus Ligouri: "The devil has always managed to get rid of the Mass by means of the heretics making them the precursors of the Antichrist who, above all else, will manage to abolish, and in fact will succeed in abolishing as a punishment for the sins of men, the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, precisely as Daniel predicted] -The fifth sign consists in extraordinary phenomena, which occur in the skies.

'The sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky; and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.' (Mt 24:29)

The miracle of the sun, which took place at Fatima during my last apparition, is intended to point out to you that you are now entering into the times when these events will take place, events which will prepare for the return of Jesus in glory."

(The miracle of the sun is also reported to have been witnessed many times at Medjugorje and Conyers, and elsewhere.)

'And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven. All the tribes of the earth will mourn, and men will see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven, with great power and splendor.' (Mt 24:30)

(The sign of the Son of Man has always been the Cross; Garabandal: 'a permanent sign'; Brother David Lopez: 'We will see in the sky one great red cross'; Fr. Anthony J. Paone, in 'My Daily Bread,' published by the Confraternity of the Precious Blood: 'The sign of the cross will appear in the sky.')

My beloved ones and children consecrated to my Immaculate Heart, I have wanted to teach you about these signs, which Jesus has pointed out to you in His Gospel, in order to prepare you for the end of the times, because they are about to take place in your days. " (To the Priests: Our Lady's Beloved Sons, pp. 750-753).

It is true that we don't know "the day or the hour." However, Our Lord tells us "Learn a lesson from the fig tree: when its branches become tender and sprout the first leaves, you know that summer is near. In the same way, when you see these things taking place, know that your liberation is near." (Matthew 24:32-33).

Let's learn the lesson of the fig tree as Jesus commands. Let's read the signs of the times while it is still day. Many have a veil over their eyes and cannot read these signs. We must pray and work to remove that veil.

Those who can still see, who still are able to read the signs of the times, will no doubt recall the hostility which Barack Obama demonstrated toward Our Lord at Georgetown University's Gaston Hall.  See here.

Welcomed by the Diocese of Worcester, Dr. Thomas Groome, a heretic, wants to reduce gender-based pronouns for Jesus

Although Pope John Paul II proclaimed the definitive nature of the Church's doctrine on the male-only ministerial priesthood in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (1994) and said that the issue was not to be discussed any longer, Dr. Thomas Groome, in his 1995 book Language for a Catholic Church (revised edition)  that, "..the continued exclusion of women from ordained ministry in the Catholic Church is seen by fair-minded scholars as without theological or biblical warrant" (p. 31).

In this same work, Groome posited that it would be "helpful to reduce reliance on gender-based pronouns" when referring to Jesus in order "to emphasise his humanity rather than his maleness" (pp. 26-27). In this passage, Dr. Groome is opposing what he views (from his myopic standpoint) as a flaw in the Church's teaching that the ordained priest must be a man in order to sacramentally represent Christ in terms of his spousal relationship to the Church, which is that of Bridegroom to Bride.

And as I noted here, Dr. Groome is being welcomed by the Diocese of Worcester as a speaker on the subject of evangelization.  Meanwhile, I cannot even apply for the Diocesan priesthood (my requests are ignored) and Mr. Robert Spencer was prohibited from speaking at the Catholic Men's Conference.  See here.  Apparently one is only really welcome in the Worcester Diocese if they are willing to prostitute their faith.

Why is it that a woman cannot symbolically represent Christ the Bridegroom?

The reason is that "God became man" and took on human nature in the masculine mode. The Word reveals itself in the flesh of Christ Jesus as the "only Son of the Father" (John 1:14, 18, 41, 49), who by virtue of giving His flesh for the life of the world (John 6:51) is the Bridegroom of the Bride (John 3:29), namely, the Church.

In John's Gospel, the line of communication is clearly set up as follows: Jesus Christ (1:18), being the incarnate Word (1:1, 14) is the only-begotten Son of the Father (1:14) and the Bridegroom of the Church (3:29; Rev. 19:7; 21:2; - see also: Mt. 9:15; 2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:21-32).

The masculinity of Jesus is part of the Logos' self-expression in the flesh and forms the basis for the original relation of Christ to the Church and for His sacramental union with her as His Body and His Bride.
Through the natural symbolism of the sexes, God communicates the reality of His free, historical, and corporeal presence in the world. By assuming humanity in the mode of masculinity, the Logos communicates Himself in His dealings with the new People of God in that fundamental personal relationship that has its foundation in masculinity. Thus, the Dogmatic Constitution the Church of Vatican II can say: "Christ loves the Church as his bride, having been established as the model of a man loving his wife as his own body (Eph. 5:25-28); the Church, in her turn, is subject to her head (Eph. 5: 23-24), 'Because in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily' (Col. 3:29)." (Lumen Gentium, No. 7).

Now, the priest takes the part of Christ, lending Him his voice and gestures. St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church, expresses this concept with precision: "The priest enacts the image of Christ, in whose person and by whose power he pronounces the words of consecration" (Summa Theologica, III, q. 83, a.1, ad 3-um).

Therefore, the priest is truly a "sign" in the sacramental sense of the word. This is why St. Bonaventure says: "The person ordained is a sign of Christ the mediator" - "persona quae ordinatur significat Christum mediatorem." It is a principle of sacramental theology that "sacramental signs represent what they signify by a natural resemblance" (In IV Sent., Dist. 25, q. 2, a.2, q.1, ad 4-um: signa sacramentalia ex naturali similitudine repraesentent.).

In other words, there is a need for that "natural resemblance" between Christ and the person who is His sign. In the words of St. Thomas Aquinas, "Since a sacrament is a sign, what is done in the sacrament requires not only the reality but also a sign of the reality" (Ibid. In corp. quaestiunculae: Quia cum sacramentum sit signum, in eis quae in sacramento aguntur requiritur non solum res, sed significatio rei.).
And as the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states quite clearly in its document "On the Question of the Admission of Women to the Ministerial Priesthood": "It would not accord with 'natural resemblance,' with that obvious 'meaningfulness,' if the memorial of the Supper were to be carried out by a woman; for it is not just the recitation involving the gestures and words of Christ, but an action, and the sign is efficacious because Christ is present in the minister who consecrates the Eucharist, as is taught by the Second Vatican Council, following the Encyclical Mediator Dei."

Because of a secularized understanding of reality, not to mention a reductive and functionalist view of man, there are some who still think that it is their job to demand the application of societal standards and values within the Church such as democratic procedures, equal opportunities for advancement in all capacities and offices etc. For such people, the Sacrament of Holy Orders, which has been instituted by Christ Jesus Himself - Who is incapable of error or of deceiving or being deceived - is little more than a Baroque, or antiquarian form of appointment to a position of leadership, like that of a bank president, party chief or television station manager. These people view the priesthood in terms of self-fulfillment and "power" rather than from the sacramental point of view.

Does Father Krzysztof Korcz really believe in the Fatima message or is he all show?

In a previous post, I Noted how Peggy Patenaude, a radical feminist who often conducts retreats at the La Salette Shrine in Attleboro, Massachusetts, will be a guest speaker at this year's "Gather Us In" Conference sponsored by the Diocese of Worcester's "Commission for Women," itself a dissenting organization.

In her newsletter, Ms. Patenaude said that: "In January, I had the privilege of facilitating my first retreat for five gay couples. It turned out to be an affirming experience for all. I was very moved by the warmth, goodness, depth and genuineness of these ten women. The fact that they were so receptive and appreciative confirmed for me the need for such programs in a world that is not always kind to minorities....

It was gratifying to see how much the participants enjoyed and benefited from the weekend. The retreat exceeded my expectations. 'It gave us the opportunity to take time out to focus on us and our relationship which means so much to us,' commented one woman. Another added, 'The retreat was very helpful. It helped my partner and me to communicate better.' The gratitude of all ten women for the supportive and respectful atmosphere was obvious. As one retreatant said, 'We are just people in love…like any other couple.' I am humbled and grateful for the opportunity to have assisted them in keeping their love alive. See here.

So I was not entirely surprised to learn that Father Krzysztof Korcz, "pastor" of Our Lady Immaculate parish in Athol, had decided to promote the "Gather Us In" conference in his parish bulletin.  I am not surprised because Fr. Korcz is anything but a child of Mary, even if he goes through the motions of promoting the Fatima message for appearances sake.   

St. Louis Marie Grignon de Montfort, in his classic work True Devotion to Mary, advises us that, the person who wishes to be led by this spirit of Mary:

p. 259 1) Should renounce his own spirit, his own views and his own will before doing anything, for example, before making meditation, celebrating or attending Mass, before Communion. For the darkness of our own spirit and the evil tendencies of our own will and actions, good as they may seem to us, would hinder the holy spirit of Mary were we to follow them.

2) We should give ourselves up to the spirit of Mary to be moved and directed as she wishes. We should place and leave ourselves in her virginal hands, like a tool in the hands of a craftsman or a lute in the hands of a good musician. We should cast ourselves into her like a stone thrown into the sea. This is done easily and quickly by a mere thought, a slight movement of the will or just a few words as, "I renounce myself and give myself to you, my dear Mother." And even if we do not experience any emotional fervour in this spiritual encounter it is none the less real. It is just as if a person with equal sincerity were to say - which God forbid! - "I give myself to the devil." Even though this were said without feeling any emotion, he would no less really belong to the devil.

3) From time to time during an action and after it, we should renew this same act of offering and of union. The more we do so, the quicker we shall grow in holiness and the sooner we shall reach union with Christ, which necessarily follows upon union with Mary, since the spirit of Mary is the spirit of Jesus.

With Mary

p. 260. We must do everything with Mary, that is to say, in all our actions we must look upon Mary, although a simple human being, as the perfect model of every virtue and perfection, fashioned by the Holy Spirit for us to imitate, as far as our limited capacity allows. In every action then we should consider how Mary performed it or how she would perform it if she were in our place. For this reason, we must examine and meditate on the great virtues she practised during her life, especially:

1) Her lively faith, by which she believed the angel's word without the least hesitation, and believed faithfully and constantly even to the foot of the Cross on Calvary.

2) Her deep humility, which made her prefer seclusion, maintain silence, submit to every eventuality and put herself in the last place.

3) Her truly divine purity, which never had and never will have its equal on this side of heaven.

And so on for her other virtues.

Remember what I told you before, that Mary is the great, unique mould of God, designed to make living images of God at little expense and in a short time. Anyone who finds this mould and casts himself into it, is soon transformed into our Lord because it is the true likeness of him.

In Mary

p. 261. We must do everything in Mary. To understand this we must realise that the Blessed Virgin is the true earthly paradise of the new Adam and that the ancient paradise was only a symbol of her. There are in this earthly paradise untold riches, beauties, rarities and delights, which the new Adam, Jesus Christ, has left there. It is in this paradise that he "took his delights" for nine months, worked his wonders and displayed his riches with the magnificence of God himself. This most holy place consists of only virgin and immaculate soil from which the new Adam was formed with neither spot nor stain by the operation of the Holy Spirit who dwells there. In this earthly paradise grows the real Tree of Life which bore our Lord, the fruit of Life, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which bore the Light of the world.

In this divine place there are trees planted by the hand of God and watered by his divine unction which have borne and continue to bear fruit that is pleasing to him. There are flower-beds studded with a variety of beautiful flowers of virtue, diffusing a fragrance which delights even the angels. Here there are meadows verdant with hope, impregnable towers of fortitude, enchanting mansions of confidence and many other delights.

Only the Holy Spirit can teach us the truths that these material objects symbolise. In this place the air is perfectly pure. There is no night but only the brilliant day of the sacred humanity, the resplendent, spotless sun of the Divinity, the blazing furnace of love, melting all the base metal thrown into it and changing it into gold. There the river of humility gushes forth from the soil, divides into four branches and irrigates the whole of this enchanted place. These branches are the four cardinal virtues.

262. The Holy Spirit speaking through the Fathers of the Church, also calls our Lady the Eastern Gate, through which the High Priest, Jesus Christ, enters and goes out into the world. Through this gate he entered the world the first time and through this same gate he will come the second time.

The Holy Spirit also calls her the Sanctuary of the Divinity, the Resting-Place of the Holy Spirit, the Throne of God, the City of God, the Altar of God, the Temple of God, the World of God. All these titles and expressions of praise are very real when related to the different wonders the Almighty worked in her and the graces which he bestowed on her. What wealth and what glory! What a joy and a privilege for us to enter and dwell in Mary, in whom almighty God has set up the throne of his supreme glory!

p. 263. But how difficult it is for us to have the freedom, the ability and the light to enter such an exalted and holy place. This place is guarded not by a cherub, like the first earthly paradise, but by the Holy Spirit himself who has become its absolute Master. Referring to her, he says: "You are an enclosed garden, my sister, my bride, an enclosed garden and a sealed fountain." Mary is enclosed. Mary is sealed. The unfortunate children of Adam and Eve driven from the earthly paradise, can enter this new paradise only by a special grace of the Holy Spirit which they have to merit.

264. When we have obtained this remarkable grace by our fidelity, we should be delighted to remain in Mary. We should rest there peacefully, rely on her confidently, hide ourselves there with safety, and abandon ourselves unconditionally to her, so that within her virginal bosom:

1) We may be nourished with the milk of her grace and her motherly compassion.
2) We may be delivered from all anxiety, fear and scruples.
3) We may be safeguarded from all our enemies, the devil, the world and sin which have never gained admittance there. That is why our Lady says that those who work in her will not sin, that is, those who dwell spiritually in our Lady will never commit serious sin.

4) We may be formed in our Lord and our Lord formed in us, because her womb is, as the early Fathers call it, the house of the divine secrets where Jesus and all the elect have been conceived. "This one and that one were born in her."

For Mary

265. Finally, we must do everything for Mary. Since we have given ourselves completely to her service, it is only right that we should do everything for her as if we were her personal servant and slave. This does not mean that we take her for the ultimate end of our service for Jesus alone is our ultimate end. But we take Mary for our proximate end, our mysterious intermediary and the easiest way of reaching him.

Like every good servant and slave we must not remain idle, but, relying on her protection, we should undertake and carry out great things for our noble Queen. We must defend her privileges when they are questioned and uphold her good name when it is under attack. We must attract everyone, if possible, to her service and to this true and sound devotion. We must speak up and denounce those who distort devotion to her by outraging her Son, and at the same time we must apply ourselves to spreading this true devotion. As a reward for these little services, we should expect nothing in return save the honour of belonging to such a lovable Queen and the joy of being united through her to Jesus, her Son, by a bond that is indissoluble in time and in eternity. Glory to Jesus in Mary! Glory to Mary in Jesus! Glory to God alone!"


A true child of Mary does not engage in dissent from Church teaching or in the promotion of dissenting individuals and organizations.  The Commission for Women is a vehicle for such dissent.  See here, here and here for example.  And also here.

If Father Korcz wants to encourage true devotion to Mary and an authentic marian spirit of prayer and obedience at Our Lady Immaculate parish, he will first have to set the example by actually living such

an authentic devotion.

The Worcester Diocese welcomes a heretic....

 

An anonymous reader left the following at my last post:

On October 27 at 6 p.m., Dr. Thomas Groome will present “Passing on the Gift of Faith” at St. Rose of Lima Church, 244 W. Main Street (Rt. 20), Northboro. It will be preceded by Mass at 5 p.m. for all who would like to attend. This presentation, part of the parish’s Year of Faith efforts, will discuss how we can pass on our faith to children and other adults in challenging times. Professor Groome is chair of the Dept. of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry at Boston College. All are welcome.


The following is taken from the Gospa Missions website:

The False Theology of Dr. Thomas Groome

Laicized priest, Boston College professor of theology and director of the Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry and author of many books used in Catholic education

Introduction:

The purpose of this document is to present Dr. Groome’s views on a not insignificant number of topics that he has disseminated, in print or in lectures or in broadcast interviews, which are in serious conflict with the teachings of the Holy Father and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. It is by no means intended to be an exhaustive analysis of Groome’s dissent from the Doctrines of the Catholic Church as many additional examples can be found in his writings, interviews and lectures. But the examples included are more than sufficient to establish the fact that Dr. Groome’s theology is dangerously opposed to the consistent teaching of Catholic Scripture, the Holy Fathers and Doctors, Pope John Paul II and the loyal Magisterium of the Church.

The format of the document is to present a Dr. Groome’s views, in his own words, on a doctrine of the Catholic church followed by the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church through her Magisterium. I pray that all who read this document will subject Dr. Groome’s theology to a critical and discriminating analysis and will view them with the same “hermeneutic of suspicion” employed by him in his efforts to rewrite sacred scripture and to despoil Catholic Tradition.

Groome’s Position On the teaching authority of the Pope and the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church:

Groome argues that “Throughout his ministry, Jesus called together ‘an inclusive discipleship of equals’ to participate in his mission and to carry it on after him.” [Thomas Groome, Sharing Faith, A Comprehensive Approach to Religious Education & Pastoral Ministry, Harper, San Francisco, 1991, p. 301] op. cit. p. 444]

Expanding on this theme Groome insists that the Church “should be an egalitarian [i.e. Democratic] community.” [Ibid. p. 444]

In this same ‘the Church should be a democracy’ vein Groome insists, “If we remember that the Church is the whole community of the Body of Christ, including all baptized Christians and not just its leaders, then we recognize that the Church’s ‘teaching authority’ cannot be limited to the institutional Magisterium.” [Emphasis added]. [Thomas Groome, Educating For Life, op. cit. p. 241.]

(N.B: the Catholic Church defines “all Christians” as those who are validly baptized into the various Protestants sects as well as those validly baptized into the Catholic Church. In reading Groome it appears that his definition of “Christian” is anyone who is baptized into any persuasion, whether the baptism is judged valid or invalid by the Catholic Church).

· Vatican II emphatically rejected erroneous statements of this sort when it proclaimed: “But the task of giving an authentic interpretation to the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” [Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, n. 25.]

Groome publicly chastised Pope John Paul II for the Holy Father’s teaching in his apostolic letter Ad Tuendam Fidem, whose stated purpose was “to protect the faith of the Catholic Church against errors from certain members of the Christian faithful, especially from among those dedicated to the various disciplines of sacred theology.” Groome attacked the letter calling it “a pretentious attempt by the present pope to stifle conversation and dialogue.” Groome lamented, “I read the blessed thing and without being too melodramatic, I was on the verge of tears. It is a very sad day.” [Thomas H. Groome, The Boston Globe, July 2, 1998.]

Totally misrepresenting the true definition of the Papal Magisterium Groome proclaims “In mainstream Catholic understanding of papal magisterium, however, the pope, as bishop of Rome, must teach in consultation and collegiality with the bishops of the world and represent the consensus faith of the whole Church, in fidelity to Scripture and Tradition.”[Emphasis added] [Thomas Groome, Educating for Life, Thomas More, Texas, 1998, p. 240]

· Vatican I definitively taught “ … that it is a divinely revealed dogma that the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ‘ex cathedra’, i.e., when exercising his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by his supreme apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals which must be held by the universal Church, enjoys, through the divine assistance, that infallibility promised to him in blessed Peter and with which the divine Redeemer wanted His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals; and therefore that the definitions of the same Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves and not from the consent of the Church. If anyone should presume to contradict this definition of ours … anathema - sit." [Emphasis added] [Vatican I Pastor Aeturnus, Chapter IV].

· Vatican II emphatically affirmed that “The Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, namely, and as pastor of the entire Church, has full, supreme and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.” [Emphasis added] [Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, n. 22; cf. Christus Dominus, n. 2]

· Speaking in regard to the supreme teaching authority of the Pope, Lumen Gentium added: “And therefore, his definitions [the Pope’s], of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly styled irreformable … and therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment.” [Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, n. 25]

· Dei Verbum, the Vatican II Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation teaches that Sacred Scripture must be viewed within the context of the Church’s Faith and that we cannot interpret Sacred Scripture such that it invalidates accepted Church teachings. The second principle that must be observed is that we cannot interpret Tradition that comes to us from the apostles in a manner that contradicts what the Magisterium has already ruled definitively to be the doctrine of the Church: “ … since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out. The living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account along with the harmony which exists between elements of the faith. It is the task of exegetes to work according to these rules toward a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture, so that through preparatory study the judgment of the Church may mature. For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God. [Emphasis added]. [Dei Verbum, n.12]
 

It is obvious that Dr. Groome’s theology in this area is seriously at odds with the teaching of Holy Mother Church and in some cases borders on the heretical. His pernicious attempt to destroy the firmly rooted Doctrine of the teaching responsibility and authority of the Pope and the Magisterium, which dates back to the 1^st century, must, in and of itself, disqualify him as a responsible teacher of, or lecturer on, the Catholic Faith.

Groome’s position On Papal succession and the Supremacy of the Successor of Peter:

In a not too subtle effort to disparage the doctrine of papal succession and, therefore the right of the popes, including Pope John Paul II, to teach in the name of Jesus, Groome declares, “The traditional Catholic assertion that there is a direct historical line of succession between the present Pope and Peter,presumed to be the first bishop of Rome, must also be nuanced [i.e. “questioned”].” [Emphasis added] [Thomas Groome, Sharing Faith, op. cit. p. 314.]

Groome continues, “in light of New Testament scholarship, we cannot presume a line of direct succession between pope and Peter...the function of bishop as we might recognize it today did not begin until the second century.” [Ibid. p. 314.]

Groome concludes: “In light of this, ‘the supposition that, when Peter did come to Rome (presumably in the 60’s), he took over and became the first bishop represents a retrojection of later church order’.” [Ibid.]

· The Catholic Church has unambiguously and consistently taught and declared that: “It is by the institution of Christ the Lord, that is, by divine right, that blessed Peter has endless successors in his primacy over the whole Church.” [Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, Denz. 3056.]

· “… the Roman Pontiff is the successor of Blessed Peter in the same primacy.” (i.e. Rome). [Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, Denz. 3058].

· Pope John Paul II has declared that this definition of papal succession“…binds the primacy of Peter and his successor to the See of Rome, which cannot be replaced by any other see.” [Pope John Paul II, The Bishop of Rome Is Peter’s Successor, General Audience, January 27, 1993].

· Vatican I solemnly teaches: “If, then, any one shall say that it is not by the institution of Christ the Lord, or by divine right, that Blessed Peter should have a perpetual line of successors in the primacy over the UniversalChurch; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of Blessed Peter in this primacy - anathema sit.”[Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, Denz. 3058.]

The doctrines of Papal supremacy and the infallible teaching authority of the Pope did not, of course, originate with the 1^st and 2^nd Vatican Councils. From the following citations it is abundantly clear that from the very first days of the Church it was Peter to whom the faithful, including the apostles, looked for leadership and it was the Pope, the Successor of Peter, to whom all faithful Christians turned for the definitive interpretation of Christ’s teachings. The Truth that all Christians must, as articles of faith, believe.

· Pope St.Leo the Great taught the doctrines of Papal succession and the supremacy of the Pope as head of the Apostolic See in the 5^thcentury, by which time it was already a “longstanding custom”: “The Lord . . . wanted His gifts to flow into the entire body from Peter himself, as if from the head, in such a way that anyone who had dared to separate himself from the solidarity of Peter would realize that he was himself no longer a sharer in the divine mystery . . The Apostolic See . . has on countless occasions been reported to in consultation by bishops . . . And through the appeal of various cases to this see, decisions already made have been either revoked or confirmed, as dictated by longstanding custom” [Emphasis added] [Pope St. Leo the Great (r. 440-461) in Letter to the Bishops of Vienne, July, 445 A.D., 10:1-2; in Jurgens, William A., ed. and tr., The Faith of the Early Fathers [FEF], 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3, 269]

· The Council of Lyons II (1274) affirmed that: … it is the teaching authority of the Church itself that determines what is orthodox (including the position of supremacy of the papacy) when it declared: “Also this same holy Roman Church holds the highest and complete primacy and spiritual power over the universal Catholic Church which she truly and humbly recognizes herself to have received with fullness of power from the Lord Himself in Blessed Peter, the chief or head of the Apostles whose successor is the Roman Pontiff. And just as to defend the truth of Faith she is held before all other things, so if any questions shall arise regarding faith they ought to be defined by her judgment . . . in all cases looking forward to an ecclesiastical examination, recourse can be had to her judgment, and all churches are subject to her; their prelates give obedience and reverence to her”. [Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma; translated by Roy J. Deferrari, from the 13th edition of Enchiridion Symbolorum, 1955, Fitzwilliam, NH: Loreto Publications, section 466, p. 185]

· From the Council of Florence (1438-1445), in its Decree for the Greeks, Laetentur coeli, July 6, 1439 we learn that: “We likewise define that the holy Apostolic See, and the Roman Pontiff, hold the primacy throughout the entire world; and that the Roman Pontiff himself is the successor of blessed Peter, the chief of the Apostles, and the true vicar of Christ, and that he is the head of the entire Church, and the father and teacher of all Christians; and that full power was given to him in blessed Peter by our Lord Jesus Christ, to feed, rule, and govern the universal Church; just as is contained in the acts of the ecumenical Councils and in the sacred canons”. [Ibid., section 694, p. 220]

On the ordained Ministry, the Eucharist and the Apostolic Succession:

In Sharing Faith, Dr. Groome supports the notion that Jesus did not commission the apostles at the last supper. “… the many specific ministries in the New Testament church

seems to have emerged from the existential situations and needs of the first Christian communities. Some people were needed to preside at worship others to preach, to teach, … , to minister to people in need, and so on” [Emphasis added]. Groome concludes with the observation that “ … the communities began to designate people to fulfill functions of service … in the name of the church. They did not understand the commissioning to confer a sacral status [on those commissioned]. Designation called one to a function of service but not apart from the rest of the community. [Emphasis added] [ Thomas Groome, Sharing Faith, op. cit. p. 309]

Groome includes the sacral function of presiding at worship with all the other non-sacral functions, which certainly could have been conferred on a person by the community itself or even merely assumed by a person without any investiture, formal or informal, by the community thereby strongly inferring that the sacral ordination of priests was accomplished in the same manner. This is a classic example of Groome’s uncanny ability to interject a seemingly innocuous word or phrase to plant the seed of a heretical view. Employing the “hermeneutic of suspicion”, the cornerstone of his teaching philosophy, to first cast doubt on and then to totally deny, a well established, Traditional teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. One must admit that, unfortunately, he is marvelously skillful at his craft.

Groome often attempts to validate his arguments by citing opinions proposed by well know dissident theologians. In Sharing Faith Groome eagerly embraces an assertion by the well known revisionist theologian Fr. Raymond E. Brown on the ministerial priesthood, which Groome claims is “now generally accepted”; in which Brown proclaims; “In spite of the long tradition of this view, contemporary scholars find no basis for such an interpretation. In other words, Jesus did not ordain the apostles at this final supper to be ‘priests,’ giving them thereby the power to celebrate the eucharist (sic).” [Emphasis added] [ Thomas Groome, Sharing Faith, op. cit. p. 314, 512n. 27.]

Groome’s repudiation of the Church’s teaching on the origin of the ministerial priesthood becomes manifestly evident as he expounds on Brown’s hypothesis. “ Brown is proposing, and his thesis now seems generally accepted, that the first Christians did not see the confecting of the Eucharist as a personal and ontological power invested in one person who rendered Eucharist for the community. Instead, through the presence of the Holy Spirit, the ‘sacramental powers’ resided in the whole community, ……, the community chose certain people to preside at divine worship for the sake of ‘holy order’. Usually … this designation fell to the community leader, not because of a sacral power, but by HER or his function of leadership[Emphasis added].

[Thomas Groome, Sharing Faith, op. cit. p. 310.]

Elsewhere, in his attempt to discredit the church’s consistent teaching on the Hierarchical structure of Holy Orders, Groome claims that “the function of bishop as we might recognize it today did not begin until the second century.” [Sharing Faith, op. cit. p. 314]

Again quoting Raymond Brown, Groome concurs with Brown’s denial of the church’s teaching on Apostolic succession: “There is simply no compelling evidence for the classic thesis that…there was a chain of ordination passing the power of presiding at the Eucharist from the Twelve to missionary apostles to presbyter-bishops. How one got the right to preside and whether it endured beyond a single instance we do not know.” [Emphasis added] [Sharing Faith, op. cit. p. 310]

Commenting on what Groome defines as the “Tridentine perspective” on the “ministry”, which emphasized the division of the Ordained Ministry into bishop, priest and deacon, Groome declares: “New Testament evidence suggests…the Tridentine perception of ministry is much more the product of history and of the socio-cultural contexts in which the church found herself than of any blueprint to be found in the New Testament communities.” [Ibid. p. 311-12.]

Groome concludes that “the notion that presiding at Eucharist is an exclusively priestly function did not become widespread until the beginning of the third century. The association of priesthood with Eucharist emerged as later Christians began to allegorize sacrifices of the Hebrew covenant, which were offered by priests. As Christianity became separated from Judaism and thus from Jewish priesthood, Eucharist was perceived as replacing the sacrifices no longer offered in the now destroyed temple, and thus requiring the sacerdotal function of the priest.” [Emphasis added].[Ibid.]

How many innocent young minds have read or heard these words of Dr. Groome pronounced by a teacher of religious education who is a disciple of Groome and have, to the destruction of their faith and possibly the loss of their immortal souls, concluded that the Eucharist has no more significance than the burnt offerings of the Old Testament priests? In stark contrast to the stated beliefs of Dr. Groome, the Catholic Church has definitively, emphatically and consistently taught:

· “It has always been the conviction of the Church of God …that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change in the whole substance of the bread into the whole substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood.” [Council of Trent, (DS 1642), cf. CCC, 1376]

· “ …. the Eucharist “is the principal and central raison d'être of the sacrament of priesthood, which effectively came into being at the moment of the institution of the Eucharist”. Apostolic Letter Dominicae Cenae(24 February 1980), 2: AAS 72 (1980), 115.]

· The Council of Trent affirmed the Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist and ministerial priesthood with the following words; “Sacrifice and priesthood are by the ordinance of God so united that both have existed in every law. Since therefore in the New Testament the Catholic Church has received from the institution of Christ the holy, visible sacrifice of the Eucharist, it must also be confessed that there is in that Church a new, visible and external priesthood, into which the old has been translated. That this was instituted by the same Lord our Savior, and that to the Apostles and their successors in the priesthood was given the power of consecrating, offering and administering His body and blood … is shown by the Sacred Scriptures and has always been taught by the tradition of the Catholic Church. [Emphasis [Council of Trent, Session 23, Chapter 1]

· Pope John Paul II in his 2003 encyclical on the Eucharist cautions: “At times one encounters an extremely reductive understanding of the Eucharistic mystery. Stripped of its sacrificial meaning, it is celebrated as if it were simply a fraternal banquet. Furthermore, the necessity of the ministerial priesthood, grounded in apostolic succession, is at times obscured and the sacramental nature of the Eucharist is reduced to its mere effectiveness as a form of proclamation”. [Emphasis added]. [ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA n.10]

· “The Eucharist too has its foundation in the Apostles … because it was entrusted by Jesus to the Apostles and has been handed down to us by them and by their successors. It is in continuity with the practice of the Apostles, in obedience to the Lord's command, that the Church has celebrated the Eucharist down the centuries” ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA n.10]

· Vatican Council II teaches that it is the ordained priest who: “acting in the person of Christ, brings about the Eucharistic Sacrifice and offers it to God in the name of all the people”. [Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, 10.]

· “the Eucharist … is a gift which radically transcends the power of the assembly and is … essential for validly linking the Eucharistic consecration to the sacrifice of the Cross and to the Last Supper. The assembly gathered together for the celebration of the Eucharist … absolutely requires the presence of an ordained priest as its president. … the community is by itself incapable of providing an ordained minister. This minister is a gift which the assembly receives through episcopal succession going back to the Apostles. It is the Bishop who, through the Sacrament of Holy Orders, makes a new presbyter by conferring upon him the power to consecrate the Eucharist.”[Emphasis added] [ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA n.29]

· “ …. the Eucharistic mystery cannot be celebrated in any community except by an ordained priest, as the Fourth Lateran Council expressly taught”. [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter Sacerdotium Ministeriale (6 August 1983), III.4: AAS 75 (1983), 1006]

· The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches: “The Lord, having loved those who were his own, loved them to the end. Knowing that the hour had come to leave this world and return to the Father, in the course of a meal he washed their feet and gave them the commandment of love. In order to leave them a pledge of this love, in order never to depart from his own and to make them sharers in his Passover, he instituted the Eucharist as the memorial of his death and Resurrection, and commanded his apostles to celebrate it until his return; ‘thereby he constituted them priests of the New Testament’." [CCC. n. 1337]

· The Council of Trent declared: “If anyone shall say that in the Catholic Church there is not instituted a hierarchy by divine ordinance, which consists of bishops, priests and ministers [i.e. Deacons] - anathema sit.” [Council of Trent, Canons on the Sacrament of Order, Denz. 1776.]

· Pope Pius VI emphatically proclaimed that it is “heretical” to assert: “the power of the ministry and of ecclesial rule comes to the pastors from the community of the faithful.” [Pope Pius VI, Const. Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794, Denz. 1502]

· St. Paul in his farewell discourse to the presbyters of Miletus admonishes: “Now be solicitous for yourselves and for the whole flock in which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as bishops to pasture the Church of God, which he purchased with his own blood” [Acts 20:28].

· Cardinal Ratzinger notes how Acts 20:28 illustrates “ … that the Holy Spirit places men in this office [i.e. the ordained ministry]: it is not a delegation on the part of the community…but the gift of the Lord, who gives personally what only he can give.” [Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Called to Communion, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996, p. 122.]

· St. Paul, himself, left us testimony regarding the bestowal of the ordained ministry effected through the sacramental rite of “laying on of hands”, which transmits the special gift of the Holy Spirit, in his letters to Timothy: “I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands" (2 Tim 1:6), and "If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task" (1Tim 3:1).[64] To Titus he said: “This is why I left you in Crete, that you amend what was defective, and appoint presbyters in every town, as I directed you,” adding that “a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless…he must hold fast to the sure doctrine and also refute those who contradict it.” [Emphasis added] (Titus 1:5-9).

On the Ordination of Women Priests:

Dr. Groome has consistently and emphatically publicly proclaimed his unwavering commitment to the cause of the ordination of women.

As early as 1982, Groome accused the Church of using“false” reasons to justify excluding women from the ordained priesthood. He insisted that women must be admitted to the ministries of“deacon, priest, bishop and pontiff” in order to establish “a Church of mutuality and inclusiveness. [Thomas Groome, Signs of Hope, PACE 12, Direction A, St. Mary’s Press. Winona 1982, pp. 4,6]
 

Groome asserts that the Church’s doctrine regarding the reservation of the ordained priesthood to men alone “is the result of a patriarchal mind-set and culture and is not of Christian faith.” [Thomas Groome, Sharing Faith: A Comprehensive Approach to Religious Education &Pastoral Ministry, Harper, San Francisco, 1991, p. 328.]

Groome castigates the Church with his accusation that: “the injustice of excluding women from priesthood debilitates the church’s sacramentality in the world … it is a countersign to God’s reign." [Ibid.]

Groome alleges that the position of the Church is “ … doing spiritual and moral harm to society.” [Ibid. p. 518.n.114.]

In his program of study for use of inclusive language in the Church, Groome declares that: “the continued exclusion of women from ordained ministry in the Catholic Church is seen by fair-minded scholars as without theological or biblical warrant.” [Thomas Groome, Language for a ‘Catholic’ Church: A Program of Study (revised and updated edition), Sheed&Ward, Kansas City 1995, p. 31]

Dr. Groome is often a featured speaker at Voice of the Faithful (VOTF) affairs where he consistently seizes on the VOTF mantra that the Catholic Church must be restructured along democratic lines in order that: “…we reconstruct the Catholic priesthood” to facilitate the ordination of“ women as priests and bishops.” [Thomas Groome, Boston Globe, May 19, 2002]

In an interview with the Boston Globe in 2003 Dr. Groome made his position on priestly celibacy and the ordination of women to the priesthood perfectly clear by proclaiming: “The present church's legislation requires celibacy, and many of the bishops and the present pope would see that as close to being divinely inspired. That wouldn't be my sentiment at all. I think it's a human regulation that we should dispense with. It should be optional. I would have a similar sentiment on the ordination of women.” [Emphasis added]. [Thomas Groome, Boston Globe, June 26, 2003].

Here again, Dr. Groome skillfully employs the tactic of equating two issues, that of priestly celibacy and the ordination of woman, as being doctrinally equivalent when in fact they are not and cannot be treated as such. Although the Church, for very good reasons, requires and is committed to maintaining mandatory clerical celibacy in the Latin Rite, it does so in its capacity as administrator over God’s Church in which role it demands obedience from its priests. However, the Church’s doctrine on the male-only ministerial priesthood is instituted by Christ and therefore is not within the Church’s power to change. That fact is conveniently glossed over by Dr. Groome.

· “The Catholic Church has never felt that priestly or episcopal ordination can be validly conferred on women. A few heretical sects in the first centuries, especially Gnostic ones, entrusted the exercise of the priestly ministry to women: This innovation was immediately noted and condemned by the Fathers, who considered it as unacceptable in the Church”. [Inter Insigniores Declaration of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the question of admission of women to the ministerial priesthood, 1976.]

· “It should not be supposed that the issue of women’s orders is novel: it dates back to the Montanist heresy of the second and third centuries, and since then has surfaced intermittently in association with comparably gnostic and anti-historical interpretations of Christianity.” [Fr. Donald Keefe, S.J., Covenantal Theology: The Eucharistic Order of History, Presidio Press, Novato, California, 1996, p. 42]

· In 1994, Pope John Paul II published the apostolic letter In Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, stating the Church’s position on conferring priestly ordination on women. The Holy Father proclaims that this teaching is founded on the example of Christ, as recorded in the Gospels and on the universal Tradition of the Church. Therefore the Holy Father declared: “Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.” [Emphasis added]. [Pope John Paul II, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, n. 4 ; cf. nn. 1, 2]


Source document may be found here.

As I said in a previous post, the Worcester Diocese has succumbed over the years to the tragic tendency to place unity above the truth. The company man who is willing to "go along" with sin and error "for the sake of friendship" is most welcome in this distorted notion of "community." But the man who puts the truth first is pushed to the margins and ostracized.