Deacon Richard Tatro's dishonest homily...

This past Saturday, during the 4:30 Vigil Mass at Holy Cross Church in Templeton, Massachusetts, Deacon Richard Tatro assaulted parishioners with his distorted theology and his fundamentalist interpretation of Jesus's command to "judge not" (Matthew 7:1-5).

Deacon Tatro cited the unfair criticism of the Cure of Ars, Saint John Vianney, with regard to his academic difficulties, specifically his problem absorbing Latin.

Here the criticism, the negative judgements, were obviously unjust.  For though Saint Vianney was not academically gifted, his holiness of life and his wisdom shined brightly for all to see (save for those "scholars" who were his contemporaries).  But does it follow that all judgements are therefore sinful or illicit?

Of course not.  Which is what makes Tatro's homily so insidious.

Catholics of Tatro's stripe apparently believe that love of enemies means condoning vice and sin. In the words of Dr. Germain Grisez, one of the finest moral theologians of our time, "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 lovedoes 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."

Poorly instructed Catholics are often heard to remark "I don't like the word 'judge,' or to those of us who defend the Church's authentic Magisterial teaching while exposing error they will say: "You're judging."

What if we are? Judging isn't always sinful. It is only sinful when we judge another's interior dispositions, when we judge their soul. But we are entirely free to judge words, ideas and actions which fail to hold up when placed in the Lumen Christi (Light of Christ).

Sacred Scripture (which these confused souls obviously don't spend much time with) 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.

As this article explains, devout Catholics who speak out against error or immorality are often shot down immediately with the accusation that they are being "judgmental," that the Bible teaches us not to judge others, that they should just mind their own business. "After all," they’re told, "I’m not judging you and you shouldn’t be judging me. Read the Bible." But is that really what the Bible teaches?

When pressed to show where the Bible supports this, those who can come up with any response at all usually point to Jesus’ words found in the Gospel of Matthew, "Judge not, that you not be judged." Most people will stop there, with the clear conviction that the Bible teaches that we are not to pass any form of judgment on others. A closer look at this Bible verse and other related verses, however, uncovers a different understanding of Jesus’ teaching.

First, let’s look at the full context of Jesus’ words:

Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (Matt. 7:1-5)

If we break this passage down line by line, it becomes clear that Jesus was not telling his disciples that they could not ever judge the behavior of others. Rather, he was cautioning them to live righteous lives themselves so that their judgment of others’ behavior would not be rash judgment and their efforts would be effective in admonishing their neighbors.

"Judge not, that you be not judged." By itself, this statement could be construed to mean that one may escape even God’s judgment simply by not judging the behavior of others. Of course, everyone is judged by God, so this cannot be a proper understanding. Jesus goes on to reformulate his statement in a positive way: "With the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get." Jesus indeed expects his disciples to judge but he warns that they, too, will be judged in a like manner.

This is reminiscent of the line in the Lord’s Prayer, "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" (Matt. 6:12). Much more than a simple warning that God will treat us as we treat others, this is an appeal to each of us to be as much as we can like God in the way that we treat others. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, "there has to be a vital participation, coming from the depths of the heart, in the holiness and the mercy and the love of our God. Only the Spirit by whom we live can make ‘ours’ the same mind that was in Christ Jesus" (CCC 2842).

In the next two lines Jesus cautions against hypocrisy: "Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?" Judging hypocritically is not effective. A petty thief admonished by a bank robber only scoffs at his admonisher.

Jesus then explains how to judge rightly: "First take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye." Much to the point of this article, there can be no doubt that those final words—"take the speck out of your brother’s eye"—are, indeed, permission to judge so long as it is done rightly.

Other Bible passages which seem on the surface to indicate a condemnation of judging others’ behavior may be treated similarly in their full context. The idea of rightly judging the behavior of others can be found throughout the New Testament.

Jesus told the Jews, "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment" (John 7:24).

He instructed his disciples what to do if someone sins against them:

Go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matt. 18:15-17)
It is not possible to follow Jesus’ instructions without being "judgmental" of another’s behavior.

Paul, too, exhorted right judgment of other Christians: "For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. Drive out the wicked person from among you" (1 Cor. 5:12-13).

Also, "Do you not know that the saints [i.e. Christians] will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life!…Shun immorality" (1 Cor. 6:2-18).

A look at the Old Testament reveals similar teaching: "You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor" (Lev. 19:15).

Clearly, contrary to what many would prefer to believe, the Bible exhorts us to rightly judge the behavior of others.

Deacon Tatro should apologize for his dishonest homily.  The role of any cleric, be he priest or Deacon, is to offer sound doctrine, which the faithful have a right to - see for example Veritatis Splendor, No. 113).

In fact, I issue a challenge to Deacon Tatro.  In light of the clear and unambiguous teaching presented in this post, please explain why you decided to offer parishioners at Holy Cross Church not the fine wheat of sound Catholic doctrine, but instead served up a meal of chaff.

Deacon?

When crimes become religion....

Vox Cantor asks: "who is [this] Jason Welle EssJay and why is he being ordained to the priesthood?"  His article is not for the squeamish.  But anyone familiar with the Jesuits, their betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, and their penchant for ordaining sodomites or homosexual activists will not be surprised.  See here for example.


This really shouldn't surprise us. Those who abandon Divine Revelation and the Natural Law will no longer seek God and His precepts and Commandments but will instead pursue their own lusts and fantasies. Such people will create and adore their own gods which are almost always a mythical projection of their own vices. They attribute a religious dimension to these vices to "baptize" them, to justify them in their own darkened minds.

It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said:

"That Jupiter of theirs is not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own thunders...now breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion." (Letters 1:8).

In a series of letters written from 1969-1970, Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparition] wrote: "It is indeed sad that so many people let themselves be dominated by the diabolical wave that is sweeping the world, and that they are blinded to the point of being incapable of seeing error! Their principal fault is they have abandoned prayer; in this way they have become estranged from God, and without God everything fails. The devil is very cunning and looks for our weak points in order to attack us. If we are not diligent and careful to obtain strength from God, we shall fall, for our age is very wicked and we are weak. Only the strength of God can keep us on our feet."

There is a retreat from truth. Those of us who refuse to abandon our Christian faith must be demonized. We must be placed in a ghetto. Isolated. Portrayed as "backward" and "archaic." And eventually placed in internment camps or simply eliminated altogether should we refuse to accept the New Order.

Deacon Scott Colley of Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol bans me for defending reverence in the liturgy

Albert Drexel, in Ein Neuer Prophet? (Stein am Rhein: Christiana, 1971) explains that: "The modernism or neo-modernism within Christianity, and especially within the Roman Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council, is above all characterized by a turning away from the supernatural and an exclusive predilection for this world, the Aggiornamento of Pope John XXIII interpreted one-sidedly and hence misapplied. Teilhard's ideology was was a definitive precondition for this. Inasmuch as he turned his back to the past, fused God and the supernatural with the process of a universal evolutionism, and proclaimed religion to be an active participation in a progressive development ending in Point Omega, the basis was given for a humanist cult of the secular." (p. 115).

In the New World Order, man will no longer believe in a God whom he cannot control. Man will worship himself and his new leader who will, like Hitler, be deified: the man spoken of by Saint Paul as the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition.

The new worship which is emerging is man-centered. And it is reflected in various liturgical actions such as banal pop-style music "concerts" and spontaneous applause over human achievement. Pope [Emeritus] Benedict XVI - while still Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger - wrote a book entitled "The Spirit of the Liturgy," in which he warned that, "Wherever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment. Such attractiveness fades quickly - it cannot compete in the market of leisure pursuits, incorporating as it increasingly does various forms of religious titillation...Liturgy can only attract people when it looks, not at itself, but at God, when it allows him to enter and act. Then something truly unique happens, beyond competition, and people have a sense that more has taken place than a recreational activity." (The Spirit of the Liturgy, Ignatius Press, pp. 198-199).

Since Vatican II, we have entered the time of wretched idolatry prophesied by the Fathers of the Church - for they emphasized the corruption of the liturgy which would prevail just prior to Antichrist during the last days. The Holy Mass is valid in her essence. But years of reckless tinkering with sacred realities has produced a mediocrity-ridden liturgy, a shallow show which has distracted from the holy while driving the faithful out the doors or so weakening their faith that they find themselves paralyzed before the current zeitgeist. Emptied churches, convents and seminaries does not a reform make.

On many occasions during the liturgy at Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol, Massachusetts [Diocese of Worcester],the entire atmosphere has been more akin to a circus than a solemn liturgy. I am reminded of the words of the Psalmist:

"Why, God, have you cast us off forever? Why does your anger burn against the sheep of your pasture? Remember your people, whom you acquired of old, the tribe you redeemed as your own heritage, Mount Zion where you dwell. Direct your steps toward the utter destruction, everything the enemy laid waste in the sanctuary.Your foes roared triumphantly in the place of your assembly; they set up their own tokens of victory. They hacked away like a forester gathering boughs, swinging his ax in a thicket of trees. They smashed all its engraved work, struck it with ax and pick. They set your sanctuary on fire, profaned your name’s abode by razing it to the ground. They said in their hearts, “We will destroy them all! Burn all the assembly-places of God in the land!” Even so we have seen no signs for us, there is no prophet any more, no one among us who knows for how long. How long, O God, will the enemy jeer? Will the enemy revile your name forever? Why draw back your hand, why hold back your right hand within your bosom? Yet you, God, are my king from of old, winning victories throughout the earth. You stirred up the sea by your might; you smashed the heads of the dragons on the waters. You crushed the heads of Leviathan, gave him as food to the sharks.You opened up springs and torrents, brought dry land out of the primeval waters. Yours the day and yours the night too; you set the moon and sun in place. You fixed all the limits of the earth; summer and winter you made. Remember how the enemy has jeered, LORD, how a foolish people has reviled your name. Do not surrender to wild animals those who praise you; do not forget forever the life of your afflicted. Look to your covenant, for the recesses of the land are full of the haunts of violence. Let not the oppressed turn back in shame; may the poor and needy praise your name. Arise, God, defend your cause; remember the constant jeering of the fools. Do not forget the clamor of your foes, the unceasing uproar of your enemies." (Psalm 74)

After leaving the above quotation from then Cardinal Ratzinger's book The Spirit of the Liturgy at the Facebook page of the North Quabbin Catholic Community, Deacon Scott Colley, who manages the Facebook page, blocked me from participation.  And this as he preaches on the importance of being a "welcoming parish."  Welcoming apparently to anyone except those devout Catholics who hold onto tradition and a spirit of reverence in the liturgy.

This comes as no surprise.  For not once have I witnessed a spirit of prayer in Deacon Colley.  He usually arrives at the last moment before Mass and may be seen conversing with friends rather than preparing for Mass.  Reverence is the basis of all true personality.  Dr. Hildebrand explains: "The significance of reverence for the full personality can easily be grasped. The greatest natural endowment, the greatest latitude of talents and capacities can never lead to true personality if reverence is lacking. For the latter is the basis of the second essential component of personality, the perceiving of values, an organic contact with the world of values, and - most ultimate of all - the dying to oneself, the preparation of inner room for Christ. The man without reverence is necessarily flat and limited. This lack is an essential mark of stupidity. Even he whose mind is obdurate and helpless, but who possesses reverence, does not manifest that offensive, tactlessly persistent stupidity of which it is said that 'even the gods struggle against it in vain.'" (Liturgy and Personality, pp. 50-51).

Because lack of reverence may have two roots, Dr. Hildebrand notes that, "..there are two different types of men who lack reverence: the arrogant person and the senseless, blunt one. The root of the first is to be found in pride. The man who lacks reverence because of pride and arrogance approaches everything with conceit and presumption, imagines that he knows everything, that he sees through everything. He is interested in the world only insofar as it serves his self-glorification, insofar as it enhances his own importance...He thinks himself always greater than that which is not himself. The world holds no mystery for him. He treats everything tactlessly, with easy familiarity, and everything seems to him to be at his disposal. To his insolent, conceited gaze, to his despotic approach, the world is sealed, silent, stripped of all mystery, deprived of all depth, flat and limited to one dimension. He stands in desolate emptiness, blind to all the values and secrets of being, circling endlessly around himself...

There is however another form of irreverence, one which is born of concupiscence. The concupiscent man is interested in the world only as a means of procuring pleasure for himself. His is a dominating position in the face of being - not because he wills domination as such but because he wants to use being for his pleasure. He, too, circles around in the narrowness of his own self. He does not face the world with arrogance and conceit but with a blunt stupidity. Stubbornly imprisoned in his own self, he violates being, and seeing it only from the outside, he thus misses its true meaning. To this type of irreverent man the world also refuses to disclose its breadth, height, and depth, its richness of values and mysteries." (Liturgy and Personality, pp. 49-50).

Rather then engaging in knee-jerk hatred against my person for insisting upon reverence in the liturgy, perhaps Deacon Colley should examine his own attitude toward the Holy Mass and his motivations in banning me from participation in the life of the parish?

Parishioner from St. Joseph's Parish in Fitchburg: "You're an idiot."

In a previous post, I noted that the Creed is often omitted during Holy Mass in certain parishes throughout the Worcester Diocese.  One of these parishes where the Creed was recently omitted is Saint Joseph's Parish in Fitchburg, Massachusetts.

Evidently my post struck a nerve.  I received a couple of hateful comments, one of them calling me an idiot and suggesting that the celebrant that day, Father Richard Trainor, simply forgot to include the Creed.  The problem with this theory is that Father Trainor concelebrated the Mass with a visiting La Salette priest that day and there were two deacons also present - Deacon Jim Couture and retired Deacon Bob Leger.  Surely with two priests and two deacons present, somebody could have remembered the Creed.

There is a point when the lying and the excuses have to stop.  We are told in Ephesians that, "Speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ....Therefore, putting away falsehood, let everyone speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another." (Eph 4: 15, 25).

The anonymous person who called me an idiot then asserted that I am "unmanly" because I didn't approach Father Trainor with my concerns.  Two things: First, Father Trainor should understand his role in the liturgy without my holding his hand.  Secondly, when I approached the pastoral leaders at Saint Joseph's in the past with suggestions, I was treated with outright hatred and hostility.  I was also excluded from participation in the life of the parish.  I really do not care to subject myself to more of their abuse.

But here's the thing folks.  Sacrosanctum Concilium of the Second Vatican Council states clearly in No. 22 that:

"1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.


2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.

3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority."

Canon 846 of the Code of Canon Law states clearly that:

"The liturgical books, approved by the competent authority, are to be faithfully followed in the celebration of the sacraments.  Accordingly, no one may on a personal initiative add to or omit or alter anything in those books."
And I'm an idiot for expecting the two priests and the two deacons present to abide by the Church's teaching and Canon Law?

You don't have a vocation in the Worcester Diocese unless you place community above truth?

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand reminds us, in his essay entitled "Is Unity among the Faithful the Highest Value?," that, "There is another great danger which goes together with the distortion of love of neighbor: the danger of putting community above truth, and of implicitly making peace the highest value.  Unfortunately this tendency to regard community as more important than truth is very widespread in the holy Church today.

The first great error which we find here is the separation of community from truth.  All genuine community among men presupposes that they encounter one another in a certain realm of goods.  The solidarity which comes from worshipping the same idol and working for it, or from working together for something false or evil, does not deserve the name of community.  Such a pseudo-community is a definite evil, and possesses a disvalue.  The value which community possesses as such is here poisoned by the disvalue of that which brings people together, of that in whose name they are united.  Surely unity, community has a value of its own.  The unity of man is something of value not only because it the opposite of strife and struggle; it also has a value which is absent as long as individual men are indeed at peace, but not united in community...Community based upon error or something evil not only has no value, it has a definite disvalue.  A pseudo-community built on some evil idol is something much worse than many individual, unrelated men who are in error or do evil.  It is not only that it is worse for many to fall into error or heresy than for one to do so; it is not a question merely of a quantitative increase.  No, it is the very unity of those who encounter one another in untruth and evil which gives birth to a pure disvalue and heightens the evil.

The value of true community, the concordia,  becomes in a pseudo-community a definite disvalue.  Thus it is utterly impossible to separate community from truth, and to make community the most important thing.  Community is dependent in both its nature and value on the truth on which it is built....The value of the truth and of the true Faith is thus undeniably greater than that of community...Indeed, the value of standing in the truth, and confessing the true God, is even greater than that of the marvelous community of the mystical body of Christ.  For it is in the true Faith and in real love of God that community with Him is constituted, and this is clearly the most important thing, and that from which all other community is dependent in its nature and value...overemphasis on community, on unity among men, this tendency to put unity above the truth and orthodoxy, is a consequence of the disastrous this-worldliness which is analogous to emphasizing love of neighbor at the expense of love of God.."

It would certainly appear that the Worcester Diocese has succumbed over the years to this 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.  For example, I stand fully with the Church's magisterial teaching.  I defend the same.  On numerous occasions I have expressed my desire to pursue a vocation to the priesthood.  But my queries have been ignored.  But Mr. Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas has been welcomed with open arms.  The difference?  Deacon Slavinskas has had praise for the late Bishop Timothy J. Harrington (who was dissent-friendly) and for Fr. Joseph Coonan, a priest who was mired in scandal and who was placed on leave in 2002 when accusations were made against him.  Specifically, Fr. Coonan was accused of physically abusing as many as fifteen men as well as his own mother and sister.

Regarding Bishop Timothy J. Harrington, Catholic apologist Richard Blanchard wrote him an open letter in his "Just the Facts" newsletter some years ago.  In this open letter, Richard Blanchard wrote (in part):

"When the Holy Father's legate, Archbishop Pio Laghi, handed you the crosier he confirmed your three-fold ministry as head shepherd of the Worcester diocese.  You became the officially authorized Prophet, Priest, and King to the people of God....These are powers of God's making that you freely accepted to serve the people of God.  To exercise these duties in all their integrity you must be one with the Chief Shepherd, the Holy Father.  You have sworn allegiance to the Holy Father in a formal way before Bishop Flanagan and the appropriate documents were sent to Rome...

We are now in the seventh year of shepherding.  How does your sworn oath of allegiance stand?  Over the years dissenters have been allowed access to the diocesan newspaper of which you are the publisher.  Dissenters have free play in the Office of Vicar of Religious, the Diocesan Commission for Women, and the Department of Religious Education.  Dissenters have spread their lies about abortion, contraception, women priests, and the legitimacy to dissent against the Supreme Authority in the Church, the Holy Father....The Holy Father has asked that all bishops give proof of their pastoral ability and leadership by withholding all support from individuals or groups who, in the name of progress, justice, or compassion, or for any other reason, promote the ordination of women to the priesthood.  Yet you fully support your own Diocesan Commission for Women that has constantly promoted the cause for women's ordination.....You were given the names of arch-dissidents who freely go about their work of undermining the Faith in your diocese.  The list included Sister Anna Marie Kane, S.S.J., who is pro-choice and pro-women's ordination, Dr. Vincent Ford, Dr. Alice affey, Dr. Bernard Cooke, Dr. David O'Brien, all professors at Holy Cross, who dissent against Church teaching.  How does your sworn allegiance stand up to this?"

Because I have been asking the same questions since the early 1990s, because I too oppose such dissent, I am not welcome.  You see, I refuse to place community above truth.  I refuse to march in lockstep with those who oppose the mind of Christ.  I refuse to condone the sexual abuse of children or homosexual behavior or to portray such evils as "harmless fun and sex games."

The Third Reich placed unity over truth.  The Communists did the same.  So too did Jim Jones' "People's Temple" which soon enough became the People's Tomb.

Related reading here.

Deacon Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas: "Father Joseph Coonan was a great influence and helped nourish my vocation"

Deacon Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas, one of four deacons to be ordained for the Worcester Diocese on June 2nd at Saint Paul Cathedral, is featured in an article by Tanya Connor in this week's "Catholic" Free Press.  Deacon Slavinskas says that his vocation journey began with Bishop Timothy J. Harrington, who was known for being very dissent-friendly.  I wrote Bishop Harrington many times over the years about various issues, most especially the column of dissident priest Father Richard P. McBrien which appeared in the diocesan newspaper with his approval.  Bishop Harrington assured me in one letter that he didn't find anything wrong with Fr. McBrien's column.  This came as no surprise at the time.

In the same article, Deacon Slavinskas is quoted as having said that, "Father (Joseph) Coonan, of course, was such a great influence, and helped nourish my vocation." (CFP, May 25, 2012 edition, p. 7). 

It is troubling to hear that Fr. Joseph Coonan was "a great influence" on Deacon Slavinskas.  I say this because some fifteen men came forward to share very similar stories about abuse, many involving Joseph Coonan's fondness for watching boys urinate, defecate or masturbate.  According to an article in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette (August 9, 2002 edition), two Oxford natives came forward with details of alleged sexual misconduct against Fr. Coonan, who was then serving at St. John's Church in Worcester.  Both men said that Fr. Coonan had delved into sexual perversion and had urged them to urinate or defecate in his presence.  See here.  Fr. Coonan was also accused (twice) of assaulting his mother and sister while intoxicated.  See here.

My prayers are with Deacon Slavinskas.  Especially given some of the influences on his vocation.  I urge you to keep him in your prayers as well.  In his first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul writes, "Do not be led astray: 'Bad company corrupts good morals'." (1 Cor 15: 33). 

Related reading here.

Deacon Ben Nogueira: Will you fulfill your mission as a Deacon of the Catholic Church and speak out against the homosexual lifestyle?

Pope Leo XIII exhorted Catholics to defend their faith amidst the pluralism of conflicting modern opinions. In his Encyclical Letter Sapientiae Christianae, our beloved Holy Father of happy memory cited the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas that all believers should defend the faith when it is endangered (S.t., 2-2, q.3, a.2, ad 2) and added:

"To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind." (Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, AAS 22 (1889-90) 390, PE, 111.14).

In the Church, everyone has a duty to be salt and light and to work for the renewal of society.  Deacons are no exception.  The Constitution on the Church [Lumen Gentium] of the Second Vatican Council had this to say: "At a lower level of the hierarchy are deacons, upon whom hands are imposed 'not unto the priesthood, but unto a ministry of service.'  For strengthened in sacramental grace, in communion with the bishop and his group of priests they serve in the diaconate of the liturgy, of the Word, and of charity to the People of God...Dedicated to duties of charity and administration, let deacons be mindful of the admonition of Blessed Polycarp: 'Be merciful, diligent, walking according to the truth of the Lord, who became the servant of all.'" (Lumen Gentium, No. 29).  Later in the same document we read, "Ministers of lesser rank are also sharers in the mission and grace of the supreme priest" and that Deacons are "dispensers of Christ's mysteries and servants of the Church" who should in holiness "stand before men as personifications of goodness and friends of God." (Lumen Gentium, No. 41).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches clearly that homosexuality is contrary to nature and that homosexual acts are among the "sins gravely contrary to chastity" (CCC, 2396).  Homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered," "contrary to the natural law" and "under no circumstances can they be approved." (CCC, 2357).  But at the website for your campus ministry at Fitchburg State College this teaching is nowhere to be found.  Instead we find a link for NACDLGM, a group which purports to be "Catholic" while undermining Church teaching on homosexuality and mocking Pope Benedict XVI.

As Matt Abbot has noted, a veteran reporter covered a 2005 NACDLGM conference which was held at the San Jose Hilton in California. This reporter writes, "For the most part, participants were unashamedly 'out and proud,' with some priests freely admitting their homosexuality and attendees railing against upcoming seminary visits and the impending approval by Pope Benedict XVI of a document banning homosexuals from the priesthood. One participant was overheard by this reporter calling the Holy Father, Benedict XVI, 'a big queen'...Copies of OutNow, a Bay Area homosexual news magazine containing advertisements for bathhouses and XXX 'gay' videos were free for the taking at the registration table..."

Deacon Nogueira, area Catholics have a right to know where you stand with regard to Catholic teaching on homosexuality.  Do you accept the Church's teaching as outlined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church?  And while we're on the subject, what are your thoughts regarding the annual drag show held at Fitchburg State College?  The Gay Straight Alliance at Fitchburg State? 

Deacon Nogueira, do you stand with Christ or chaos?  Christ or a secularized culture?

Let us strive for peace and not simply preach it...

This past weekend at Holy Mass, a Deacon at Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol, Massachusetts preached on forgiveness and peace.  This is the same Deacon who disrupted the Rosary I was praying just prior to Christmas Mass.  The same Deacon who found it necessary to confront me with an insulting and sarcastic attitude in an attempt to humiliate me before others.

Peace?

Make no mistake about it, I have forgiven this Deacon.  But we must give more than lip service to peace.  We must strive with the help of God's grace to obtain peace in our own lives.  Such is the fruit of prayer.  Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains that lack of peace separates us from other persons.  He writes that lack of peace, "..makes us unable to attend to other persons according to the will of God.  And so, inasmuch as it renders us egocentric, our lack of peace also causes us to offend against charity." (Transformation in Christ, p. 389). 

Dr. Hildebrand continues, "Meekness is but the actualization of this inner harmony on the plane of our relationships with others: the shaping of all our reference to, and treatment of, our fellow men by the principle of a spontaneous, unhampered, overflowing charity.  This dependence of meekness on patience and true peace makes it doubly evident that true meekness is unattainable for anyone who does not live through and in Christ." (p. 419).  "Meekness,' explains this great philosopher, "..bears mainly on our behavior towards our fellow men.  It is specifically opposed to two sets of qualities: first, to everything brutal, uncouth, coarse-grained, and violent; secondly, to all modes of hostility, to the subtly or pointedly venomous as well as to the massive or rabid form of hostility.." (p. 401).

Meekness does not, of course, mean the passive toleration of all wrongs as Dr. Hildebrand explains.  Nor is it a "dull acquiescence in the dominion of sin" (p. 420).  The Church's authentic peace is ever at war with everything which falls under the dominion of sin.  See here.  We kill the error and love the one who errs as St. Augustine put it.  Interficere errorem, diligere errantem.

The person who is truly meek and seeking peace will fight when it's time to fight.  But he or she will not exhibit a hardened or cramped attitude toward others.  Such a person will certainly not seek to sow discord.

Pope Benedict XVI's Christmas Urbi et Orbi Message and a Deacon at Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol

In his Christmas Urbi et Orbi (To the City and the World) Message, Pope Benedict XVI said:

"Dear brothers and sisters listening to me here in Rome and throughout the world, I joyfully proclaim the message of Christmas: God became man; he came to dwell among us. God is not distant: he is 'Emmanuel, God-with-us. He is no stranger: he has a face, the face of Jesus. This message is ever new, ever surprising, for it surpasses even our most daring hope.

First of all, because it is not merely a proclamation: it is an event, a happening, which credible witnesses saw, heard and touched in the person of Jesus of Nazareth! Being in his presence, observing his works and hearing his words, they recognised in Jesus the Messiah; and seeing him risen, after his crucifixion, they were certain that he was true man and true God, the only-begotten Son come from the Father, full of grace and truth (cf. Jn 1:14).

'The Word became flesh'. Before this revelation we once more wonder: how can this be? The Word and the flesh are mutually opposed realities; how can the eternal and almighty Word become a frail and mortal man? There is only one answer: Love. Those who love desire to share with the beloved, they want to be one with the beloved, and Sacred Scripture shows us the great love story of God for his people which culminated in Jesus Christ.

God in fact does not change: he is faithful to himself. He who created the world is the same one who called Abraham and revealed his name to Moses: 'I am who I am' … the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob … a God merciful and gracious, abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (cf. Ex 3:14-15; 34:6). God does not change; he is Love, ever and always. In himself he is communion, unity in Trinity, and all his words and works are directed to communion. The Incarnation is the culmination of creation. When Jesus, the Son of God incarnate, was formed in the womb of Mary by the will of the Father and the working of the Holy Spirit, creation reached its high point. The ordering principle of the universe, the Logos, began to exist in the world, in a certain time and space...this truth is revealed to those who receive it in faith, for it is a mystery of love. Only those who are open to love are enveloped in the light of Christmas. So it was on that night in Bethlehem, and so it is today. The Incarnation of the Son of God is an event which occurred within history, while at the same time transcending history. In the night of the world a new light was kindled, one which lets itself be seen by the simple eyes of faith, by the meek and humble hearts of those who await the Saviour. If the truth were a mere mathematical formula, in some sense it would impose itself by its own power. But if Truth is Love, it calls for faith, for the “yes” of our hearts.

And what do our hearts, in effect, seek, if not a Truth which is also Love? Children seek it with their questions, so disarming and stimulating; young people seek it in their eagerness to discover the deepest meaning of their life; adults seek it in order to guide and sustain their commitments in the family and the workplace; the elderly seek it in order to grant completion to their earthly existence.

'The Word became flesh'. The proclamation of Christmas is also a light for all peoples, for the collective journey of humanity. “Emmanuel”, God-with-us, has come as King of justice and peace. We know that his Kingdom is not of this world, and yet it is more important than all the kingdoms of this world. It is like the leaven of humanity: were it lacking, the energy to work for true development would flag: the impulse to work together for the common good, in the disinterested service of our neighbour, in the peaceful struggle for justice. Belief in the God who desired to share in our history constantly encourages us in our own commitment to that history, for all its contradictions. It is a source of hope for everyone whose dignity is offended and violated, since the one born in Bethlehem came to set every man and woman free from the source of all enslavement.

May the light of Christmas shine forth anew in the Land where Jesus was born, and inspire Israelis and Palestinians to strive for a just and peaceful coexistence. May the comforting message of the coming of Emmanuel ease the pain and bring consolation amid their trials to the beloved Christian communities in Iraq and throughout the Middle East; may it bring them comfort and hope for the future and bring the leaders of nations to show them effective solidarity. May it also be so for those in Haiti who still suffer in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake and the recent cholera epidemic. May the same hold true not only for those in Colombia and Venezuela, but also in Guatemala and Costa Rica, who recently suffered natural disasters.

May the birth of the Saviour open horizons of lasting peace and authentic progress for the peoples of Somalia, Darfur and Côte d’Ivoire; may it promote political and social stability in Madagascar; may it bring security and respect for human rights in Afghanistan and in Pakistan; may it encourage dialogue between Nicaragua and Costa Rica; and may it advance reconciliation on the Korean peninsula.

May the birth of the Saviour strengthen the spirit of faith, patience and courage of the faithful of the Church in mainland China, that they may not lose heart through the limitations imposed on their freedom of religion and conscience but, persevering in fidelity to Christ and his Church, may keep alive the flame of hope. May the love of 'God-with-us' grant perseverance to all those Christian communities enduring discrimination and persecution, and inspire political and religious leaders to be committed to full respect for the religious freedom of all.

Dear brothers and sisters, 'the Word became flesh'; he came to dwell among us; he is Emmanuel, the God who became close to us. Together let us contemplate this great mystery of love; let our hearts be filled with the light which shines in the stable of Bethlehem! To everyone, a Merry Christmas!"

What struck me the most in our Holy Father's Christmas message were these words: "Only those who are open to love are enveloped in the light of Christmas."  Last night, I attended a Christmas Eve Mass at Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol, Massachusetts.  I was in a cheerful mood (as always) and prayerfully preparing for Mass when I was approached by one of the parish's deacons who began to lecture me about making room for "elderly people" who were in need of a seat.  When I calmly informed him that no one had approached us (I was with family) to ask us if we could slide down the pew, he answered with dripping sarcasm, "Consider yourself approached."

Was the deacon's attitude Christ-like?  Is it evidence of a person who is "open to love"?  Or does it not betray a lack of charity?  The homily at Mass, delivered by Father Richard Jakubauskas, was largely about the need to embrace love and kindness toward one another.  But words are cheap when they are not backed up with concrete action.

Jesus condemned the Pharisees because they were all show.  Their actions did not correspond to their preaching.  Is that not the case here?  Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council tells us that, "Ministers of the lesser rank are also sharers in the mission and grace of the supreme priest.  In the first place among these ministers are deacons, who inasmuch as they are dispensers of Christ's mysteries and servants of the Church, should keep themselves free from every vice and stand before men as personifications of goodness and friends of God (cf. 1 Tm 3: 8-10, 12-13).  Clerics, who are called by the Lord and are set aside as his portion in order to prepare themselves for the various ministerial offices under the watchful eye of spiritual shepherds, are bound to bring their hearts and minds into accord with this special election (which is theirs).  They will accomplish this by their constancy in prayer, by their burning love, and by their unremitting recollection of whatever is true, just and of good repute.." (No. 41).

Only those who are open to love are enveloped in the light of Christmas.  There is a deacon in Athol who should meditate very carefully on those words.  Although this unhappy soul attempted to distract me from prayer and to squash my joyous spirit, he failed.  Emmanuel: God with us....even if others be against us!

Join Deacon Nick Donnelly in defending the Holy Father

"Where Peter is, There is the Church, There is God"
Love for the Roman Pontiff must be in us a delightful passion, for in him we see Christ (In Love With the Church, 13).

The Newman Center at Fitchburg State College: faithful to the Church's teaching regarding homosexuality?

The Newman Center at Fitchburg State College has published a series of lectures given by Fr. Bruce Williams, O.P., at its website. One of these lectures deals specifically with the Church's teaching regarding homosexuality and same-sex "marriage." In this lecture, the full text of which may be found here, Fr. Williams presents the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church as "evolving," and adds, "Support for gay and lesbian rights legislation and (or) municipal ordinances is well within the parameters of Catholic moral teaching..."

Really? The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith would beg to differ. In its document entitled, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, which was published on July 31, 2003 and signed by the Congregation's Prefect Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the CDF explains that marriage "is not just any relationship between human beings. It was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties and purpose." This important document continues:

"There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts 'close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.'" (No. 4).

Considerations refutes the objection often raised by those within the homosexual movement (or by those who are sympathetic toward its agenda) that laws permitting homosexual unions would not harm the common good since they do not impose anything:

"In this area, one needs first to reflect on the difference between homosexual behavior as a private phenomenon and the same behavior as a relationship in society, foreseen and approved by the law, to the point where it becomes one of the institutions in the legal structure. This second phenomenon is not only more serious, but also assumes a more wide-reaching and profound influence, and would result in changes to the entire organization of society, contrary to the common good. Civil laws are structuring principles of man's life in society, for good or for ill. They 'play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior.' Lifestyles and the underlying presuppositions these express not only externally shape the life of society, but also tend to modify the younger generation's perception and evaluation of forms of behavior. Legal recognition of homosexual unions would obscure certain basic moral values and cause a devaluation of the institution of marriage." (No. 10).

Considerations points out the grave consequences to society if homosexual unions were to be legalized:

"The inevitable consequence of legal recognition of homosexual unions would be the redefinition of marriage, which would become, in its legal status, an institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to heterosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. If, from the legal standpoint, marriage between a man and a woman were to be considered just one possible form of marriage, the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good. By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane analogous to that of marriage and the family, the State acts arbitrarily and in contradiction with its duties." (No. 8). Which is precisely what I argued here.

Fr. Williams doesn't see it that way. He concludes his lecture by saying, "speaking for myself as a Catholic and as a priest who has served the church for 33 years, in my prayers I try to imagine the church some day (probably after my lifetime) having a very different impact on the social status of gay and lesbian people than the impact it has had historically and still continues to have to some degree. Instead of being an influence for social homophobia and discrimination, as has been the case, could the church not become a force for society’s affirmation and inclusion of gays and lesbians – precisely by modelling such affirmation and inclusion in its own life? In moving to this point, could the church not benefit from the example of other faith communities that have already progressed further along the way.." Like the Episcopalians maybe? Better yet, let's not travel down that particular road of infidelity and self-destruction.

It is noteworthy that Fr. Williams has served on the Advisory Board of "Other Sheep," an organization which promotes the radical homosexual agenda. Sister Jeannine Gramick has also served on this Advisory Board. See here. Remember Sister Gramick? Here's what Archbishop Charles Chaput had to say about this dissident religious and the Holy See's Notification regarding her:

July 13, 1999

"Ministry to homosexual persons is important to Catholics. It will remain so. Common sense requires, however, that people ordained or consecrated for Church service should teach what the Church teaches. Unfortunately, on issues pertaining to homosexuality, Sister Gramick and Father Nugent do not, as evidenced by the body of their work.

The Holy See's action regarding Sister Gramick and Father Nugent concludes more than 15 years of study, explanation and discussion of their views on homosexuality and the nature of their pastoral work with homosexual persons. It is guided by the Holy See's commitment to teach God's truth about the dignity of the human person, and by a respect for the rights of all involved — the rights of the everyday faithful, as well as the rights of Sister Gramick and Father Nugent."

Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
Archbishop of Denver

The full text of the Holy See's Notification may be found here.

Small wonder that Fr. Williams would view the Church's teaching on homosexuality as "evolving" and would accuse the Church of promoting "homophobia." After all, Other Sheep has the following Mission Statement:

"Other Sheep - Multicultural Ministries with Sexual Minorities is the only worldwide ecumenical Christian organization dedicated to empowering sexual minorities throughout the world with the Good News of God's unconditional love for all and salvation through God's Son, Jesus Christ. With other LGBT activists throughout the world, we recognize that ideological fundamentalism in various religions, especially Christianity, Judaism and Islam, constitutes the major obstacle to justice for our people. Consequently, within the International Lesbian and Gay Association, Other Sheep pioneered the establishment of the ILGA Working Party on Homophobia, Ideology and Religion."

Does the Newman Center at Fitchburg State College also view the Church's teaching regarding homosexual acts and same-sex "marriage" as nothing but "ideological fundamentalism"? If not, why would the Center publish a lecture which accuses the Church of "being an influence for social homophobia and discrimination"?

Where does Deacon Ben Nogueira of FSC's Newman Center (who also serves at St. Camillus de Lellis Parish in Fitchburg) stand with regard to the Church's teaching? Does he view the Magisterial teaching of Christ's Church as "ideological fundamentalism"? Does he view the Church as having been "an influence for social homophobia and discrimination"?

Is Bishop Robert McManus aware that FSC's Newman Center has published this lecture at its website?