"Pope" Francis writes gushing letter to homosexual propagandist Father James Martin, S.J.

 2 John 1: 9-10:

"Anyone who is so 'progressive' as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him."

Bearing this in mind, read the gushing letter from Francis to pro-homosexual heretic Father James Martin, S.J.

For some background on Father Martin and his sick agenda, see here.

Father James Martin and homosexual narcissism...

Lifesite News reports:

"America magazine has sent out a mass mailing containing a prayer composed by its “editor-at large,” LGBT activist Fr. James Martin, which captures so well the narcissistic pseudo-spirituality that sadly is plaguing so many among Catholic clergy today.

The prayer, taken from Martin’s homosexualist book “Building a Bridge,” reads like one that could have been composed by the Saturday Night Live Character, “Stuart Smalley,” who famously stared at a mirror and said to himself, “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.”

The title of Martin’s “Stuart Smalley prayer” is “A Prayer for When I Feel Rejected,” which feeds Martin’s narrative about the Catholic Church “rejecting” practicing homosexuals, rather than “welcoming them,” when it condemns the sin of sodomy. Martin claims that homosexual orientation is given to people by God, says that the Church’s condemnation of homosexual behavior isn’t “authoritative,” and advocates eliminating expressions of Catholic doctrine on the intrinsically disordered nature of homosexual attraction."

___________________

In the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, Cardinal Ratzinger summarized the biblical teaching on homosexuality and explained why the Church's teaching on this subject follows necessarily from her teaching on the nature and purpose of sexuality:

"The Church, obedient to the Lord who founded her and gave to her the sacramental life, celebrates the divine plan of the loving and life-giving union of men and women in the Sacrament of Marriage. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behavior therefore acts immorally. To choose someone of the same sex for one's sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator's sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent. As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood."

Homosexual activity is both self-indulgent and narcissistic. Gianfrancesco Zuanazzi, Professor of Psychology and Psychopathology for the John Paul II Institute for Studies at the Pontifical Lateran University, explains that, "The homosexual condition is difficult, sometimes tragic, and not only because of the obstacles it can still encounter in society and the injustices of which it can be the victim, but also because of its narcissistic quality. This quality is expressed in the continual attempts at 'self-recovery' and in searching for the 'better self' or the 'missing self' in another person. The homosexual approach is really one of identification and possession. According to Miller, it is easier for two homosexuals to regard each other as narcissistic extensions of themselves than to be involved in a mutual exchange. Socarides says without hesitation that in a homosexual relationship each partner plays his role, ignoring the complementarity of a sexual union, as if the act were consummated in "splendid isolation" from the other individual, simply as a stratagem for portraying a one-sided emotional conflict. Every homosexual encounter is primarily concerned with disarming the partner by means of seduction, prayer, power, prestige, effeminacy or masculinity, in order to derive satisfaction then from the loser.

Homosexual, like heterosexual, relationships exhibit forms of uplifting tenderness or mere genital expression, but whatever the approach, it always seems that the subjects use each other to fulfil themselves and, at the same time, to defend themselves from one another in a reciprocal way. Even if at the present time, dominated by the fear of AIDS, a couple's relations are not exceptional, as a rule they are unstable, unfaithful, strewn with jealousy and bitterness, marked by possessive love and demands that will never be satisfied. Very often homosexual relationships do not bind the two parties, but reveal that typical self-isolation which is an expression of complete autoerotism. The absence of complementarity, which stems from the radical difference between masculine and feminine identification, prevents the genuine dynamic of a couple. 'There is always something false", Marcel Eck notes, "and deeply painful in these loves which cannot experience reciprocity'. The problem of being, the title of a work by Jean Cocteau, who wrote from direct experience, is precisely the problem of being together.

Hans Giese rightly stresses that the 'foreground' of the homosexual syndrome comes from 'clinging to the self'. The move towards the other is not completed, while the move towards one's own sex is shorter, less costly, simpler; but, since one fears the risk of failure, to take this step involves a new risk, that of egotism. Bergler also maintains that the dominant note is always emotional detachment from the other and the focusing of interest on mere sexual gratification. Kardiner notes that the majority of these experiences are due to casual encounters and are 'one-night stands', i.e., the essential element is the value the experience has for the imagination and not the lasting human relationship. This easily leads to the desire for arousal for its own sake, to repetition and finally to anonymity, the discovery of the other not being worth the effort. Then the body is truly reduced to something corporeal: Pier Paolo Pasolini's posthumous work Petrolio exemplifies this eventuality as amply as it does monotonously. In short, for the homosexual there is the proximate danger of failing into such anonymous, repetitive and ever more demanding sexual behaviour that it becomes a kind of addiction. But this promiscuity or 'tricking', which is so frequent in the gay world, is sometimes praised by those involved as the best of relationships."

And Francis has made Martin an adviser to the Vatican.  But then, narcissism has crept into the Vatican under Francis.

Actually, Father James Martin, S.J., is the one engaging in fascist techniques of degradation...

Matthew Archbold writes:

"Fr. James Martin is now referring to Catholics who oppose what he wrote in his latest book as 'alt-right Catholics.'

Honest to goodness, I have no idea what that even means. I didn't really have a firm understanding what 'alt-right' meant when it referred to politics but I definitely don't understand what it means in reference to Catholics.

Is it just the new 'fundamentalist' which pretty much meant 'a Christian I don't like because he actually believes that stuff.'

Politically, the alt-right moniker seems to be a way of calling someone racist or a Nazi without calling them a Nazi racist. So it's like a skirting of Godwin's law. But in Catholicism, it seems to mean someone who actually believes the Church teaching on sex and gender. But (and I'm not being obtuse for humor reasons here) I'm honestly not sure what the heck it means.

Maybe, they should call it 'alt-rite' in Catholic circles just to give it that Catholicy feel."

As defined by Wikipedia, "The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loosely defined group of people with far-right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of white nationalism. White supremacist Richard Spencer initially promoted the term in 2010 in reference to a movement centered on white nationalism and did so according to the Associated Press to disguise overt racism, white supremacism, neo-fascism and neo-Nazism. The term drew considerable media attention and controversy during and after the 2016 United States presidential election.

Alt-right beliefs have been described as isolationist, protectionist, antisemitic and white supremacist, frequently overlapping with Neo-Nazism, nativism and Islamophobia, antifeminism, misogyny and homophobia, right-wing populism and the neoreactionary movement. The concept has further been associated with several groups from American nationalists, neo-monarchists, men's rights advocates and the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump..."

To understand why Father James Martin would use the term Alt-Right to refer to faithful accepts who actually accept the Depositum Fidei, we need to understand the sick mind and the fanaticized consciousness of someone like Father Martin, who spurns God Himself.  See here.

In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel writes, "..the fanatic never sees himself as a fanatic; it is only the non-fanatic who can recognize him as a fanatic; so that when this judgment, or this accusation, is made, the fanatic can always say that he is misunderstood and slandered...Fanaticism is essentially opinion pushed to paroxysm; with everything that the notion of opinion may imply of blinded ignorance as to its own nature....whatever ends the fanatic is aiming at or thinks he is aiming at, even if he wishes to gather men together, he can only in fact separate them; but as his own interests cannot lie in effecting this separation, he is led, as we have seen, to wish to wipe his opponents out. And when he is thinking of these opponents, he takes care to form the most degrading images of them possible - they are 'lubricious vipers' or 'hyenas and jackals with typewriters' - and the ones that reduce them to most grossly material terms. In fact, he no longer thinks of these opponents except as material obstacles to be overturned or smashed down. Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation. It cannot be asserted too strongly or repeated too often that those the Nazis made use of in their camps - techniques for degrading their victims in their own eyes, for making mud and filth of them - and those which Soviet propagandists use to discredit their adversaries, are not essentially different though we should, in fairness, add that sadism, properly so called, is not to be found in the Russian camps." (pp. 135-136, 149).

Marcel explains that, "In fact, the greatest merit of the critical spirit is that it tends to cure fanaticism, and it is logical enough that in our own fanatical times the critical spirit should tend to disappear, should no longer even be paid lip service as a value."

The irony is that Father James Martin is employing the very tactics used by the Nazis.

Our strange time!

Father James Martin, S.J., implicitly spurns God Himself while committing heresy...

A couple of weeks ago I was criticized on Facebook by a Catholic housewife (Toni Vercillo) who is defending the heretic Father James Martin, S.J., who advances the LGBT agenda and asserts that homosexual acts are not sinful.  I called Martin a heretic and this housewife, who fancies herself a theologian without any formal training in theology, told me that, "Only the Church has the divine right to call someone a heretic."

What this unfortunate woman does not understand, and she is by no means alone in this regard, is that the Church does not have to formally charge someone with the crime of heresy for that person to be - in fact - a heretic.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which this unlearned woman is unfamiliar with:

"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same.." (2089).

Dr. Germain Grisez, one of the most respected moral theologians in the Catholic Church, explains that one can commit heresy in one's heart by a single choice.  He writes, "Canon Law limits heresy to the 'obstinate' denial or calling into question of a truth which is to be believed with divine and Catholic faith.  It might be supposed that 'obstinate' implies prolonged persistence in a heretical opinion despite an admonition to give it up. Like any other sin, however, heresy can be committed without any outward act to provoke a challenge and without obduracy, that is, persistence in sin over time.  Obstinate signifies that the sin of heresy is in purposely refusing to accept what one knows the Church holds to be divinely revealed."

How serious is heresy?  Again Dr. Grisez: "To see the seriousness of heresy, it is essential to remember that propositions of faith are not mere sets of words, but are truths which the words express and which bring one into touch with divine reality.  The heretic really rejects part of the reality which God wished to share with humankind in revealing Himself.  Moreover, that reality should be accepted inasmuch as God reveals it; thus, the heretic implicitly spurns God Himself."

A sign of this sin's gravity is that one who commits it is automatically excommunicated.  See c. 1364, 1 of the Code of Canon Law.

Got that Mrs. Vercillo?  Automatically excommunicated!

Now, as this article explains:

Fr. Martin asserts that chastity is not required of homosexuals

Fr. Martin states that Catholics should reverence gay "marriage"

Fr. Martin supports transgenderism in children

Fr. Martin supports a dissident priest who promotes gay "marriage" and women "priests"

Fr. Martin publicly derides Catholics adhering to Church teaching on homosexuality as "homophobic" and "close-minded"

Fr. Martin affirms the idea of active gays kissing at Mass

Fr. Martin claims former homosexuals don't lead a fully "integrated life"

Fr. Martin characterizes censured pro-gay nun Sr. Jeannine Gramick as worthy of sainthood

Fr. Martin publicly suggests that God created homosexuals that way

Fr. Martin publicly welcomes the esteem of dissident, pro-gay groups condemned by the Holy See

Fr. Martin publicly promotes homosexuals' ordination to the priesthood

Fr. Martin publicly supports a scholar who proclaims "Jesus is queer"

Fr. Martin publicly refers to the Holy Spirit as "She"

If you cannot admit to yourself that Father James Martin, S.J. is a heretic, you might think about extracting your cranium from your Gluteus maximus.

Father James Martin, S.J., and a formation which looks to the person's final end...

My good friend to the North, Vox Cantoris writes: - about Father James Martin, S.J. -

"Rather than correct the poor child [a transgendered child whose parents want to ensure he is educated in a Catholic school] from what is clearly confusion and probably some kind of mental illness, he leaves him in his state and deceives the parents. He dares to write that it is a 'scandal.'"

For Father Martin, it constitutes a "scandal" that the Catholic school in question has refused the boy entry.  But Catholic schools must consider the good of the child.

Are his parents concerned with the good of their child?  In other words, is their idea of “the good” in conformity with Church teaching and Canon Law?

Canon 795 of the Code of Canon Law states quite clearly that, “Since a true education must strive for the integral formation of the human person, a formation which looks toward the person’s final end, and at the same time toward the common good of societies, children and young people are to be so reared that they can develop harmoniously their physical, moral and intellectual talents, that they acquire a more perfect sense of responsibility and a correct use of freedom, and that they be educated for active participation in social life.”

So “the good of the child,” according to Holy Mother Church, must consist of a formation which looks toward a child’s final end.  And that education is only true which strives for a child’s integral formation and which contributes to the common good.  How then can the Church partner with parents who raise their child as "transgendered"?

As Father Vincent Miceli, a great Jesuit scholar and my mentor, once noted, “It is said that ‘the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.’  But if the person who rocks the cradle is warped and crippled in personality then the world will not be ruled but ruined.”

Father Martin doesn't understand the nature of Catholic formation.  But then, he's not the intellectually gifted Jesuit that Father Miceli was.