Saturday, July 14, 2018
Friday, July 13, 2018
Here’s the evil Abbey Church where Peter Strzok went to “Mass”
Thursday, July 12, 2018
Edit: what a Neo-Pelagian!
Wednesday, July 11, 2018
"One of my predecessors wanted to prevent his ordination to the priest. I suspect he knew it was not the best decision for this man to become a priest. "
"His personal situation is very sad and difficult to solve. If he does not ask for his laicisation, I will do it on my own initiative," said Bishop Zemi.
"I still regard you as my priest. Until you ask for dispensation, you will be a priest. "
"For me, there is only marriage between a man and a woman".
|Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.|
|By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?|
|Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit.|
Edit: a lot of people were really frothing, raving mad that Michael Voris, Vox, Randy Engel and a few other bloggers are taking aim at clerical aberrosexuals. How is that anything new? Perhaps with the exposure of Uncle Ted, they sense the walls are closing in! Indeed, it sounds like a real sore spot with some commenters invoking UK law against incitement of hatred. This was the reason Kreuznet was shut down, never to really rise again (although there is a shadow of it still publishing mostly Bishop Williamson’s regular letters to German speakers.) The heroic Kreuznet editors merely made the observation that a famous aberrosexual comedian who peddled his deviancy on the public street was in Hell, and they posted a host of quotations of Saints and Church Fathers to support their supposition. The German media melted down and exploded in a frenzy of hate. In the wake, even the German and Austrian Bishops got involved in helping the federal police of Austria and Germany discover the person or persons responsible with the evil Cardinal Schönborn in the forefront, bitterly condemning the site and its contributors. (I don’t think I’ve ever seen him that up in arms about anything)
These are the kinds of recriminations intended to silence Catholic teaching and normalize deviant behavior. This article by Lifesite is an excellent reminder of the problem within the Catholic Church which a lot of people don’t want fixed. Even back in 2005 when Diogenes wrote this article, the problem was omnipresent. Truly the Church has spiritual AIDS.
Speaking anecdotally from my own experience over the years, I’ve found clergy who are even relatively normal, or masculine to be as rare as clergy who are orthodox.
Just to illustrate: Back at some point in the 80s, a Lutheran Seminarian friend, let’s call him Jack, related a story of a friend of his who was a Paulist whom he met doing mission work in Latin America. His friend lived in their residence in Washington D.C.. It had a well-stocked refrigerator, and was beyond comfortable. The Central American women who worked at the house washing their clothes and cleaning, thought they were serving God and the Church by taking care of the Paulists there. Jack occasionally visited his friend there and would wait in the commons area where the Paulists would watch television. At one point, one of them approached him and asked him excitedly, “who are you with! You’re causing quite a stir around here!”
I attended a High School where practically every single monk was an accused aberrosexual predator. If they weren’t, they were at least covering for the rest. At one point, this was one of the largest Benedictine houses in the world, but has since withered considerably with no abatement in their advocacy for deviancy. So based on my own experience of many years, I can tell you that effeminates and deviants were commonplace even in 1995, to say nothing of 2005. In fact, it seems that it was a problem long before that, but we don’t have to rely on my anecdotal experience and observations, but a look at the not insubstantial number of Bishops in the US and Canada cited by the now silent Diogenes who have been found to be aberrosexual by their civil cases, and now, we even see entire news networks like Salt and Light, and prominent individuals in the clergy like James Martin or Robert Barron (a close friend of Andrew Greeley’s) who in varying degrees soft-soap or actively endorse deviancy against the immemorial teaching of the Church.
July 10, 2018 (CatholicCulture.org) – The news that Cardinal McCarrick has been credibly accused of molesting a young man – and the subsequent revelations that "everybody knew" about the cardinal's homosexual activities – have raised new and important questions about the silence of other American bishops. What did they know, and when did they know it? How did the cardinal advance through the ecclesiastical ranks, even after complaints had been received in the dioceses where he served?
These are not new questions. In fact our sometime contributor Diogenes asked them – and pointed to the obvious answer – in a post that appeared on this site over 13 years ago. His argument was powerful in 2005, and although some of his references will now seem dated, nothing that has happened in the intervening years affects the essential force of that argument.
Maybe people are going to relate to their own experiences and connect the dots?
Herewith the thoughts of Diogenes, from June 16, 2005:
The Washington Times reports that "the U.S. Catholic bishops will sidestep the issue of whether gay men should become priests at their semiannual meeting," which began today at the Chicago Fairmont.
And why, boys and girls, was it a foregone conclusion that the bishops would "sidestep" the issue? Because the question of whether gays should be ordained cannot be addressed without first addressing a considerably more explosive question: the number of bishop-disputants who are themselves gay and have a profound personal interest that there be no public examination of the connections between their sexual appetites, their convictions, and their conduct of office. Let's do a little stock-taking of those U.S. bishops who are publicly known to be gay:
- Retired Bishop Dan Ryan of Springfield, IL. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Tom Dupre of Springfield, MA. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Patrick Ziemann of Santa Rosa, CA. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Kendrick Williams of Lexington, KY. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Keith Symons of Palm Beach, FL. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Lawrence Soens of Sioux City, IA. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Joseph Hart of Cheyenne, WY. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Retired Bishop Anthony O'Connell of Palm Beach, FL. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? Through the offices of the civil justice system.
- Non-Retired Bishop Robert Lynch of St. Petersburg, FL. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? The papers reported his $100,000 sexual harassment pay-off to his communications flack.
- Retired Archbishop Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee, WI. Did he tell us he was gay? No. Did his brother bishops tell us he was gay? No. Then how did we find out? His lover broke the news on Good Morning AmericaPost Scriptum: Back on October 30th, 2012 we were the first to have posted an article on Father Dariuscz Ozco about Homoheresy and a few others in English, as far as we know.I’ve always found this to be very true from Church Militant:Father Oko explained that those with homosexual tendencies reject the "warrior mentality" necessary in the Christian life. "[T]hey will not emulate our Lord as the warrior, as the counter symbol to the prevailing evil," he remarked. "They will try to orient the Church to being emotional, to having a dialogue with everybody, turning the Church into a 'safe space.' They don't like battle or confrontation."AMDG
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
The Monday Kick Op by Peter Winnemöller
That was not put into the world by an impertinent volunteer from the press office subsequently being quickly removed. On the contrary! This is the official report of the press office of the diocese of Würzburg on Masses, to which couples especially were invited to their 50th to 60th anniversary and higher. The bishop of Würzburg had invited long married mixed-confessional couples to Mass without any preconditions for Communion.
So Communion was to be a reward for a special occasion, a long-lasting marriage. (The trivial kind of thing it is in most US parishes) This is strange in that the Church law still regulates very clearly that those who give Communion give the Sacrament only to Catholic recipients. Even DBK's highly controversial guidance does not consider unconditional inter-communion as a reward as a possibility. Rather, it is about the remedy of a spiritual emergency. This aspect too is by no means so clearly outlined as the current inter-communion propaganda of some German bishops intends to persuade us.
There is still a valid judgment forthcoming from Rome as to whether a bishop can detect such an emergency in the case of a mixed-confessional marriage. There is a need for clarification. In this respect, it is not only the stunned publication of the so-called orientation aid that causes alienation, but also the unthinking affrontery of some bishops. A fascination of first quality is that the bishop of Würzburg in his own words, no longer has to speak in the cause at all with the competent bodies (eg the Council for the interpretation of the legal texts) in Rome. He just wants to talk to the committees in his diocese. It may, therefore, be asked whether the Bishop of Würzburg as a whole stands in unity with the bishops worldwide and especially with the Bishop of Rome. In addition, it may be asked whether, in the face of this flat invitation, he (still) shares the Eucharistic understanding of the Church.
It is important to answer these questions for the sake of the truth. It's not about seeking the scandal for the sake of scandal. It should also not be disallowed at this point that the emotions, which are thoroughly understandable in the case, will squelch - whether they are pro - or contra - the discourse.
The present scandal is a nuisance of itself. This is not about a trifle. It's not just about a "pastoral solution." It is about faith in the Eucharist and thus the core of our Catholic faith.
The question to be answered is, in a word, whether a schism already exists.
Trans: Tancred email@example.com
In its latest issue, Dumont, whose editorial is also freely available on the Internet, deals with the "unbelievable" silence of almost all cardinals and bishops - with the exception of the four signatories of Dubia - "the dissolution of the traditional form of catholicity by the pontificate of Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been set in motion." Bernard Dumont discusses the apparently desired end of "Roman Catholicism" without, however, raising an outcry, as the historian Roberto Pertici once complained. The end is proclaimed by Rome or those who invoke Rome, and all are silent and seem to submit to the inevitable fate. See the analysis of Prof. Pertici: The reform of Pope Francis was already written by Martin Luther .
Why is this?
The belief reduced to ethics
Dumont also published in the new edition the text of a Benedictine monk and theologian who analyzes and criticizes "perhaps the most radical upheaval in Catholicism of our time." No longer does the sacrament have primacy in the Church, of which the Second Vatican Council said it was the "culmen et fons" of the life of the Church, but ethics.
This subversion is also reflected in the question of remarried divorced as well as the inter-communion with the Protestants.
The Benedictine theologian is Fr. Giulio Meiattini, who this year already published the monograph "Amoris laetitia? The Sacraments Reduced to Morality" (publisher La Fontana di Siloe, Turin 2018). He is a monk of the Benedictine Abbey of Madonna della Scala in Noci and Professor of Fundamental Theology at the Theological Faculty of Apulia and at the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant'Anselmo in Rome.
Meiattini accuses Pope Francis and his whisperer, Cardinal Walter Kasper, of promoting "cunning" rather than the much-cited "distinction." There is cunning in Amoris laetitia and the mind behind it.
"The state of confusion is obvious".With these words the theologian and monk begins his essay. It is claimed that the confusion is only supposed, and only the result of a new style of government. Such a picture of the current situation is not something Fr. Meiattini takes pleasure in.
"Can the confusion and disagreement between bishops on tricky points of faith be fruits of the Holy Spirit? Not in my opinion."
Several small steps mean a large one in sum
Then Meiattini indicates that in the matter of remarried divorced people a ready-made plan was pursued from the beginning. With the opportunity of being able to deliver the only speech in February 2014 to the Cardinals' Consistory procured by Pope Francis, Cardinal Kasper "laid the groundwork". Nevertheless, two bishops' synods failed to produce a common line to the problem being discussed. Anyone reading the reports of the "circuli minores" of the 2015 Synod can easily see that there was no common position.
The pope would have had to examine and understand, which would have been the first task of "distinction", "which processes" would be initiated and pursued, and which not. However, such a distinction did not take place. The path taken was not changed.
The fact is that a large majority of the Synod Fathers wanted "no change in the traditional order". The editorial committee of Relatio finalis therefore took care not to include any innovations in the text.
For this reason, a "small step," according to Meiattini, was undertaken instead of a big one: The editorial committee formulated some undefined positions, which meant a "change of atmosphere".
The non-rejection of these ponderous formulations, which received the necessary two-thirds majority only with extreme difficulty, sufficed that the next "small step," with some ambiguous footnotes in Amoris laetitia, were sufficient to indicate a new direction.
These small steps, which, strictly speaking, did not reinforce the traditional position, were enough to split the episcopate. The next step was papal confirmation of the guidelines of the ecclesiastical Province of Buenos Aires on the Eighth Chapter of Amoris laetitia.
In reality, these guidelines are not mere interpretations, because they contain statements and instructions that were neither found in Amoris laetitia nor adopted by the synods, and never found a majority there.
Through a series of "small steps", a "big step" was finally taken within three years, with a profound intervention. But this has nothing to do with "synodality," according to Meiattini.
Faith would be reduced to ethics in Amoris laetitia , that is the total thrust.
"Ethics has neither the first nor the last word."
"I do not understand how the Bishop of Rome can write such a thing"And Meiattini continues:
"To be honest, I can not understand how a bishop, especially that of Rome, can write such sentences: 'One should not burden two limited people with the tremendous burden of perfectly recreating the union that exists between Christ and his Church '(AS, 122)."This formulation is an expression of a very different way of thinking: A gospel ethic, freed from the sacrament, becomes a "mighty burden" rather than a "sweet yoke" and a "light burden."
Such a statement can only be reached if one understands Christianity - perhaps unconsciously - only as ethics. In this way we arrive at results that correspond to the Lutheran concept of simul iustus et peccator, condemned by the Council of Trent.
Intercommunion with the Protestants follows the same logic. What is only decisive is the presumed, inner feeling. For the objective criteria, all conceivable attenuating circumstances are taken into account, and the subjective decision of conscience is decisive. Why, then, according to this pattern, should not even a Buddhist or a Hindu be able to receive the Catholic Eucharist, according to P. Meiattani?
"Damaging the relationship between morality and sacraments can ultimately lead to a non-Catholic understanding of the Church."Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Catholica / Vida inteligente / Cooperatores veritatis (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred firstname.lastname@example.org
Saturday, July 7, 2018
This is a very common problem in the choir loft. I'm a professional music director and I can say confidently that music at many TLMs is directed by gays. In most cases the laity are completely unaware and praise their highly qualified and capable musicians, but the clergy are absolutely aware in every case I personally know of. It's absolutely scandalous. ... Furthermore, to show how widespread this issue is, it even extends into the annual CMAA Sacred Music Colloquium. One individual in particular is an extremely well-known, flamboyant, active, practicing homosexual who is frequently described by others at the colloquium as "absolutely oozing gayness." His lifestyle and flawed beliefs are known to all involved. Yet he is invited to play, conduct, sing and teach at this colloquium regularly. Others at the colloquium just shrug it off because he is such a talented and respected musician who leads the music program at one of the nation's largest Episcopal parishes.
Friday, July 6, 2018
Würzburg (kath.net) The Würzburg bishop Franz Jung pronounced a general invitation to the Eucharistic reception for Protestant spouses at the two pontifical masses for married couples. "But today, the anniversary of marriage, I would like to make the invitation to the Eucharist for interchurch marriages, in which the two partners have remained faithful to each other," said the recently consecrated bishop according to the press office of his diocese. There was no indication in the press release that even in the DBK orientation aid, which had not been approved by the pope, there was no generalized access to any Protestant married to a Catholic spouse without distinction. It was, according to Jung in his sermon, for a long time fought over intensively, what could be a spiritual path, at the end of a permission for Communion in individual cases for Protestant partners could look like. He would, ‘intensively discuss this recommendation of the German Bishops' Conference with the diocesan councils in the coming period.’ The German bishops, however, want to ‘pay special tribute to the ‘lived faithfulness of marriages in the domestic Church’ especially in confessional marriages,” he continued in his sermon.
The only admission requirement for a Protestant Christian married to a Catholic to the Catholic Eucharist, therefore, seems to be a suitably long marriage in these Mass celebrations with Bishop Jung. The admission of Protestant Christians "on an individual basis", which is so strongly emphasized in the discussion, seems to be obsolete here, but at least it does not appear in the press release. Bishop Jung could thus be the first Catholic bishop in Germany to publicly represent such a general invitation to the Protestant spouse and spread it through the diocesan media.
In the run-up to the Kiliani Pilgrimage Week 2018 couples are invited to these services in Kiliansdom, who have been married for 25, 50, 60 or 65 years.
Trans: Tancred email@example.com
Wednesday, July 4, 2018
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
Monday, July 2, 2018
Edit: they already have the snake goddess religion enthroned in the Vatican, no?
Vatican City, Jul 2, 2018 / 02:08 pm (CNA).- While a veteran Vatican journalist has suggested that the 2019 Synod of Bishops from the Amazonian basin might open the door to the appointment of women as deacons, recent comments from the Vatican’s doctrinal chief imply that is not likely to be the case.
In a July 1 blog post, veteran Vatican journalist Sandro Magister argued that Pope Francis this year has made three major “u-turns” on key topics, noting that the pontiff has not been clear on whether the “reversals” are “definitive and sincere.”
Magister cited Francis' about-face on Chilean Bishop Juan Barros, who until recently led the Diocese of Osorno, but who resigned in June in wake of the country's massive clerical abuse scandal and accusations of cover-up.
The Archdiocese of Madrid has warned the Spanish government against plans to exhume the remains of the country’s late dictator, General Francisco Franco, without obtaining agreement from interested parties. “We want a solution which helps build a peaceful country,” said Rodrigo Pinedo Texidor, archdiocesan communications director, noting that the archdiocese is not for or against the removal of Franco’s remains
“We are against moves which don’t have his family’s consent and don’t consider what the Church has to say,” he told Catholic News Service after Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez confirmed plans to remove the remains from a state mausoleum at the Valley of the Fallen, near Madrid, by the end of July.