Thank you, SgC, for posting this. I wasn't familiar with Ralph Martin or that website but I'll be keeping an eye on it in future. The comments section beneath the article contained a link to a priest's blog. Thinking that we all would benefit from reading the blog post "Why Don't Priests Blow the Whistle?" and not wanting it to be buried in a long thread like this, I've started a new thread for it. Our good priests need our prayers now more than ever.
I have heard a Priest speak to this subject in the same way as this in confirmation classes and have listened to his Homily on it as well although I doubt that very many in the pew truly understood what he was getting at. The catechism teaches the same thing.
Thank you for your unique perspective! Very sad indeed. We can only hope TODAY the vast majority are genuine and sincere in their discernment and motivation for being in seminary. I prefer to look at priests by gauging their passion during Consecration and listening to their homilies, when visiting elsewhere. I also take that perspective back to my current parish. Boy, is THAT eye -opening! I realized last weekend, other churches don't have a side table with hand-sanitizer on it for Eucharistic Ministers. I think you have to be correct on taking SIN out of the equation! How can we be grateful for and acknowledge Christ's Mercy without first owning and acknowledging sin?! As much as people chastise others for messing up (Protestant and Catholic alike) what about the plank in my/your eye? We may not always have mortal sin on our conscience but those 'thoughts words and deeds' that creep are just as real. That includes criticizing the panhandler that may or may not be legitimate, etc.....
SgCatholic, Thank you for posting this article, I think it is very well done. I really don't know anything about Renewal Ministries or Ralph Martin but I think it is well worth everyone's time to read this article that you posted - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinio...er-from-ralph-martin-about-the-churchs-curren *** Padraig, This is what I call "Building a Bridge". I really enjoyed both homilies that you have posted from this priest today, thank you. *** Brian, It's scary stuff and quite possibly the case. Steve Skojec is a brave one, thank God for him.
The Fatima Center Chris Ferrara They Are Everywhere Now Fatima Perspectives #1220 With the fall of Cardinal McCarrick and news of the grand jury report regarding an investigation of no fewer than 300 sexual predator priests in Pennsylvania dioceses alone, it should be obvious to anyone who is not willfully blind that the “pedophile crisis” of the early 2000s is actually a homosexual crisis involving a veritable invasion of the Church at all levels by active homosexuals. I attended the 2002 “pedophile summit” in Rome as a journalist. During the press event at the North American College, I asked Bishop Wilton Gregory, then head of the USCCB, about the obvious failure to enforce the pre-Vatican II instruction of the Holy See barring admission of homosexuals, and even those with homosexual tendencies, to the seminary, and he replied (as quoted in press reports around the world): “It is an ongoing struggle. It is most importantly a struggle to make sure that the Catholic priesthood is not dominated by homosexual men.” As I wrote back then: “Despite this devastating admission by the very head of United States bishops’ conference, the Vatican instruction will continue to be ignored. Thus, a new bumper crop of homosexual ordinands is guaranteed — and with it a new harvest of scandal for the Church.” My prediction of 16 years ago has come to pass. But it did not take a prophet to see what was coming, because it was obvious back then that major segments of the hierarchy were knowingly presiding over the homosexual invasion of the priesthood and that they intended to do nothing to stop it but rather fully intended to go on concealing it. In fact, at the “pedophile summit,” which pretended the problem was not rampant homosexuality in the priesthood but a few child molesters, the American cardinals in attendance, “after forty years of ordaining homosexuals in defiance of the Vatican’s never-enforced instruction that ‘those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination,’” were willing to do nothing more than state the following preposterously inadequate proposal in their ridiculous Final Communiqué: “We will propose that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops recommend a special process for the dismissal from the clerical state of a priest who has become notorious and is guilty of the serial, predatory, sexual abuse of minors.” Note the lawyer-like qualifications on the language: the cardinals proposed that the bishops vote on whether to recommend a process to remove from the priesthood only notorious, serial and predatory child molesters, leaving not only secret child molesters but also all the homosexuals engaging in sodomy with legal adults safely in place — including Cardinal McCarrick, one of the very leaders of the “pedophile summit.” And this is not even to mention the existence of the same sodomitical corruption of the hierarchy on every continent and in virtually every nation on earth. Never, absolutely never, has the Church witnessed the level of moral, doctrinal and liturgical corruption that has arisen in her midst since the “opening to the world” at Vatican II. In these unprecedented times, we can only keep the Faith, speak the truth, and expect the divine chastisement that is surely coming unless, by a miracle of grace, the Message of Fatima is finally heeded and obeyed by a holy and courageous Pope, whose name may well be Pius.
Some Church analysts with supposed info from those close to the Vatican (I have a friend who makes such analyses from what he's heard/knows) think that, since this new ecumenical "mass" is already pretty much a done deal having been worked on in private by a selected group and so they're just waiting for the appropriate time where acceptance of such will be more easily done. My friend suggests that he thinks, in the end, this Pope will dump it and then die, leaving the Church in chaos of division over this and so we will be without a Pope for some time, having to decide for ourselves what to do and who to follow. Why we must prepare by being Consecrated to the Immaculate Heart NOW for our security in the Faith and for the disturbances of such times. And with all this current exposure everywhere of the rotten/corrupt "systems" with those creeps who are deeply within all of these "swamps", such "dumping" of the final plans might now be sped up as a kind of diversion or continuing "cover up". Just sayin!
Just sayin a whole lot!! I have certainly seen a few prophesies that ring similar to this. Ya always wonder- take it literally or...? Then, why risk yourself? We do need to protect ourselves in some way!
Can a Pope change the teaching on capital punishment contradicting all previous teaching just like that? http://www.ncregister.com/daily-new...-wording-on-capital-punishment-calling-it-ina Vatican Draft Alters Catechism Wording on Capital Punishment, Calling It ‘Inadmissible’ In a letter to bishops Aug. 2, Cardinal Luis Ladaria, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said, ‘The new revision ... situates itself in continuity with the preceding Magisterium while bringing forth a coherent development of Catholic doctrine.’ Hannah Brockhaus/CNA/EWTN News VATICAN CITY — The Vatican Thursday altered the Catechism’s wording on the permissibility of the death penalty, which the Church teaches is legitimate in extreme cases, stating it is “inadmissible,” and its elimination will be sought. A new draft of paragraph 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Aug. 2, after Pope Francis approved it in May. Quoting Pope Francis’ words in a speech of Oct. 11, 2017, the new paragraph states, in part, that “the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,’ and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.” Reasons for modifying the teaching, the paragraph says, include: the increasing effectiveness of detention systems, growing understanding of the unchanging dignity of the person, and leaving open the possibility of conversion. In a letter to bishops Aug. 2, Cardinal Luis Ladaria, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, gave a brief overview of developments to the Church’s teaching on the death penalty over the last decades, and the perspective of the three most recent popes. He noted, in particular, Pope St. John Paul II’s teachings in Evangelium Vitae (The Value and Inviolability of Human Life), which were subsequently added to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, presenting the death penalty as not a proportionate penalty for the gravity of certain crimes, though justifiable if “the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively.” “The new revision ... situates itself in continuity with the preceding Magisterium while bringing forth a coherent development of Catholic doctrine,” Cardinal Ladaria wrote. “The new formulation of number 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church desires to give energy to a movement towards a decisive commitment to favor a mentality that recognizes the dignity of every human life,” he said. “And, in respectful dialogue with civil authorities, to encourage the creation of conditions that allow for the elimination of the death penalty where it is still in effect.” The new teaching will be included in all the editions of the Catechism going forward, a Vatican communique stated Aug. 2. The full text of the new draft of paragraph 2267 states, in full: “Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good. Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption. Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,’ and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.” Until now, the Church has consistently taught that the state has the authority to use the death penalty, in cases of “absolute necessity,” though with the qualification that the Church considered such situations to be extremely rare. The Catechism of the Catholic Church had stated: “Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.”
Changing the teaching on the death penalty is a clear break with Tradition, implying that the Church has been teaching a grave evil for its entire history. If this can change, what can't change? The ordinary magisterium is infallible in faith and morals, yet it has erred in this matter since the apostles? I can't help but feel that this is to get out in front of when people demand the death of all the pedophelic and satanic priests. This was a step too far. It certainly distracts from all of the news about priestly abuse, especially on the day that 71 priests from Harrisburg are named. It was approved on May 11, 2018 and has just been waiting in the wings....
Exactly, these news of the Pope changing teaching are indeed the top headline of the bbc cover page https://www.bbc.com/news
Names Of Former Bishops Stripped From Church Buildings Aug. 1, 2018 Anticipating the release of a Pennsylvania grand jury report exposing decades of mishandled sexual abuse cases in the Roman Catholic Church, the bishop of Harrisburg on Wednesday ordered that the names of former bishops dating to the 1940s be stripped from church buildings. This was the first time a bishop has conducted such a sweeping purge of his predecessors’ legacies, although the names of individual bishops and priests involved in sexual abuse scandals have been excised from church buildings in other dioceses. Harrisburg is among six dioceses in a heavily Catholic region of Pennsylvania that are bracing for the release of what is expected to be a devastating grand jury report exposing more than 300 priests accused of sexual abuse over seven decades, as well as the bishops who failed to remove them from the ministry. The Harrisburg and Greensburg dioceses had tried last year to end the grand jury’s investigation, according to court records reported by The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. The bishop of Harrisburg, Ronald W. Gainer, also published on Wednesday a list of 71 clergy members, seminarians and church personnel accused of sexual abuse of children since the 1940s and said their names would be removed from church buildings, schools and halls. “The decision to remove names of bishops and clerics may prove to be controversial, but as bishops, I strongly believe that leaders of the diocese must hold themselves to a higher standard and must yield honorary symbols in the interest of healing,” Bishop Gainer said in a news conference. The move comes as Catholics in the United States have been reeling from a new wave of accusations that have brought down an American cardinal and revealed possible cover-ups at the church’s highest levels. Church officials knew for decades about allegations that the former cardinal, Theodore McCarrick, had sexually molested young men training to be priests in New Jersey, but they failed to take action. With outraged Catholics calling for a Vatican investigation into Archbishop McCarrick, the president of the United States bishops’ conference, Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, the archbishop of Galveston-Houston, released a statement on Wednesday saying that the accusations “reveal a grievous moral failure within the church.” He said that the bishops’ conference had begun to consider a course of action and would “pursue the many questions” raised by the case “to the full extent of its authority.” Archbishop McCarrick, who is 88, resigned from the College of Cardinals last week after an additional report that for years he had sexually abused a boy he had known ever since baptizing him as a baby. The archbishop, a globally known figure who had led the Washington archdiocese, is set to face a church trial. The sexual abuse scandal in the American Catholic church exploded in Boston in 2002, leading some bishops to resign amid allegations that they had protected predators or abused minors themselves. Catholics in Pennsylvania have endured several rounds of grand jury investigations and reports that revealed widespread cover-ups. The church, however, has a powerful pull in the statehouse in Harrisburg and has successfully fought off efforts by abuse victims and their advocates to expand the statute of limitations, which would give victims a longer period in which to bring civil or criminal cases. Among the many Catholic state legislators, one of them, Representative Mark Rozzi of Temple, Pa., is a survivor of sexual abuse who has become a tenacious advocate for expanding the statute of limitations. Bishop Gainer is the president of the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference, the church’s statewide public policy arm, which has lobbied state lawmakers against expanding the statute of limitations. On Wednesday, however, Bishop Gainer waived the confidentiality agreements of abuse victims who had received settlements from the diocese, permitting them to speak publicly without fear of legal repercussions. The release of names of the 71 priests, deacons and seminarians who have been credibly accused of abuse in Harrisburg since 1947 covers the period examined by the grand jury. The bishop said the diocese had also posted new guidelines to prevent child sexual abuse. The Harrisburg diocese does not know how many places will have the names of bishops or priests removed, a spokesman, Joe Aponick, said. Many parishes have buildings or rooms named after accused priests, he said, and a conference center and a retirement residence for priests are named after former bishops. With his blanket decree, Bishop Gainer did not say how many of his predecessors had been negligent in handling abuse. The only living former bishop of Harrisburg is Kevin C. Rhoades, who is now the bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend. Bishop Rhoades did not respond to a request for a comment. The most prominent of Harrisburg’s former bishops is Cardinal William H. Keeler, who as archbishop of Baltimore was the first American bishop to volunteer to post the names of priests accused of abuse in his archdiocese. Cardinal Keeler died in 2017. Joe Grace, a spokesman for the state attorney general, Josh Shapiro, called the release of the names of accused perpetrators “long past due.” He said that the Harrisburg diocese had previously pushed to end the grand jury investigation. “Their proclamations today only come after intense public pressure and in the face of the imminent release of the grand jury report exposing decades of child abuse and cover-up,” Mr. Grace said. Bishop Gainer said at the news conference that he had intended to publish a list of accused perpetrators earlier but waited because he had been asked by the attorney general’s office to hold off while the grand jury was investigating. But Mr. Grace responded, “The diocese of Harrisburg had decades to publish these names, and then they wanted to give them out in the middle of our active grand jury investigation, when it could only harm our investigation.” The grand jury report has been ready for many weeks, but its release was delayed by objections from people who are said to be identified in it. The state Supreme Court decided recently to allow the release of a redacted version of the report. It will cover the dioceses of Allentown, Erie, Greensburg, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh and Scranton. The grand jury investigation has already resulted in one guilty plea by a priest. On Tuesday, the Rev. John Thomas Sweeney, of the Greensburg diocese, pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 10-year-old schoolboy 16 years ago. The boy had been sent to him for discipline because he had misbehaved on a school bus. Until he was arrested and charged last summer, the priest was working in parishes and had access to children. Another grand jury report, released in 2016, cataloged the scope of abuse in one small Pennsylvania diocese, that of Altoona-Johnstown, and found that bishops there had failed to notify the police or remove abusers from ministry. News of that last grand jury report prompted hundreds of victims to call a hotline set up in the office of the previous attorney general, Kathleen G. Kane. Her successor, Mr. Shapiro, convened a grand jury that heard testimony from victims over nearly two years. Bishop Gainer said on Wednesday, “I express profound sorrow, and I apologize to the survivors of sexual abuse, to the Catholic faithful and to the general public for the abuses that took place and for those church officials who failed to protect children.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/...column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
Seventy-One Abuse Priests Cited In Harrisburg Diocese Harrisburg Bishop Ronald Gainer has released information from the diocese’s own internal investigation on child sex abuse, including a list of the names of 71 clergy, both dead and alive, accused of abuse. He also ordered removal from buildings, halls and rooms the names of former diocesan bishops going back to 1947. The name ban extends to anyone who appears on the diocese’s list and has been accused of sexual misconduct, and also to any position of honour in the diocese given those named. “It is my most unwelcome, yet necessary, duty to visit a sorry chapter of the Diocese of Harrisburg’s history, the one concerning the sexual abuse of minors,” Bishop Gainer said in an open letter. “As has been the subject of much public discussion,” he continued, “the diocese has unfortunately at times been the home of men originally called to the service of God who, for reasons unknown and unfathomable, instead ignored that summons and turned to the pursuit of heinous personal ends.” “That conduct has left a legacy of pain and sorrow that is still being felt,” Bishop Gainer said. “On behalf of the Diocese of Harrisburg, I apologize for these actions.” While these harms of the past “cannot be undone,” he said, “it is my hope that today I can do my part as the present chief shepherd of the diocese to salve some of these historic wounds with the healing touch of transparency.” To that end, he released a detailed list giving the names of 71 clergy and seminarians credibly accused of abuse, with a description of the alleged abuse, ranging from indecent behaviour to inappropriate “communication with children.” As he said, the information is not an assessment of guilt but provides historic details of the accusations. Among those named are vowed religious who served in the diocese and diocesan priests accused of misconduct in another diocese. As a result of a review of historical cases, conducted by professional investigators and outside counsel, “it was also clear that the leadership of the church did not in every case take adequate measures when handling matters related to offending clerics,” a diocesan statement said. The bishop’s release of pages of detailed information – which is being called unprecedented – comes ahead of the expected release of a redacted version of a grand jury report based on a months-long investigation by the state’s attorney general into sexual abuse claims in six Pennsylvania dioceses. Many of the claims go back decades. Besides Harrisburg, the dioceses are Pittsburgh, Allentown, Scranton, Erie and Greensburg. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the redacted report should be released. In June, the court had put a hold on the full report being released because it said it needed to review challenges filed by “many individuals” named in the report. “A number of the petitioners asserted that they were not aware of, or allowed to appear at, the proceedings before the grand jury,” the court said in its earlier opinion. In its new ruling, the court said the report will be edited to protect the identities of those challenging its release and the redacted version can be made available to the public as early as August 8 and no later than August 14. “While this list cannot undo that which has been done, it is my sincere hope that it can in some way bring relief to those who have unfortunately been harmed throughout our history,” Bishop Gainer said. “In the meantime, the diocese will remain steadfast in its efforts to ensure that this chapter never repeats. I also recommit myself, my staff, all clergy, and every man and woman associated with the diocese to eradicate abuse in our midst.” The diocese had intended to release its list of accused abusers nearly two years ago, but the state attorney general’s office had asked the diocese to not do so to protect its own investigation. Bishop Gainer also waived any confidentiality provision in a settlement made by the diocese with an abuse victim. “Though it has been the diocese’s policy for some time not to enforce those confidentiality provisions, Bishop Gainer learned that some survivors still feel constrained by them,” the diocese said in a statement. “The survivors can feel free to tell their stories to whomever and whenever they wish,” Bishop Gainer said. “I hope that this step will further aid those survivors, and perhaps others, in their path to healing.” http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...releases-names-of-71-clergy-accused-of-abuse/
This is what the CDF is saying in the official letter announcing the change today, that there is no contradiction with Tradition because the circumstances that in the past made Death Penalty necessary and proportionate to a crime are no longer present in our society... http://press.vatican.va/content/sal...ubblico/2018/08/02/0556/01210.html#letteraing 2. It is in the same light that one should understand the attitude towards the death penalty that is expressed ever more widely in the teaching of pastors and in the sensibility of the people of God. If, in fact, the political and social situation of the past made the death penalty an acceptable means for the protection of the common good, today the increasing understanding that the dignity of a person is not lost even after committing the most serious crimes, the deepened understanding of the significance of penal sanctions applied by the State, and the development of more efficacious detention systems that guarantee the due protection of citizens have given rise to a new awareness that recognizes the inadmissibility of the death penalty and, therefore, calling for its abolition. 3. In this development, the teaching of the Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitæ of John Paul II is of great importance. The Holy Father enumerated among the signs of hope for a new culture of life “a growing public opposition to the death penalty, even when such a penalty is seen as a kind of ‘legitimate defense’ on the part of society. Modern society in fact has the means of effectively suppressing crime by rendering criminals harmless without definitively denying them the chance to reform.”[3] The teaching of Evangelium vitæ was then included in the editio typica of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In it, the death penalty is not presented as a proportionate penalty for the gravity of the crime, but it can be justified if it is “the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor,” even if in reality “cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender today are very rare, if not practically non-existent” (n. 2267).
Pope changes death penalty teaching, now ‘inadmissible’ VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis has changed Catholic Church teaching about the death penalty, saying in a new policy published Thursday that it is always “inadmissible” because it “attacks” the inherent dignity of all humans. The Vatican said Francis had approved a change to the Catechism of the Catholic Church — the compilation of official Catholic teaching. Previously, the catechism said the church didn’t exclude recourse to capital punishment “if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.” The new teaching, contained in Catechism No. 2267, says the previous policy is outdated, that there are other ways to protect the common good, and that the church should instead commit itself to working to end capital punishment. “The church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide,” reads the new text, which was approved in May but only published Thursday. The death penalty has been abolished in most of Europe and South America, but it is still in use in the United States and in several countries in Asia, Africa and the Mideast. In addition, just this week Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey could soon move to reinstate the death penalty, which it had abolished in 2004 as part of its bid to join the European Union. In an accompanying letter explaining the change, the head of the Vatican’s doctrine office said the development of Catholic doctrine on capital punishment didn’t contradict prior teaching but rather was an evolution of it. “If, in fact the political and social situation of the past made the death penalty an acceptable means for the protection of the common good, today the increasing understanding that the dignity of a person is not lost even after committing the most serious crimes,” said Cardinal Luis Ladaria, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Ladaria said the new change aims to “give energy” to the anti-death penalty movement “and, in respectful dialogue with civil authorities, to encourage the creation of conditions that allow for the elimination of the death penalty where it is still in effect.” Francis has long railed against the death penalty, insisting it can never be justified, no matter how heinous the crime. He has also long made prison ministry a mainstay of his vocation. On nearly every foreign trip, Francis has visited with inmates to offer words of solidarity and hope, and he still stays in touch with a group of Argentine inmates he ministered to during his years as archbishop of Buenos Aires. He announced his intention to change church teaching on capital punishment last October, when he marked the 25th anniversary of the publication of the catechism by announcing his intention to update it. The catechism, first promulgated by St. John Paul II, gives Catholics an easy, go-to guide for church teaching on everything from the sacraments to sex. At that 2017 ceremony, Francis said the death penalty violates the Gospel and amounts to the voluntary killing of a human life, which “is always sacred in the eyes of the creator.” He acknowledged that in the past even the Papal States had allowed this “extreme and inhuman recourse.” But he said the Holy See had erred in allowing a mentality that was “more legalistic than Christian” and now knew better. Amnesty International, which has long campaigned for a worldwide ban on the death penalty, welcomed the development as an “important step forward.” “Already in the past, the church had expressed its aversion to the death penalty, but with words that did not exclude ambiguities,” said Riccardo Noury, Amnesty Italia spokesman. “Today they are saying it in an even clearer way.” In addition, he praised the clear indication of the church’s commitment to the cause beyond doctrine. “There seems to be also a desire to see the Catholic Church take an active role in the global abolitionist movement,” he added. https://apnews.com/b1cf76995c864611...ges-death-penalty-teaching,-now-'inadmissible'
