Thank you for posting this. There are always two sides to every story. This priest has been in my prayers .
I agree Garabandal. I know there are many conflicting stories out there about him but he certainly did sound the alarm—convincingly—before anyone else dared to say it. And he was a very accomplished writer. Lyrical and concise at the same time. The mark of a true prophet is accuracy. He is pretty doggone accurate.
Who is Kakia Livanos? According to Malachi Martin’s obit, she was his companion. (Playing devil’s advocate here)
She and her husband and family took him in and gave him rooms in their very spacious home as per Pope Paul VI’s request. When he released MM from the Jesuits he told M.M. to live with a family.
Whether it's in the Church or in society as a whole we are in this time expressed in the latest Luz de Maria message...not as yet translated into English....Google representation: They have not recognized the errors of the evil committed, but they advance from evil to evil, in an absence of conscience that has been crushed by human arrogance and the whims of living within debauchery and accepting the devil as their god. It also expresses that this background is what is laying the ground for the one evil government control over all, now already forming by Satan's universal influence over the "elitist" governments, through chaos, immorality and terror. It says that all of the history of punishments like Sodom and Gomorrah, or the flood, have no effect on the current sin and surrender to Satan.
That just about sums it all up. 2 kings 17: 5-17 We are sent to convert the world to the Bride of Christ, not to prostitue the Bride of Christ to the World. To turn that which is holy into a whore. Selling her to the world to confirm to their base pleasures and sins. Turning God's House into a Brothel to conform her to their own depraved sins. Woe to them! Rome will burn. Her iniquities and they have become beyond all measure...; her downfall. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH LUMEN GENTIUM SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964 CHAPTER I THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH 1. Christ is the Light of nations. Because this is so, this Sacred Synod gathered together in the Holy Spirit eagerly desires, by proclaiming the Gospel to every creature,(1) to bring the light of Christ to all men, a light brightly visible on the countenance of the Church. Since the Church is in Christ like a sacrament or as a sign and instrument both of a very closely knit union with God and of the unity of the whole human race, it desires now to unfold more fully to the faithful of the Church and to the whole world its own inner nature and universal mission. This it intends to do following faithfully the teaching of previous councils. The present-day conditions of the world add greater urgency to this work of the Church so that all men, joined more closely today by various social, technical and cultural ties, might also attain fuller unity in Christ.
Sg, First, the first highlighted section above is accurate. Any priest who looses the sense of the transcendent will become less reverent, and I added that his disposition at Holy Mass will most likely show this. I was simply remarking that such a lack of reverence would be more noticeable in a priest who faces the congregation while celebrating the Novus Ordo. Second, Alice refers to a tendency toward what she calls fanaticism in those who attend the TLM. She defined a fanatic as one who considers truth to be his personal possession instead of God’s gift. I was stating that those who attend the TLM are in a distinct minority; therefore, a certain defensive posture might develop that could lend itself to such a fanatical attitude. Third, I agree that we should reach out to others and seek their conversion. Alice was reminding me, though, that I convert no one. I admire what she said: The most we can do is to pray to be God’s instruments. To be an instrument we must strive to live the Gospel every day and in every circumstance. Only God’s grace can give us the desire and ability to do that. Safe Under Mary''s Mantle!
It still kind of sounds like he was being punished for theological orthodoxy and an insistence on doing things right.
Sg, First I want to clear up something, the letter that I posted from Padre Pio was the letter that did not contain any mention of the Second Vatican Council and I posted it here #9424 as an example of Padre Pio's support of Blessed Pope Paul VI whom you were questioning as a valid pope and for that reason alone. This same letter was included in the following article http://thesestonewalls.com/gordon-m...ign=Feed:+TheseStoneWalls+(These+Stone+Walls) and was posted on MOG on July 26, 2108 here #7984 . I tend to believe that this is the accurate translation of Padre Pio's letter to Blessed Pope Paul VI, the same one that I recently posted. It is, of course, your choice to believe that this letter was not written by Padre Pio. I, of course, have no explanation why EWTN also posted a slightly different version of this letter in addition to the one the one that I believe is the valid translation of his letter, maybe you should contact them to ask them. I would be interested in their answer. In addition, I posted the video of Padre Pio saying the Novus Ordo mass as proof that he supported this form of the mass. Padre Pio may have asked Fr Luigi Villa to investigate "the possible infiltration of both Freemasons and Communists into the Church." as Dr. Alice von Hildebrand has stated but it is the following statement in particular that I was asking you to show solid proof for which you posted here #9411, Padre Pio embraced Father Villa three times, saying to him: ‘Be brave, now…for the Church has already been invaded by Freemasonry!’ and then stated: ‘Freemasonry has already made it into the loafers (shoes) of the Pope!’ At the time, the reigning Pope was Paul VI. This statement above which you posted is a very strong statement and remains hearsay until solid proof for it is offered. Your posts (#9465 , #9466 and #9467 ) of Dr. Alice von Hildebrand's interview is not proof of this statement. All this doctor stated in regard to Padre Pio is that he asked Fr Luigi Villa to investigate "the possible infiltration of both Freemasons and Communists into the Church.", correct?
It does, from his standpoint. We just don't have enough facts. It sounds to me as though these issues with him go back for awhile. Also, I noticed in Father's explanation of his issues, he mentions someone like a liturgical administrator (those are my words). I just found out what that is, since our pastor has just hired one. UGH. It is a layperson who designs the liturgies, and when I asked our pastor about it a month ago, he stated that we are behind in having one, as other places already have one. UGH. I told my husband I am biding my time and keeping a watchful eye on this. Our pastor is a canon lawyer! Why can't he do his priestly duties? I hope I am not reading too much into this. But I say this to explain what this priest in question might have been up against.
Why can't the priest just offer up the Mass? Why the heck does a layperson have to /get to make choices like that? Seems useless. And stupid.
Hard to tell. In fairness to the Bishop, he's limited in the amount of information he can disclose. I wouldn't put this in the same category as the flag burning incident. Neither priests nor (good) bishops have it easy nowadays. If the priest had been in a parish with a culture of abuse and he was the only one trying to correct the abuse, then he would have been very isolated. On the other hand, if he was in a regular parish and he was the only person seeing abuses, he could have been the problem. It could have been a case where the first parish he was in was rife with abuse and that had such an impact on him that he became difficult to work with when he moved on to better parishes. We really don't know enough about it. Although the Bishop said that the priest was paid everything due to him, he didn't say that payments were made regularly and on time. It surely looks like money owing to the priest was withheld for a while and then paid in a lump sum. That's fine for people with other means of income but not for someone living from payday to payday.
