World Meeting of Families to discuss LGBT church members https://www.rte.ie/news/pope-francis-in-ireland/2018/0823/986921-world-meeting-of-families/
Oh of course they are discussing these “families”—this is SO obvious. The Agenda must go forth while Rome burns.
Interesting idea. I would have thought this attitude is so repugnant that it would spell the kiss of death. Maybe not. I think civil authorities have to get involved. Scary but maybe it is the only way to shut this down unless Cardinals Burke and Mueller have a plan.
Going to the Secular Powers as a Sovereign Remedy might be a bit like going to the Doctor with a headache and finding he advised having your head amputated. In the USA you might get away with getting a good Doctor.. or maybe not as the case may be; but in others countries a head amputation would be the very first choice of procedure....and enthusiatically acted upon A bit like calling in Kim Jong-Un to sort out the Federal Reserve
The very wise Fr. Hunwicke says, of the pathetic Vatican defence (it was all caused by clericalism!) says: You know what they're going to do now, don't you? Under the skilled and careful guidance of the Enemy himself, they're going to use this scandal, this crisis, as an excuse to try to root out of the presbyterate any surviving relics of a sense of true Priesthood (aka 'Clericalism'). Those corrupt structures of deference towards prelates which have landed us all where we are today will be viciously reinforced, and those who suffer, as well as abused victims, will be Catholic laity and Catholic clergy. I expect to see a new onslaught* on the training of seminarians and junior clergy, in which anybody possessing a Breviarium Romanum or a cassock will risk getting the boot. And, as soon as Joseph Ratzinger is dead, the Gestapo will be let loose on Summorum pontificum. These people are running scared and that means they will be very dangerous.
Yet the fact that they are running scared is a very, very positive sign indeed. Or the fact that millions of ordinary Catholics all over the world are discussing issues like this in an eyes open way is truly heaven sent. All this truly burst out into the open as recently as the Feast of the Assumption. I think these awful epople are finding fwer and fewer places to hide and that their evasions and excuses ring more and more hollow. Thier ship is sinking and will continue to sink.
When our pastor spoke last Sunday about the scandals he was almost in tears from the pulpit You could hear a pin drop, no babies cried Father said yesterday that people were giving him positive feedback for telling the truth and bringing it out in the open They even stopped him in the grocery store to give him positive feedback I agree that this all started to ratchet up around Assumption We need to keep up the rosaries and sacrifices
You are right Padraig. But when a crime—a heinous crime is committed and you are stonewalled by cowardly or evil men in charge who won’t stop the predator but instead try to intimidate you —then I think you have no recourse but the civil authorities. It gives me no joy to say it. I’m heart sick.
Seems like pretty classic projection this "clericalism". The words of Pope Francis in this regard remind me of the constant onslaught of those in power which work feverishly to destroy the mystery of our Faith. Is it no wonder so many of our youth leave the Church and turn to pagan beliefs in search of that mystery? I thought the exact same thing with regard to Summorum pontificum. It is only a matter of time. I pray for Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI every day. For his continued health and well being.
Yes. I read one fine priest’s blog in this—can’t remember who— but he said if they insist on calling it clericalism then fine. We will call it homoclericalism.
He has a valid point. Homoclericalism has been weaponized by those who wish to destroy and remake the Church.
and on that note... http://wdtprs.com/blog/2018/08/comments-from-the-great-roman/ Comments from The Great Roman™ Posted on 22 August 2018 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf During The Present Crisis partisans of the loony and often homosexual catholic Left have attempted misdirection of attention away from the root cause – homosexuality – and toward clericalism. Watch: they will also try to connect the Crisis to traditional liturgy. Some on the sane side of the non=”gay”, sound doctrine Catholic spectrum have been seduced into a least some of the clericalism argument. Let’s face it: the real problem is homosexuality. Homosexuality is what cause the vast amount of the abuse of power and victims of all ages. Is there a bad clericalism which can lead to abuse of power? Sure. But… that produces homosexual abuse and the homosexual subculture that perpetuates itself in the Church? Is there a connection? There could certainly be some overlap. But, let’s be honest about this. The one is by orders of galactic magnitude greater and it uses the later, rather than the other way around. My friend The Great Roman™ sent me a note, which I now share in a slightly edited form. We exchanged some communications about the clericalism angle. TGR™ regularly helps me to see other aspects and questions. I had sent him an article I had read about getting rid of outward clerical signs as being helpful in The Present Crisis. GUEST CONTRIBUTION: The Great Roman Right on a few things but big time wrong on everything else. First of all, regardless of the – supposed – simplicity of their garb, sodomy and the abuses that stem from it aren’t unknown among schismatic Easterners. Nor is careerism. On the contrary, they are doing worse on all counts, and have done so for quite some time, and that includes vocations. Easterners boast one of the most glaring symbols of an “imperial Church”: married clergy, which many would have us implement even though although it didn’t help Easterners much when it comes to either vocations or sexual abuse. All the alleged lack of “imperial” grandeur and of flattery supposedly avoided by the lack of red birettas and such didn’t stop them from things like breaking unity with the Church and submitting to worldly (some would say imperial) powers, from Byzantine emperors to KGB officers, who always had a role in shaping clerical careers by blackmailing them, be it via marriage or homosexual scandals. And I won’t even begin to make examples of shooting wars between Eastern priests, monks or bishops for career reasons, without secular input. Which is worse, looking imperial to some, or being known to all as the obedient religious arm of an empire? Are the faithful really put off by ecclesiastical clothing and “exalted” titles? Would they be more indulgent if our clergy dressed like shaggy and pony-tailed black robed schismatic bishops but were still practicing sodomy among themselves and preying on boys and kids? Give the people a sense that you are doing your best to live up to the call to priesthood and they will die for you, flawed though you might be, because there is nothing on Earth they need and want more than what only you can give them and that is Jesus Christ in His Sacraments. In fact, they will gladly give you all they have to see to it that your service to the Lord is carried out with the best of the best human love and ingenuity can produce. The titles, the gold, the fine vestments they want to see on you are what they would like to see on their Sweet Savior who was insulted, blasphemed, stripped naked and humiliated in every possible manner usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis to save us. They too, in their own way have to say “quid retribuam?” and that’s how they try to give thanks (εὐχαριστῶ since we’re feeling Eastern) this side of the altar rail. I insist – Easterners are not immune from “imperial” mentality. They have kept Caesaropapism alive and well while our Roman Church fought tooth and nail throughout its existence and paid a heavy price to preserve its independence from secular powers in keeping with Mk 12,17. It did so with Supreme Pontiffs, bishops and priests who could be saints or reprobates but steely willed men all. And the grandiose liturgies, paraphernalia and titles of the past did not keep them from repressing sodomy among clergy in ways the bunch of metrosexuals we all are – by comparison – find oh so inhumane. And even those who are said to have had disordered tendencies are not known to have set up a mob-like web of perversion, protecting and reproducing itself within seminaries and chanceries. It’s not titles or mozzettas that make men lust for other men or boys or whatever. It’s the vice of sodom and its compulsive-obsessive nature, a pathological and particularly devastating subset of that little thing called original sin. If the lust for pectoral crosses and fine garments make you liable to unspeakable vices, you had something wrong with you going in and the system should have been able to filter you out, for the sake of your soul and that of many others … Your Eminence. And let’s delve into this Imperial mentality business. Should we tear down the triumphal arches in paleochrisitian Churches because they attribute to Christ the tracts of an Emperor? Should we not call the Pope the Supreme Pontiff, because that too was a Roman and – later – an Imperial title? Should we call Sacraments by another name because sacramentum was the oath of fidelity of a legionary recruit? Should we abolish tabernacles since the tabernaculum was the commander’s tent at the center of the encampment? Should we not use the term diocese because that was an administrative unit of the late empire? Should we not call pagans such because that was one of the ways Roman legionaries would call the dwellers of villages (pagi) in recently settled lands, a bit like modern soldier use the world “civilians”? That’s because Christians were so numerous among the legions along the Limes that many words from the military vocabulary were implemented by the early Church. contd..
We are Romans. Get over it. Not by birth or language, but by baptism and choice. We are who we are precisely because the Church operated that marvelous spiritual translatio imperii whereby a worldly power and its legendary City were turned into an army of God casting demons out of our souls. As Romans, when we see the glorified versions of a senator’s toga or tunica on a cleric at the altar, we don’t recoil in horror. We burst at the seams with legitimate pride! Take that, Devil, you wanted to turn Rome, the mother of the western civilization into the City of the Antichrist and instead the Apostles saved all that was good in it and turned it into tools to save souls and make life better in the process. And that is “continuity” too, in symbols and facts, because we the Church of Rome “examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.” “Anyone who has ever seen Saint Peter’s Basilica or Square filled with cardinals and bishops in their finery knows that the sight is grand”. What “finery”? It is a polyester nightmare in there! And didn’t we all grow up in the era of the “just call me Joe” priests? The reason why the supposed imperial grandiosity of the Roman curia and the hierarchical life of the Church are annoying to many is that it doesn’t seem justified by an apparent and choral effort to bring the King of the Universe to all people. Privileges are justified by the mission. Kick out those who don’t like the mission and I guarantee you that no Catholic worth their salt will object to privileges of and homages paid to priesthood which are nothing else but love for Christ and acknowledgment of His Kingship, the only legitimate per se. While no community is untouched by careerism or sodomy, who have been, so far, most of the promoters of the destruction of all the supposedly imperial symbolism in the Church? Where are you more likely to run into the enemies of the “hermeneutic of continuity”, of sound liturgy, theology, religious life? Among the supporters of the allegedly “imperial” aesthetics or among those who want to do away with them along with the core of our faith? Lastly, certain aesthetics and certain symbols should not me tampered with in a time of crisis, especially a crisis of identity. They can help us rediscover it. In time, when the effects of a rebuilt identity and a long lasting evangelization will have again shaped culture along with the religious life of both the flock and its clergy, symbols that are no longer effective will be either set aside or reduced in importance as has been the case for over 20 centuries. Then came the vandals, who thought they knew better, and we don’t know who we are anymore. And these peculiar vandals of our time are only good at two things: destruction and sophistry: for instance destruction of marriage and sophistries about depravity, destruction of liturgy and sophistries about the nature of priesthood. It all boils down to that, doesn’t it: who is the priest? Answer that question correctly and you will know why generation after generation of Catholics would kiss the hand of a priest or the ring of a bishop and skip meals if necessary to build the most beautiful churches, to embroider the most precious vestments and to give glory to God through reverence for His ministers. ____ Thus, The Great Roman. That question, towards the end struck me: Who is the priest? My old pastor, looking at the horror show circus that was the local seminary back in the day, and the lavender-farting clown car that was the faculty, vocations office and chancery, used to quip that they couldn’t answer three questions: Who is Jesus Christ? Who is the Church? Who is the priest? If you can’t answer those three questions in a straight forward way, then you are doomed to make one mistake after another. If you won’t answer those questions in a way consistent with the Church’s doctrine
A pray Fr Martin's intervention in Ireland triggers more people like this man below to speak up the truth. https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/08/fr-martins-false-comfort FR. MARTIN’S FALSE COMFORT by Joseph Sciambra At the age of sixteen, after an indifferent Catholic education, I inexplicably paid a visit to the local priest. I didn’t know quite why I wanted to see him. It was during the height of the AIDS crisis, and I was scared, because I had recently come out to myself. I was a sad, lonely kid with no male friends or role models. I had abandoned the Catholic faith, but I wanted to talk with a man—any man—and I didn’t know where else to turn. Nervously fumbling on a few simple words, I sat down in the reconciliation room and told the priest, “I’m gay.” He assured me that God understood. God had “made me that way.” His attempt at compassion and understanding brought forth memories of my middle- and high-school “religion” classes, which had emphasized the primacy of the conscience. According to the priest, I should practice “safe sex.” This was the proper role of the conscience: It should lead me to act “responsibly.” Less than two years later, I walked into the Castro District of San Francisco. For a time, I did play it safe; later, I didn’t. After a few years, at a time when my life wasn’t going so well, I spoke with another priest. He offered the same advice the first priest had, but he added that I needed to settle down with one partner. I tried that, too. But I don’t believe I made any major lifestyle changes on the basis of what these priests told me. For the most part, my mind was already made up: I believed I had been born gay. Whether or not some God had made me that way, I didn’t really care. In one sense, these priests had made my life easier by confirming what I already thought. Yet at sixteen, when I talked to that first priest, I had secretly wanted him to say something else. I had wanted him to be strong—I had wanted him to rescue me from myself. Today the celebrity priest James Martin, S.J. speaks at the World Meeting of Families in Dublin, Ireland. The topic of his presentation is “Showing Welcome and Respect in our Parishes for ‘LGBT’ People and their Families.” In his book Building a Bridge: How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion, and Sensitivity, Martin praises the Catechism for saying that homosexuals must be treated with “respect, compassion and sensitivity” and that “‘every sign of unjust discrimination’ must be avoided.” On the surface, the message of James Martin appears compassionate and sensitive. In fact, it is conflicted and confusing. Though he praises the Catechism’s call for sensitivity, Martin also denounces it as “needlessly hurtful” toward homosexuals because it describes homosexuality as intrinsically disordered. Martin has proposed that the Catechism instead adopt the phrase “differently ordered.” But if that phrase had been in the Catechism when I returned to the Catholic Church after years of living in sin, I would have returned only to my death. After living for more than a decade as a sexually active homosexual, I finally sought out Christ as a broken and humiliated man. My health had deteriorated. I had watched my friends die of AIDS and figured I was next. But even then, I was scared to leave. Where could I go? Blessedly, I found I could go home. Though every priest I encountered assumed I should continue in my sin, my parents never did. They gave me a place to heal. For a while, I wrestled with the Catechism and with God. I came to realize that homosexual activity is wrong. I could see the destructive nature of gay sex in my own shattered body. But I couldn’t accept that, during all those years I had spent in a far country, my suffering had been in vain—that countless gay men had died for nothing, that we had all succumbed to a lie. Yet we had. In my era, some heard the lie through popular culture, in the strains of “Y.M.C.A.,” which promised male comaraderie for those brave enough to follow Madonna and “Express Yourself.” The superficially caring and compassionate priests I had met in my youth in fact had done nothing to help me. Instead of telling me the truth—that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered—they patted me on the back and sent me on my way. Instead of calling me to celibacy and encouraging me to live a chaste life, they left me as they found me: confused. The words of these priests, spoken to a young man with very little faith, allowed that man to remain in mortal sin for years, unrepentant and separated from God. If such priestly advice could so damage the life of one young man, imagine the damage Fr. Martin’s words will do to the countless young people who earnestly attend the World Meeting of Families. If the Church wants to show true respect, compassion, and sensitivity to homosexual persons, it must offer them the words of Christ—not Fr. Martin’s false comfort. Joseph Sciambra writes from Napa, California.
This is a great homily by a courageous and obviously holy Priest. I would suggest everyone listen to it all the way to the end. https://straphaelcrystal.org/homily/august-19-2018/
AED, Maybe on the Mike Church Show? https://www.mikechurch.com/2018/08/its-homoclericalism-stupid-the-mike-church-show/ Edited to add: I came across the following upon searching for what is mentioned in the above audio clip - "The Bishops Knew"/#CatholicMeToo. The Mike Church Show mentions a rally that will take place in Baltimore in November in relation to this movement. I'm not certain if anything has been posted about this rally on the forum. I have seen posts about the movement though. Here is a link to information about the meeting along with two snapshots of the information on the link and a short video, http://thebishopsknew.com/ . If you would like to attend this rally you need to click on the following link since the above is just a snapshot of the form, http://thebishopsknew.com/ **** This may have been posted already and I apologize if that is the case but I am posting it here because it is related to the #CatholicMeToo movement, https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/catholicmetoo-billboard-spotted-in-texas I am not sure if these billboards are in an area which is well trafficked but at least they got some press from the Church Militant.
The police are the first port of call I assume. But I would be very alert to the fact that when you invite a stranger into your home that the stranger, even if he comes from the Government might not be trustworthy one. Not ever fruit that fall from Government trees are good ones.
