My Photo

Insight Scoop

Catholic World News Top Headlines (CWNews.com)

The Curt Jester

JIMMY AKIN.ORG

Poor Box

Render Unto Us

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad

« New Concerns: A Closer Look At Fred Thompson's Abortion Stance | Main | Dissident Theologian, Richard McBrien Has A Feature Column In Cardinal Mahony's Newspaper, "The Tidings" »

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Comments

James

I respectfully disagree with a lot of what you say, Carlos.

First, I don't wish to ignore canon law, but retreating into it in the face of the outright promotion of evil is not really facing up to that evil. (The game? 'Well, I, the so-and-so bishop ain't gonna do anything, because so-and-so abortopolitician is automatically excommunicated. So, you see, I don't have to do anything.' Of course, the politician could't care less about some 'automatic' excommunication under canon law, and will just ignore it completely. So will everyone else.)

Second, a bishop, successor to Peter as he is, does NOT have absolute discretion in dealing with this issue. He is to be obedient to the teachings of the Magisterium, and he is to be obedient to the Pope. When a bishop falls into the promotion of evil, and a refusal to carry out the uber-precious canon law, it is the duty of the Pope and the Magisterium to prevent scandal in the Church. But they never do! Move the guy out, to somewhere where he won't continue to spread evil. When a Pope and Church leadership become 'reluctant' to confront evil - within the Church's own ranks! - evil spreads! (All that is necessary for the spread of evil is for good men to do nothing...) The homosexual evil in the Church grew to dramatic proportions, and eventually spilled over to molest tens of thousands of teenage boys, precisely because for decades, upposedly 'good' 'men' in the Church did NOTHING. If bishops can do whatever the hell they want, millions are going to be stuck with evil-promoting bishops. (Oh, right, that's already happened...)

Can you imagine what would happen if the Pope told these politicans that they are going to end up in hell if they do not repent? Of course, we will never see that courage from our present Church leadership. Why aren't bishops and popes walking the streets telling people to repent of their sins, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand? You could listen for years to 'leadership' in the Church, and never once hear the word repent. (The very first word of the ministry of the Son of God, by the way...)


Finally, I am not carping. I'm refusing to not call a spade a spade. What am I to say to my kids when they see a Bishop Wuerl making nice with Nancy Pelosi (Ms. I will NEVER do anything ever to hinder an abortion...)?

This is what they (and all other Catholics) take from it:

- The automatic excommunications mean NOTHING;

- The Church leadership is not only not willing to stand up to evil, but is complicit in it (as Wuerl is);

- I'm not gonna be persecuted for standing up to evil, if Wuerl and the other bishops aren't going to.

Enough.

Let's have a Church that refuses to tolerate evil in the world, and within its own ranks.

The Wuerl/Pelosi thing makes me sick, and the same thing occurs with lots and lots of other bishops. It sickens serious Catholics all over the world, and it makes cynics of our youth.

James

Dan Hunter

James is 100% correct on this matter.
God bless you all.

James


You know, the hardest thing about being a serious Catholic is that you end up fighting evil within your own Church for mega portions of your life. Yeah, really.

As a parent, I have had to fight lies taught to my kids by pastors, various priests and nuns, all sorts of laity who have evil agendas. You mention simple Catholic truths (like that hell exists) and you are attacked in your own parish.

The bishops are making nice to the abortopoliticans, the church (around where I live) is infested with sodomites and sodomy promoters. My kids cannot be regarded as safe alone with a priest.

The Pope and bishops are arguing about who is automatically excommunicated and who is not - and who can have Communion and who cannot. The spokeman for the Pope contradicts what the Pope said just previous to him. Everyone presents himself for Communion, no matter what. The abortopoliticans laugh off whatever the Pope says. The public just laughs.

You send your kid to a 'Catholic' university, and they're busy inviting your kid to see 'The Vagina Monologues' where everyone yells "C__t!" in the audience, and the lesbian molestation of a young girl is celebrated.

The Church is in such a sorry state, compared to what it is supposed to be.

The worst? Catholics all over spend their lives rationalizing all these things, and finding various ways to excuse them.

We have the strictest Pope in years, but down in the parishes, it don't mean much.

It never will, until a Pope decides to seriously discipline those who promote evil in the Church.

Still waiting...

James

James


Here's a good article on the subject:

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/070511

James

James

Some quotes (from http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0702642.htm):

"Pope Benedict XVI's comments on excommunication for pro-abortion Catholic politicians touched on huge and sensitive issues -- so sensitive that the Vatican issued a toned-down version of his remarks the following day."

"On May 10, the Vatican press office released the official transcript of the pope's 25-minute session with reporters. The pope's opening "yes" to the direct question about excommunication had disappeared, and so had the references to Mexican bishops."

"Carlos Villa Roiz, a spokesman for Mexico City Cardinal Norberto Rivera Carrera, told Catholic News Service May 9 that the Mexican church did not yet have an official position on the matter."

"Politicians who supported the abortion bill have downplayed the excommunication discussions."

"Mexico City Mayor Marcelo Ebrard, a member of the Democratic Revolution Party, told reporters May 9 that he "hadn't lost any sleep" over the possibility of being excommunicated. I am going to fulfill my duties," he said. "Above the law, there is nothing more important.""

"During the 2004 U.S. presidential election campaign, about 10 to 12 of the approximately 190 diocesan bishops spoke out in favor of denying Communion to politicians who favored abortion."

====

What a farce. What pathetic leaders of our Church. What total disarray. What complicity in evil.

James

Clint

There have always been two sets of rules in the Catholic Church. One for the ordinary people and another for the the rich and famous.

Popes have always treated Europe's royalty defferentially.

Dan Hunter

Clint,
Show us where His Holiness has taught matters of faith and morals differently to the rich as opposed to the poor.
He has no choice but to teach and defend the Gospel message to all equally.
If anything the Holy Father is sweeter and gentler to the poor.
Just go over to Father Zuhlsdorf's site:"What does the Prayer Really Say".
There you will see two beautiful photos of His Holiness in Brazil,one holding a little boy who comes from drug addicts and the other shows him with arms outstretched and the Holy Ghost in his face.
They made me weep.
God bless you.

John

Like Vatican II's wishy washy Modernistic language-are they excommunicated or not?

Cant ever seem to get a true comment or teaching or decision out of the Vatican in the past 40 years or so...except maybe the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre who will be cannonized in the future. When it comes to Traditionalists..the vatican all can agree that they hate them, but anything else, forget about it!!

DenverCatholic

John, you and others seem more concerned with winning the argument for "your side" than with what it is right for the Church and its members.

At least that's the way you come across: my way or the hiway - and if someone isnt backing you 100% then he is damned.

Are you sure you aren't protestant?

James


John's right. It's pathetic that from the Pope down, we can't get a clear teaching on whether these abortopoliticians are excommunicated, or even on whether they are allowed to take Communion.

It's shocking to me that the Vatican spokespeople 'clarified' what the Pope said on this (and left out all the tough parts). Was that under his authority? Or was it not? Isn't that false witness - to say what the Pope said when it's not what he said? If the Pope wants to clarify or contradict his own teaching, he should do it himself.

But even worse - the Mexican bishops can't say whether these abortolovers are excommunicated or not, only a few lonely bishops in the US will even say that they shouldn't get Communion.

It's very clear to many, many Catholics that a LOT of bishops and higher-ups in the Church don't want to have to go up against these powerful and influential politicans. Wuerl, McCarrick (who was already caught in a flat-out lie about a letter from then Cardinal Ratzinger).

What about Teddy Kennedy? He promotes abortion and sodomy all the time. Why isn't he excommunicated? If he is, why won't anyone say so? If he is, why does he go to Church normally and take Communion?

What about Nancy Pelosi? Why isn't she excommunicated?

Either the Church stands up to evil, or it decides to live with it. Sadly, a lotta Catholics are seeing that in most places, it's gonna be the second.

This is where the you-know-what hits the fan. The world is falling into evil and sin of egregious proportions, and a lot of Church leaders are afraid to take the world on. It's sickening.

James

John

Dever Catholic

If you cant get a clear YES or NO regarding excommunication regarding so called "Catholics" whom promote the death of the unborn (please go and check your catechism and canon law as to what constitutes mortal sin and one does not need to be St Thomas to know these politicians are in mortal sin by their allowance of such) from the Vatican or even the USCCB whom I watched Raymond Arroyo on EWTN shake his head a few months back on this same subject when interviewing this wishy washy Bishops-then something is very wrong with the church Christ founded here on earth established for the salvation of souls and protecting of the meek and unborn

I would think that one would be able to get a clear answer from Pope Pius X, would one not?

spaxx

It boils down to whose side we are on; God's or the world.

Our Bishops are cowards, any truth that triggers public backlash is best left alone; better to appease the public than stand for the Truth.

How many came out and openly stood by the side of our Pontiff when he was under heavy and sustained attack for RIGHTLY calling Islam evil? He was abandoned by all his generals and foot soldiers because it is not politically correct.

Wherever our Pontiff goes, the gay and feminist legion is present in full strength. Where are his generals and foot soldiers? Precisely safe in their cocoons because we must not do anything inflammatory or that will make our brethren feel excluded.

How many bishops come out to actively oppose abortion? They make a few feeble and cowardly statements and quickly withdraw back into their cocoons. When confronted about the same statements they PLEAD having been quoted OUT of context lest they be thought of being anti-women's rights (anti-feminist) or as NOT being in step with the times.

Such weakness of our Bishops for public opinion has has been copied by the flock and thus led to lukewarm catholics and/or apostasy. The Church is dying bse of lukewarm leadership.

In his admonition against lukewarmness St John Vianney says(of the lukewarm soul):

"Such a person, when he is with those who have no religion will talk only about the pleasures of the world. He would blush to fulfill his religious practices in front of his companions or those boys and girls who share his evil ways..."

The general state of the church is aptly summarizes when he says:

"A lukewarm soul is not yet quite dead in the eyes of God because the faith, the hope, and the charity which are its spiritual life are not altogether extinct. But it is a faith without zeal, a hope without resolution, a charity without ardour.... "

This is the church today, a dying church plagued by mass apostasy; most destruction being wrought by enemies from within her own ranks. This is only a prelude of worse things to come. Constant Prayer(The Rosary) is the only remedy (according to The Blessed Virgin Mary, custodian of all God's graces).

It is worthwhile then to ponder the following words of the same saint.

"See, before God, my brethren, on what side you are. On the side of the sinners, who have abandoned everything and plunge themselves into sin without remorse? On the side of the just souls, who seek but God alone? Or are you of the number of these slack, tepid, and indifferent souls such as we have just been depicting for you? Down which road are you travelling?"

"Let us then ask God with all our hearts, if we are in this state (lukewarm state), to give us the grace to get out of it, so that we may take the route that all the saints have taken and arrive at the happiness that they are enjoying."

The saints are a torch who illuminate the way for ALL faithful to follow; I do not know of any saint who attained sainthood by appeasing the world. Neither should we.

James


"The Church is dying bse of lukewarm leadership."

---

Around where we live, a good portion of the priests are in love with the world (and many in love with different personal sins). Many simply won't speak the Catholic truth about all sorts of things (always the difficult things, of course, and the things the priests don't like). They just refuse to - even to kids.

I personally think a future pontiff (This one, sadly, has shown himself to be too cowardly to do it.) should fire 80% of the bishops in America and start over (and about 80% in many other countries as well).

As I've stated before, the saddest thing about being a Catholic these days is having to fight evil within your own Church day in and day out - and having to have your guard up at ALL times whenever a priest (or bishops) is near your kid - both because of spiritual dangers, and because of physical ones.

This latest inability to straightforwardly censure and refuse to play nice to aborto-loving politicians in America, in Europe, in Central America, is just one more deep leap into the muck and evil of the world.

I can tell you - we get so tired of spineless priests around where we live - who actually consider themselves courageous if they mention abortion (or sodomy, or contraception) once during Mass every couple of years. Seriously, they pat themselves on the back for that, and think they're great.

In the meantime, parents are having to raise kids in a society that now bombards them daily with pornography, the glorification of homosexuality, the condoning of divorce, baby murder, etc. etc.

It never ends. We consider ourselves lucky these days to go to Church and not be assaulted with either untruth or some condoning of evil.

But as for the Church being unequivocally on our side - as we try to raise seriously Catholic kids, forgettaboutit. The equivocations are so rampant, the relativism so pronounced, the sins of ommission so numerous, and the infiltrations of evil so commonplace, that we seriously begin to despair at times.

I would rather see a Church that is 1/8 the size it is, but which gives no quarter to evil.

Guess I'll never see that in my life (now probably 1/2 over).

Every day the world slips further into muck and depravity, and every day leaders in the Church slide down some more too. They've slid down so, so far, but think they're great because they are just a smidgeon higher than the rest.

It IS discouraging and sickening.

The most discouraging for us is that our kids, who are very aware and smart, see this constant equivocation in the Church wherever they go.

I really, really believe that there needs to be a huge shakeup in the Church. If there's not, I would not be surprised at all if there were some great chastisement from God. Really. I think it's come to that.

James

Dan Hunter

James,
Our Holy Father is not a coward by any stretch of the imagination.
He has a disobedient curia which he is replacing.
God bless you

John

Dan

With due respect,would you allow cancer to stay in your body knowing that it will eventually kill the rest of you?

The same for these cancerous bishops and cardinals whom go against the Pope on this MP and if it was not for their threat of revolt you would have seen it by now but he is fearful. Old age? Who knows but Pius X, Leo XIII, Pius IX, and so on, called the church enemies to the carpet and exposed them for what they were. Pius X made each of his clergy take an oath against modernism which of course the Vatican II popes did away with because modernism is now all the church seems to embrace.

He must do away with these men and start over and cure the body before it dies of cancer no matter what one says about the gates of hell-Our Lord never said the church would be an organization that it is today or even when and who would be empowered. Revelations give some insight as do other writings of St Paul but that will not be seen in our lifetime thankfully. Right now we need a church that will catechism our children and stand for what is correct

James


I think this Pope is more courageous than many priests, but well, that does not mean all that much.

The Pope just says stuff that ALL priests are supposed to be saying. The fact that he appears to be unusual shows the sad state the Church is in.

I agree with John. The Church (as measured by what priests are really teaching [and refusing to teach]) is in a horrible, horrible mess. There is a huge cancer in the Church (apostasy, heresy, all sorts of sins of ommission, sodomy among the priests, fake 'Catholic' universities, bishops and cardinals in full revolt against certain teachings, etc. etc.).

This resulted, in large part from 1) the belief [erroneous] that Vatican II allowed anyone to believe anything and 2) from the failure to discipline on the issue of contraception - which has now led to the grand failure to discipline priests and bishops on just about anything.

When a Pope refuses to enforce discipline in the Church, that Pope is failing a primary duty, and IS cowardly.

Pope John Paul II knew that the American bishops were, in many places, in complete revolt against teachings about sexual morality. He did nothing. It eventually grew so bad that thousands of boys were sodomized by priests.

Here's how I judge whether a Pope is courageous: When someone does something, in my little corner of the woods, about heretical and sodomitic priests, and the grand failure to teach our young ones many of the truths of the Catholic faith, I'll start believing that a Pope has found some courage. Until then, forgettaboutit.

James

Dan Hunter

James,
I will put my complete trust in our Supreme Pontiff Pope Benedict XVI.
He is Christs Vicar on earth,and you and I are not.
As much as I would love to drop the axe on thousands of dissidents,I do not have the authority or the understanding to judge Peter's movements.
God bless you and God bless the Catholic Church

James


"I will put my complete trust in our Supreme Pontiff Pope Benedict XVI."

---

You should put your complete trust in God and in Christ, Dan - not in the pontiff.

He is a decent and hard-working and devout and very smart man - but he is also cowardly, IMHO. I learn a lot from Pope Benedict, and he is trying to do good in many ways - but that does not excuse the evil, evil stuff that goes on in the Church (including around where I live) - and which harms lots and lots of children.

Benedict is basically a teacher at heart. It's good to be a teacher. But a Pope should be a tough disciplinarian as well. (Why? Because otherwise the bishops do whatever the hell they want.) JPII rarely if ever disciplined. We can see what happened.

A lady in my church often says of the priests here who don't want to tell anyone anything they don't want to hear: "They don't want to be the bad guys." It's the same with the recent popes.

I personally get tired of looking at the Pope's photo on the wall of our church, and knowing that virtually anything he does or says will have a zilch effect on what goes on here. It's not supposed to be that way. He's like, totally irrelevant to the priests around where we live.

James

bill bannon

James,
I actually agree with most of what you say though I would check that "tens of thousands" of sex abuse victims figure quantitatively as to real numbers and qualitatively as the percent that were actually adolescent willing gays themselves who sinned mortally with the priests whose guilt though (the priests) is worse due to age and office and vow.
I think the Popes are too protected within Catholic culture from any criticism whatsoever. Pope John Paul II for example
tried to overthrow two constant traditions and faced virtually not an iota of criticism...the licitness of the death penalty/ and husband headship which is not in this present catechism at all but is in the NT 6 separate times by Paul, Peter, and by a deutero Pauline author.
John Paul tried to overthrow the latter in the following cites:
Dignitatem Mulieris, sect.24, par.3&4 and and the Theology of the Body section 89.3-4.

But that in itself is not tragic in that there were several millenia plus traditions that should have been overthrown and were: interest on all personal loans as against nature and the licitness of slavery (opposed by Popes in a number of bulls situationally (native populations and the trade) but not in se and not if one had just title to a slave (born to a slave mother...see the catechism of Trent in the section on stealing)....that's why religious orders had slaves in the 19th century despite centuries of bulls seeming to object in se but not really doing so.

But that John Paul could write against the death penalty and for equality only of spouses in the New Covenant (part of the truth).....and have not one Cardinal strongly disagree in the press nor one major Bishop....means that our system produces an unhealthy amount of dependency of thought in those who graduate
to our hierarchy. No one should be independent in matters resolved as infallible as in the case of abortion which was infallibly settled in section 62 of Evangelium Vitae and thus it passes muster under Canon 749-c "No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident."
But our leaders should be capable of criticizing a Pope when he opposes two ideas that have connections to Scripture itself let alone centuries of implied or explicit belief.
Likewise your point here is that the Pope should be doing something stronger if leaving the Bishops to their own judgement has produced no strong action against abortion pols. The Pope is the captain of the ship. Now the navigators and the engine room engineers...ie...the bishops should be left to their own authority for awhile by the captain. But if one is getting closer and closer to crashing into the ice berg, it is the captain's duty to override those who are normally trustworthy
and normally don't need to be micromanaged by the captain. The sex abuse farce was a sign that the Bishops in the US and elsewhere do need to be micromanaged for a time until they regain their senses and until they fulfil scripture which says that
"the wise man discerneth the time and the judgement". John Paul by the way should have taken care of this area which goes back decades with Cuomo and Ferrara in New York and their public pro choice positions.
Had they been excommunicated by a formal sentence (not this auto thing which as you point out can be a dodge of the requirements of the virtue of severity)...had they be excommunicated at once, there would not be around 44 catholic legislators with pro choice positions.
But why is it we produce few leaders who either do the severe and we produce virtually no one who can criticize the Pope when he is veering erroneous (my examples)or he is veering pusillanimous (your example).
Respect toward a Pope should include his being confronted strongly when He is wrong (my examples) or inactive in the name of bishop subsidiarity (your example).
We know this from Paul who said in Galatians: " I withstood Peter to his face for he was deserving of blame."
We as a Catholic culture have banned what Paul did to Peter and we have banned it in the name of a respect... a concept of respect that we did not get from God's word but from Euro culture wherein for centuries, no one gainsays the father of a family. But we are to follow God's word not Euro tradition....when the two are at odds.

James


Hey Bill -

Wow. I agree with a great deal of what you say.

On numbers - approx. 10,000 boys (mostly teens) molested by priests in the US - and tens of thousands more in other countries. It doesn't matter whether said teenage boy thinks himself 'gay' or not; he was still molested and sodomized by a priest.

I am also shocked that so many in the Church refuse to state that the husband should be the head of the family (a family without a clear head is rudderless). I fully believe such is part of the divine plan for family, just as I believe men should be priests. I've seen all my life what happens to families where there is no male headship (which is now the greater part of families). An old priest in our parish says: The husband is the leader of the family; the wife, the heart. He's right.

With the death penalty, the above - what you see is Popes trying to placate the world, on sensitive subjects - rather than seeking to convince the world of the rightness of God's plan. JPII, I believe, fell to this temptation at many points (as when he kissed the Koran, for example).

But on the discipline thing - this is the greatest threat to the Church there is.

For instance - if you have the principal of a school - he does not have to be the horrible disciplinarian - but it IS his ultimate responsibility to discipline (both teachers and students). Usually that's delegated to a vice principal - but it IS the principal's ultimate responsibility. With no discipline, teachers get lazy, or corrupted, or fall into bad things, or teach lies, and student gangs form, and bad things start happening in the rest rooms and on the playground. We've had a Church with no real principal for a long time - or rather - I should say - with a principal who talks a lot and whom everyone ignores (because there are no consequences at all to ignoring him). There's no vice principal for discipline in the Church, and the Popes have NOT been taking ultimate responsibility for that discipline.

And on respect, you're right - 'respect' has come to mean not confronting the other, and not hurting the other's feelings, and kowtowing to someone's position. The Pope is not above reproach, just like none of us are. But there is something even more insidious going on. Many bishops won't confront a pope on error, not because they are being too 'respectful' - but because a lot of them don't even care to begin with. Our last bishop was openly scornful of the Pope - along with a tons of priests around here. They just ignored everything the Pope said.

James

Gregory L. Castano

I just went through the postings on this topic and can understand the very deep frustration, annoyance, and even bitterness of James and others as they discuss the state of affairs of the Church, especially having to do with the governance aspect (i.e., how bishops govern and apply the laws of the Church in their day-to-day decisions).

Opinions (from the postings) appear to be that bishops do poorly - - which becomes even more serious because of the scandal involved in these decisions or lack of decisions (e.g., tolerating renegade bishops, priests, and other religious; tolerating dissent from Church teaching that for the past 40 years has even become institutionalized in many dioceses, refusing to deal with Catholic politicians who scandalize the faith daily, and, of course the entire sexual abuse scandal that has and continues to ruin the lives of our children and undermines the Church, good clerics and religious, and the weakens the faith of untold numbers).

So, the frustration is understandable. I often tell myself that we would be better off with a smaller Church whose bishops, priests, religious, and laity were faithful to the teachings of the Church, and let the freethinkers get in line or get out.

Having often experienced the frustrations that James and the others have talked about on this blog, I believe that one needs to step back, from time-to-time, take a deep breath, and recall some of Christ's actions as He founded His Church to carry out the Will of His Father.

First, Christ picked HIS apostles - - not the brightest people to say the least, and yet they were the ones Christ chose to do His important (life-saving)work. One of them, who Christ, Himself, picked to become the visible head of the Church denied Him three times; another, selected by Christ, Himself, betrayed Him. Another, doubted Him. Can you just imagine anyone picking these twelve to do the most important work of our Creator and Redeemer? Apart from being weaklings, they knew nothing about organization and management and yet they were selected by Christ, Himself, to start and lead the most important institution that has outlasted all institutions of the past. So what's my point?

Christ works through people who either accept His graces or not. People are essentially weak except for the grace of God. Some, perhaps many in His Church are weak and may not always accept the graces that God is so willing to offer them. While the idea that a Pope who sees something not going well in the Church fires off a memo to one of his bishops telling them to straighten up or get out would probably make most of us very happy, it doesn't work quite that way or Christ would have fired most of His apostles. Popes, like Christ, would much rather convince uncooperative bishops to do the right thing. Granted, some, like Peter, will respond while others. like Judas, will not. And you know the end of the story.

Patience is virtue and if we can become saints by practicing patience (which we certainly must when considering the state of things in various parts of the Church), I would say we've gained quite a bit - - perhaps even purgatory or heaven. For those of us who must complain (I certainly do, quite a bit of it), let's at least complain among ourselves as Catholics so that we can let off some steam which Christ will probably not hold us too accountable (I hope)!

God bless,
Greg

James


I respectfully disagree, Greg, with honesty.

Christ picked real men to be his apostles - who would've known without a shadow of a doubt that allowing sodomites to be in charge of teenage boys is a BAD idea, that promoting or condoing immorality is BAD, that there IS Godly truth, etc. etc.

The apostles had their weaknesses, to be sure - but they didn't fall over into the promotion and condoning of evil.

In the old days, we might have had a priest who drank too much, for instance - but he would've been the first to acknowledge his own weakness - and would NEVER have portrayed that to young ones as a good.

When I talk to Dads around where I live - the thing they most consistently cannot stand and are fiercely angry about is that so many of our priests are NOT real men. They aren't. They're some feminized or queerized, afraid-to-offend, afraid-to-fight, afraid-to-speak truth half-men.

It's not just that they have their weaknesses (like we all do); it's that they excuse lies and evil. They are NOT like the apostles. They're something far worse.

A lot of the bad stuff in the Church is EASILY correctable, if just someone had the balls to do it.

Sadly, no one does.

James

Gregory L. Castano

Hi James,

I really don't disagree with what you are saying nor with the tragedy of what has gone on for much too long. As I alluded to in my post, I have many of the feelings that you and others have regarding the state of things which I have witnessed for many years. I would probably be first in line to recommend and put into effect what should be done administratively and managerially to straighten out the terrible situation in the Church - - recall my "smaller Church would be better example"?

I simply wanted the notion of the weakness of mankind to be kept in mind, not as an excuse for what is happening, but simply to recall His actions, wanting all of us to accept His graces without which we (and the bishops) simply cannot do His Will.

God bless,
Greg

Dan Hunter

James,
You have gone way over the line calling Pope Benedict XVI a coward.
He is not a coward.
I am a discharged Navy Seal who saw action in Grenada,and I can tell you that I have seen cowardice.
What the Holy Father is doing is the antithesis of cowardice.He is expending his life in the utterly complete service of the God-Man.
I give complete trust and obedience to Pope Benedict because he is THE voice Of Christ on earth.
Never,ever call His Holiness Pope Benedict a coward again.

James


He's not dealing with the dissent and heresy and evil within the Church - just like JPII didn't, Dan.

That's cowardice.

Just saying what all priests are supposed to be saying is no more than what priests are supposed to do.

Benedict IS expending his life in the service of God - but selectively so. The papacy is not a selective ministry. It's not a professorship at Tubingen. There are lots of things that need to be done about real evils within the Church, and no one is brave enough to do them (or even talk about them, half the time).

Until some discipline is restored in the Church (when? I dunno - sometime in my lifetime? I dunno) - evil will be sprouting in all sorts of places IN the Church, and then staying there.

Mahoney shouldn't be cardinaling, year after year, the American bishops shouldn't be giving Communion to lots and lots of aborto-politicians, bishops who moved molestor priests all over the place shouldn't be bishoping, the Pope should never have allowed lots and lots of bishops to say that they will just ignore the instruction from Rome on homosexual priests (which many of the flagrantly say they intend to do), Wuerl shouldn't be allowed to play 'nicey-nice' with Nancy Pelosi, someone should respond to the tons of complaints from all over about heretical bishops and priests, universities which are in no way Catholic should not be allowed to fool parents into thinking they are, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Until the Pope deals with these things - which have been going on for decades (all of my short life on Earth) - he is a coward. I refuse to have evil condoned to my children and accept that that is right - in the Catholic Church - but that is what goes on all the time around where I live. Enough. I refuse to agree that such is OK, or normal, or to be justified, or whatever.

My kids (and my wife and I) deserve the Catholic truth, taught by trustworthy and orthodox priests, who would be appalled at immorality of any sort - within themselves and within the Church. That is NOT what we have.

I refuse to go along on this. It's the Pope's ultimate responsibility to ensure these things don't occur - AND HE ISN'T TAKING THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON. AND NEITHER DID THE POPE BEFORE HIM.

James

The comments to this entry are closed.

Pope Benedict XVI Homilies & Statements

Codex of Catholic Blogs

Orthodox Blogs

Blogs From People We Wish Were Catholic