Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil
Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter. (Isaiah 5:20)The archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, who ordained ZERO priests this year, has no problem with 'gays' in his seminary so long as they stay in line and refrain from committing reprehensible acts like ... KNEELING FOR HOLY COMMUNION.
Tip to DIOGENES.
The Dublin archbishop's opinion about homosexual seminarians is not all that surprising in view of THIS.
posted by Quintero at 8:51 PM
13 Comments:
That is profoundly sad about his stances. What, as a lay person, can we do about priests and bishops of this sort here in the U.S.? Is there recourse for us? Is there a mechanism we can follow outside of protest and prayer?
Look, you got a problem priest or even a problem bishop? Who ya gunna call?
You want results? Look for a man with a proven track record for getting results. Of course, his methods are a bit unconventional and you will owe him a favor someday, but he will get the job done
You can get more accomplished with kind words and a gun than you can with kind words alone.
These are the kinds of circumstances when the letter of the law must yield to the spirit thereof. In such situations as these, when the "duly appointed shepherds" are nothing but committed wolves and their superiors lack the insight or the resolve to dispose properly of them (i.e., the Popes since John XXIII), it is no sin to have recourse to extralegal or "irregular" means for the Sacraments, true doctrine, and the other things to which Catholics have a right on account of the obligations we have to God.
The SSPX is one such avenue and there are others. As for the charges of schism, that is just a red herring: nobody is in schism unless they explicitly intend to be and the SSPX has consistently renounced such an intention.
Ah, yes, the SSPX option. It's a baby-bathwater axiom: Crappy bishops always provoke crappy reactions.
The SSPX have renounced a lot of intentions.
It's pleasant, I'm sure, to feel that one is cleaving to the Really Actually True Catholic Tradition, except that Canon 752 defines schism as “the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” The canon doesn't distinguish between degrees of withdrawal of submission to the Roman Pontiff, nor are subjective intentions invoked as a criterion. John Paul II the Great told Archbishop Lefebvre not to consecrate bishops without Rome’s permission, and Archbishop Lefebvre refused to submit.
This incense-laden recalcitrance is correctly called High Church Protestantism.
Dissenters from Humanae Vitae invoke nearly identical language to justify their brand of disobedience, claiming the divine right to pursue "irregular" contraceptive means on account of their God-given obligations to responsible parenthood.
But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither enter yourselves, nor allow those who would enter to go in.
Matthew 23:13
A magnificent retort -- standard red herring material from the SSPX logic handbook. That is, if the Scripture-quoting "anonymous" is the same as the SSPX-defending one.
The problem within the Catholic Church is not the SSPX. Yet, nothing gets a rise out of neo-Catholics quicker than the mere mention of attending an SSPX chapel.
Canon 752 defines schism as “the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
So then, Happy-clappy, neo-Catholic, Novus Ordinarian, let’s try this today, clergy who are either indifferent or who condone homosexual activity, abortion, artificial contraception etc. are guilty of “schism” as well.
These Novus Ordinarians obviously are not in Union With Rome ™ which makes them “schismatic” according to the above Canon. Either that or Rome itself permits their non-submission and, therefore, which case of non-submission is worse?
Why should it be worse to attend SSPX chapels that maintain Traditional Catholicism, reverence for the Eucharist and liturgy, clear teaching against homosexual activity, artificial contraception and abortion rather than to go to Churches who feature dissident wolves in sheep’s clothing like the archbishop of Dublin who have been allowed to maintain their “in union with Rome” status primarily because of “the Great One’s” refusal to sanction dissenters. Nevertheless, these dissenting priests and bishops are equally “schismatic” in their refusal to submit to the Supreme Pontiff in their teachings and practice.
Incidentally, I don't have a dog in this fight. I attend the “indult” and not an SSPX chapel. It’s just that kool-aide drinking neo-cats who get their panties in a bunch at the mere mention of the SSPX, disgust me.
I'm not SSPX; I consider them to be a Protestant cult. But these bishops who welcome gay priests and give the boot to the pious and reverent call to mind Matthew 23:13 as well as Isaiah 5:20.
I wonder how Sock would have coped with the Great Schism, when there was a "pope" in Avignon and one in Rome.
Is this bishop Roger's cousin?
As to the SSPX---I think we will see at least some of them come to reconciliation with the Vatican in the coming years, already the 'schism' name is being quieted down. I HOPE it will happen. I will not go to their chapel myself but I understand very well what can drive people to it. When the Masses at our 2 local parishes are nothing but painful,I understand what drives heartbroken souls to seek a holy reverent Mass with real teaching. I understand that longing well myself.
I wonder how Sock would have coped with the Great Schism, when there was a "pope" in Avignon and one in Rome.
I am an insignificant worm. A worm who believes in Jesus Christ, reads the bible and the Doctors and who prays. The pope (no disrespect meant) has little effect on my salvation or my love of Christ. I don’t care where he resides or who he is.
Take a deep breath, Sock. I have exactly the same complaints about the liberal version of the Church's wounds. My point is not to single out SSPX per se, but to note the baby-bathwater syndrome that arises in the face of leftist abuses, such as are currently on display in Dublin.
Your childish sarcasm toward our late Holy Father and those annoyed by bitter RadTrad rants ("bitter RadTrad" being a tautalogy) say a lot about your basic worldview. Being disgusted is the default state of 99% of RadTrads.
"The pope (no disrespect meant) has little effect on my salvation or my love of Christ."
Bingo, Sock. Thanks for illustrating my point. And people still doubt that RadTrads are High Church Protestants?
I must take my leave: a tall KoolAid awaits and, as all self-respecting, happy-clappy, neo-Catholic, Novus Ordinarians know, they don't stay cold forever.
And, all you "anonymouses" out there, could you start using your real names or at least pen names?
Being disgusted is the default state of 99% of RadTrads.
There is plenty to be disgusted with within the Cathoic Church, Patrick. If you laid off the kool-aid for a few days, you might be sober enough to see it for yourself.
Your childish sarcasm toward our late Holy Father and those annoyed by bitter RadTrad rants ("bitter RadTrad" being a tautalogy) say a lot about your basic worldview. Being disgusted is the default state of 99% of RadTrads.
Our late Holy Father was a nice man but not great. That is, not great except in the eyes of neo-Catholics.
And people still doubt that RadTrads are High Church Protestants?
I don't know what you're talking about and I don't think you do either.
Look, I'm not interested in what you think. I don't waste time with kool-aid drinking neo-cats.
So, have yourself a wonderful evening, sing kumbaya, hold hands and hug a stranger for me next Sunday at Mass.
Hey Kool Aid!!!!!
I like grape flavor. Yum-Yum
Post a Comment
<< Home