Under the leadership of Cardinal Robert Mahony, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles’ annual Religious Education Congress – billed as the biggest annual gathering of Catholics in the country – gained a reputation for functioning as a platform for dissidents who seek to undermine Catholic doctrine on life and family issues.
When Mahony left office in 2011 in disgrace following revelations of his protection of priests accused of child sex abuse, he was replaced by Archbishop José Gomez, a former Opus Dei priest perceived as a conservative. Expectations were high that Gomez’s administration would lead to a reversal of Mahony’s policies. However, almost seven years later, the Religious Education Congress continues to promote Mahony’s dissident agenda with apparent impunity, at the expense of the Church’s doctrines on life and family.
This year, as in previous years, the Religious Education Congress features a roster of speakers that includes promoters of the homosexual agenda, several of whom have found a warm welcome in Gomez’s archdiocese.
Under the topic “LGBT ministry,” which include nine scheduled talks, speakers include Fr. James Martin, who regards homosexual orientation as part of God’s design of the individual, and as a person’s legitimate “identity.” Martin calls “LGBT people” “holy” without giving any qualifications and openly advocates eliminating the phrase “intrinsically evil” from the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s description of homosexual acts. Martin will be giving a talk on the topic “Building a Bridge: Bringing Together LGBT Catholics and the Church” as well as two other talks, one on “ecumenism” and another on “The Historical Jesus.”
Dr. Arthur Fitzmaurice, an open homosexual and LGBT activist who says that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is “evil” because of its language regarding homosexuals, will be giving two talks at the conference: “Transgender in Our Schools: One Bread, One Body,” and “Teaching Mercy: Accompanying LGBT Students.” At the Religious Education Congress in 2015, Fitzmaurice condemned the Catechism’s teaching that homosexual orientation is “intrinsically disordered,” asserting that “to keep this abusive language in the Catechism and other Church writings is, in itself, gravely evil.”
Fr. Bryan Massingale, who openly advocates the LGBT political agenda, will also be giving a talk with the title “Transgender in Our Schools: One Bread, One Body.” Massingale spoke last year at the annual symposium of the condemned homosexualist organization “New Ways Ministry,” which seeks to eliminate Catholic moral teaching against homosexual acts. According to the dissenting National Catholic Reporter, Massingale “shared a note he had received in 2002 from [Archbishop] Rembert Weakland” who had recently resigned after he was exposed as having paid hundreds of thousands of diocesan funds to a man with whom he had a homosexual tryst. Massingale quoted the note from Weakland stating, “On the gay issue, the level of fears is so high that the official teaching of the church skates so very close to the edge of a new ‘theology of contempt.”
Massingale has publicly opposed the Trump administration’s executive order to protect religious liberty because he regards it as “unnecessary and most likely would threaten the rights of LGBT persons.” Although Christians have lost their businesses for refusing to cooperate with the celebration or practice of homosexuality, Massingale writes, “Despite the rhetoric of persecution embraced by some, Christians are not under attack in this country.”
An open lesbian named Yunuen Trujillo will be giving two talks in Spanish, titled “Family acceptance project: Myths and realities regarding the gay community,” and “Catholic and gay: Answers to the most basic pastoral questions.”
In a recent video, Trujillo claims that for homosexuals having a “partner” and being chaste are “equally holy.”
Fr. Chris Ponnet will be giving a talk on the topic, “Teaching Mercy: Accompanying LGBT Students.” Ponnet is the “spiritual director” for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Office of Catholic Ministry with Lesbian and Gay Persons. He recently gave an interview to the UCLA student newspaper The Daily Bruin, in which he says that after years of some people being “harsh and bitter” towards the gay lifestyle, “society is beginning to look at what a committed relationship means in the gay and lesbian experience.” He adds, according to the newspaper, that “while the Catholic Church does not bless LGBT relationships, he thinks the church’s outlook on LGBT inclusion is changing.”
According to the talk’s description, Ponnet will do a “workshop” that will “share concrete tools and consider real scenarios to help educators discern a merciful balance between teaching doctrine and offering pastoral care as they accompany LGBT students through journeys of self-discovery and self-acceptance.”
Many of the above-named speakers, such as Fitzmaurice, Ponnet, and Trujillo, actually work for the Gomez-led Archdiocese of Los Angeles in various “ministries” to homosexuals.
Pro-life eliminated from ‘life’ topics
This year’s congress appears to be equally devoid of material on the right to life. The talks being given under the headings of “life” and “family” make no mention nor even hint at topics such as abortion and the right to life, artificial birth control, euthanasia, or natural family planning. The “Life Issues” category instead includes many topics dear to the gay agenda, such as “Aligning Responses to Bullying with Catholic Schools,” “Bullying Out – Formation In,” “All Are Welcome in This Place: Rise Up in Communion.” Others cover Stuart Smalley style pop psychology topics, such as “13 Reasons Why You Matter.”
The only exception to the “gay-friendly” themes at this year’s congress is a single topic by Fr. Ed Benioff, who ministers to those who suffer from same-sex attraction as a part of the orthodox Catholic organization “Courage.” Courage helps such people to resist their sexual impulses and to live a celibate and chaste life. Benioff will be speaking on the Courage ministry, but the title of his talk also hints at relativism: “Finding Courage – A Way for Catholics with Same-Sex Attractions.” The talk has been placed into the category of “Morality” rather than “LGBT.” Under the same heading, Fr. Massingale will give a talk called “Sin: From Breaking Rules to Violating Justice.”
‘Outright dispersion of lies’
Joseph Sciambra, a former homosexual porn star who converted to the Catholic faith and now defends Catholic sexual morality in California, told LifeSiteNews that he informed archbishop Gomez about the unorthodox nature of the speakers on LGBT issues before last year’s Religious Education Congress, but to no avail.
“During and after the 2017 Congress, I spoke with representatives of the LA Archdiocese, including Archbishop Gomez and told them about my concerns,” Sciambra told LifeSite. “Yet, this year, they inexplicably invited probably the most controversial speaker in the Catholic Church on the topic of homosexuality: James Martin, S.J.”
Sciambra also told LifeSiteNews that he handed out pamphlets at the 2017 congress warning participants of the unorthodox stances of speakers on life and family issues, and found that many were shocked and surprised to learn that such speakers could be appearing at a congress approved and sponsored by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.
“When I informed Catholics, who were attending the Congress, that certain speakers were criticizing The Catechism, they were genuinely shocked,” Sciambra told LifeSite. “The response I heard several times was: ‘But this is a Catholic conference; it is sponsored by the Archdiocese of LA; the Archbishop is here?’ Their point is that, because the LA Congress is an official Archdiocesan event, everyone who speaks upholds Church teaching. A reasonable assumption.”
Sciambra noted that the “mere presence” of such speakers at an official congress of the archdiocese “imparts upon them a certain imprimatur.”
“Unfortunately, many devout and faithful Catholics do not understand or even know what the Church teaches about homosexuality. Therefore, when they attend a lecture by [Fr. James] Martin at an official Catholic conference, they will assume that everything he wrote and says supports those teachings.”
“In other words, the Bishops, who allow such speakers, are contributing to confusion and the outright dispersion of lies,” said Sciambra.
Contact information:
Most Reverend José H. Gomez
Office of the Archbishop of Los Angeles
3424 Wilshire Boulevard, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010-2241
Phone: (213) 637-7534
FAX: (213) 637-6510
info@la-archdiocese.org
Office of Media Relations
(213) 637-7215
(213) 216-8395
mediarelations@la-archdiocese.org
Full story at LifeSiteNews.
how confusing and discouraging !
On the road to Calvary,
with his Face covered with dirt and thorns and blood,
could Jesus be recognized as Lord of Lords?
His body, the Church is undergoing such a moment.
Jesus, how can i console You ?
Another resource instead of religious congre (RE Congress) is SCRC’s annual convention which upholds the truths of the Holy Spirit (based Catholic teachings). I was there this weekend and the charismatics are absolutely beautiful! Here is their website as they also have talks almost every month https://scrc.org.
Prayers to all the victims, Pope, clergy and lay as we go through a purification.
January, named after the god Janus — the deity with two faces. It seems that the Church also shows two faces, one for one group of people and one for another. Some call that a schism.
I live here. The realization is growing in the archdiocese that the Religious Education Congress is not what it used to be. Thirty years ago it was a mostly valuable event. Now it’s deteriorated into largely being a waste of time and even harmful in some of what it features, as this column explains. The feckless archbishop and the effete director of the Office of Religious Education are to blame. Some office staff members have been intent on establishing a LGBT beachhead at this conference (obviously), and they have succeeded in entrenching their agenda more solidly with each passing year.
It is disturbing that the catholic religious congress is not the true teaching of our church. However, we still have the SCRC (Southern California Renewal Communities) that is on fire! The most strikingly distinct aspect of the SCRC Convention is the focus on the Holy Spirit. Attendees come to the Convention not only to learn about the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but to experience the Holy Spirit’s presence as well.
The SCRC Convention has a choice of several programs: Regular Talks, spiritual warfare track, Teen Conference, Children’s Program, Young Adult Program, and Spanish track. All run simultaneously and offer a wide variety for different ages and interests.
Another distinct aspect of the Convention is the large slate of…
Really, is anyone surprised? This “religious education” event always manages to include a few orthodox speakers for the sake of appearance, but it’s real point is the spotlighting of sexual perversion within the Church.
Always another dialogue about mercy and inclusion and woe to those who mention sin. Folks, stay home and read your catechism. Keep your soul safe from this abomination.
We do have the promise of Divine Assistance promised by Our Lord to St. Peter —–“I give you the Keys to Heaven and the gates of hell shall not prevail. I will be with you until the end of time.” With this assurance, we can afford to be patient.
No Lou, we can’t afford to be patient. Souls are being malformed, and these the very ones the Los Angeles Archdiocese allows to teach the next generation. The longer lies exist, the more accepted they become. Yes, Our Lord will be with us, but He did not encourage us to give up the fight.
Respectfully, the faithful still are able to receive the Sacraments from these clergy. The Sanctifying Grace from the Sacraments are not conditioned upon the virtue of the minister. Better to worthily receive the Sacraments and ce open to the Grace that comes with them. After all, the Sacraments are what keeps us alive spirituallt.
Lou, the point is that people who actively dissent from the faith are being given public platforms to spread their twisted opinions on it. This is wrong and as members of the Church Militant, we have a duty to make their errors known. These clergy should be held accountable for misleading their flocks, even when they still have ecclesial faculties.
Was S. Athanasius “patient”? Well, Pope Liberius excommunicated him at the time.
Was S. Catherine of Siena “patient”? She quite bitterly criticized the wayward Avignon pope Gregory XI and his weak-willed cardinals. Had she not, perhaps there would be no Vatican, instead an Avignon papacy.
Are LaSallette and Our Lady’s revelations false, about “Rome losing the Faith” and the Church “in eclipse?” Look around you. Open your eyes wide.
People can “call out” and demand explanations as much as they want. The Sacraments are of utmost importance, however. Wouldn’t the faithful rather receive the Sacraments from an “ostensibly” controversial priest, who has all his Sacramental faculties, than not receive the Sacraments at all?
Yes, however, we cannot just simply “be patient and wait” we must actively oppose this current situation and fight for God’s law to be followed!
We need to.organize a BOYCOTT of ab annual appeal in La.etc… . Plus Cal bishops from.San Diego to San Jose..Then write to these bishops and tell them why..Include this article in your correspondence to these wayward cino scarcely Roman or Catholic rump church bishops
Does Concerned Roman Catholics of America still picket it?
No need to boycott. Attend Mass at one of the Eastern Catholic Churches (e.g. Maronite). Those Tites are just as Catholic as the Roman Rite.
I never went to the conference because of the silliness, the ambiguities, the confusion, the misdirection, the euphemisms, the slogans, and sometimes outright lies. I did not pay for any teacher or catechist to go either. I don’t eat at restaurants with bad food; neitherI do I attend or listen to bad teaching regardless of the position in society or the church of the speaker. Those at my Sunday Masses her me say that they should check the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church against anything that they hear from me since those sources contain a more profound and clear teaching than I might offer.
Let’s stipulate that all speakers at the conference don’t meet the standards of orthodoxy. The conference has two choices: ban all speakers who are not 100% orthodox or be willing to let people hear speakers with whom we are likely to disagree. I prefer the former but can live with the latter, up to a point. A recent study by CARA and others points out that young people leave the church between the age of 10-20, and in droves. One of the main reasons is the church’s stand of homosexuality. They just don’t believe that it is wrong or that it is a sin. If a pastor is losing 75% of young people, he ought to have a place to learn about the LGBT community, what it believes and how to “combat” the drift in membership. We can’t put…
A large part of my son’s CCD class did not return after the teachers taught about homosexuality. To be honest, it was not taught correctly according to the Church’s teaching in the Catechism. It was mixed with things like “Men are gay because they don’t have fathers” and other secular ideas that are not correct.
I don’t know if they would have stayed if it had been taught correctly.
Ah, a proposal for an acceptably decent, corrupt “faith”.
Hear, hear! Much easier on us all!
Strange times. One needs to spend time in prayer and reading the Gospels and Epistles. The Holy Sacrament is still beautiful, but there are beings in the Church who are not born of Christ. We can pray for them but we should also confront them. The Church fought many heretics in the first centuries. We need to do the same.
There is nothing wrong with the catechism but people don’t understand what the phrase “intrinsically disordered” means. Some people take great offense at it and some people use it to demean others.
That section of the Catechism is one that was altered in the updated version.
Since the 1980’s when the catechism was written, attitudes toward homosexuality in the US have drastically changed. That is not the case in the rest of the world.
Anon … I can’t remember how many times I’ve tried to explain to other gay people that “intrinsically disordered” doesn’t mean that WE are intrinsically disordered human beings. That phrase in the Catechism is so arcane and convoluted that it serves no purpose except to confuse people, make the Church look bad and give aid and comfort to viceral homophobes. Francis needs to have it changed.
The CCC is pretty clear: “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” (CCC 2357).
If despite that clarification some are still upset, then perhaps their real issue is not with language but reality.
Our shepherds are no longer defending their flocks from the ravenous wolves (those false teachers with their pro LGBT and the so-called same sex marriage, the heterodox interpretation of AL permitting and blessing people in adulterous relations, etc.)
Dear shepherds remember what our Blessed Lord said: Those who have received more, more will be demanded of them. You will have to answer for every soul lost under you watch!…
The late Bishop Sheen said in later time it will be left to the laity to raise up and rescue the Church from the ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing. I say to the good people of Los Angeles – if the Bishop is unwilling or prehaps being prevented from defending his diocese and his sheep- raise up, stand up on these venues and demand vocally and unequivocal that you will no longer tolerate misrepresentations and heresies teachings from any speakers who does not affirm the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Enlist others and stand up in vast numbers and make your voice known. God love you!
Ironically, “Rise Up!” is the theme of the 2018 RECongress.
Does Father Martin also advocate eliminating the term abomination for homosexual sex taken from the word of Almighty God the Holy Bible? Intrinsically disordered is a far more gentle term than the word abomination. The word of God never changes. Woe to those that call evil good and good evil. Didn’t Our Lady of Fatima tell the three shepherd children she appeared to that more souls go to hell for sins of the flesh than any other sin? It is the duty of these Bishops to proclaim the truth of the entire Gospel message no matter what the cost to them. Jesus Christ King of Kings Lord of Lords True God and True Man is coming back soon like a thief in the night. Turn to a God of love and mercy. Repent and convert! Pray America Pray…
Not mentioned is the fact that Diocese of Orange teachers are required to attend this lunacy – and presumably teachers from the neighboring dioceses are, as well. The Bishop of Orange seems to have no problem with spreading heresy, I guess.
I remember a teacher’s meeting the week after a congress where the principal shut down any discussion of how some of the speakers’ were blatantly anti-Catholic – enforcing the social action agenda of many in the Church.
Bishop Gomez is a failure. And the institutional Catholic Church, all the way up to the Vatican, is a failure in preaching the True Faith, including calling out the moral dangers of homosexuality. “Father” Martin is, in effect, his own source of authority in his rantings about the nonsensical “gift” of homosexual sex. Against this is the Bible, and millennia of Church teachings on the outright immorality of homosexual sex.
Conferences of this sort are a scandal to the Faithful. The Bishop is complicit in whatever is taught here. Mr. Sciambra is good to try to raise this to B. Gomez. Satan’s children, however, are stubborn and hungry for souls.
The Watchman: Your mentioning the book of Liviticus is interesting. I assume you don’t eat shrimp, because that too is listed as an abomination. There are hundreds of other rules. It’s best if we don’t quote one without reference to the others.
Bob One you know quite well that the Kosher Law for Christians was lifted by St. Peter after he had the vision in the book of Acts of the unclean (non Kosher) food in the net and the voice of Christ told him it was all right to eat it. I and others went through this with you many, many times previously. The moral law, the Ten Commandments is still in effect for though. There is no comparison, except I suggest any pork you eat be well cooked as part of the reason for it being outlawed in the Old Testament was that it can carry trichinosis — so does bear meat and the meat of most wild animals because of their scavenger diet. Sodomy is an unnatural use of a body part and leads to all kinds of diseases and injuries from the misuse of that…
Continued: part of the body and can never be condoned — never, ever. Even rewriting the catechism or Bible will not change that fact. It would just bring about a schism or heresy as it always has.
Correction to my third line in my last post: “The moral law, the Ten Commandments and all the subtitles that go with it, are still in effect for Christians, though.” One is forbidden to commit adultery, fornication, sodomy, mate with ones close relative, etc.. That is all re-enforced in the New Testament.
Catholics are allowed to eat shrimp. (See Mark 7 and Matthew 15)
Catholics are not permitted to engage in sex outside of a sacramental marriage. This prohibits gay sex, pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, self service sex, open marriage, polyamory.
I am sure you know this.
Bob One I find it interesting that you mention the Book of Leviticus because no where in my post do I mention Leviticus. Read also what many of the Saints have to say on this subject. Homosexual sex is condemned throughout the Holy Bible. Why was Sodom and Gomorrah totally destroyed? People like you will never want to accept the awful truth. Woe unto to you for calling evil good and good evil. The Lord will not be mocked for too much longer. Prepare for Jesus Christ King of Kings Lord of Lords True God and True Man will come back soon like a thief in the night. Turn to a God of love and mercy before it is too late. Repent and convert! Pray America Pray. Pray Pray Pray!
Watchman, Leviticus 19:22 is where homosexual relations is referred to as an abomination.
given bishop gomez’ softpedalling of these issues, it is an act of mercy to prevent immigration from mexico where, i hope, the abandonment of this part of the catechism has not yet happened. maybe
Given that Archbishop Gomez has known for years about heterodoxy at the RECongress, and given that for years he has done nothing effective to stop it, prevent it nor even decry it, and given that he is the one person who could stop it all if he wanted to, it would seem that Archbishop Gomez does not want to stop the heterodoxy.
So now the question is, “Why doesn’t he want to stop it?”
So Bob One you then agree with me that the word of God in the Holy Bible strongly condemns homosexual sex as an abomination. You don’t answer my question why was Sodom and Gomorrah totally destroyed by Almighty God? Turn to a God of love and mercy before it is too late. Repent and convert! Pray America Pray. Pray Pray Pray!
The problem is that no one can ever tell you anything heterodox that is said at the conference. Go to the conference, attend the lectures, and if something wrong is said, speak up.
Then send an email to the diocese.
Don’t sit and complain because you read something on the internet.
Fr. James Martin may be the most controversial speaker but not because he dissents from the faith. Even Cardinal Sarah did not accuse him of that.
Part of the problem is that Catholics know the faith so poorly that they can’t even tell if someone dissents from the faith.
I live here and can tell you from experience attending the conference and going to hear speakers with heterodox reputations just to see what would be said, there are statements made that are contrary to faith. Not all workshops have Q&A afterwards. Some speakers post signs at the room entrance saying that disrupting the session is a violation of religious disturbance laws. Videos of arena sessions are available on YouTube, and last year Bryan Massingale and Dan Horan gave misleading talks about morality.
I have written to Ab. Gomez and Fr. Bazyouros, but they don’t respond.
The problem you mention affects many catechists who are being misled by speakers.
Thank you Andrew. That is really helpful. You are awesome.
Keep attending and post somewhere, even if it is just here, what you hear that is wrong and who said it.
The notice on the doors is unbelievable but I believe you. Take photos if you can.
I will look those up on Youtube.
Archbishop Gomez may not respond but we had a speaker come to my church who looked a little unconventional online. Instead of boycotting, I went. I was appalled as many were with things he said and I let the diocese know what he said.. He had never been back to speak in this diocese.
Andrew, I have been to Church and I have realized that it is not your responsibility to monitor the REC. It is the bishop’s. It’s his problem. It’s 100% on him.
It is a good time to start praying for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the speakers and the attendees and on Bishop Gomez.
Anonymous: “it is not your responsibility to monitor the REC”
It’s not his responsibility to monitor the Train REC in the way Gomez should. That’s true. But what if Gomez fails to do this? Now what?
Also, all Catholics should at least monitor what they hear if they care about truth.
And since you care about being responsible, you might try reading about the rights and duties canonically granted to the laity. For example, CCC 212, sec. 3 establishes that the laity have the right and even duty sometimes “to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful,” which is what you’re seeing here at Cal Catholic.
I get a little over zealous sometimes. He does not have to go to the REC because someone on the internet told him too. He needs to seek God’s will. God’s will for Andrew may be different.
I would like Andrew to be a little more explicit on what Frs. Massingale and Horan said. But I don’t know that God wants him to put it on the Internet so I’m not going to tempt him by asking him. God already knows and I probably don’t need to.
There was a man named Kenneth Fisher who used to post here who worked to expose the REC. I think he said once that he was not even allowed in. Prudence is a virtue so pray a lot.
Anonymous: “I would like Andrew to be a little more explicit on what Frs. Massingale and Horan said. But I don’t know that God wants him to put it on the Internet so I’m not going to tempt him by asking him.”
The statements of REC speakers are public ones. So why would it be wrong to critically discuss these comments in a public forum like Cal Catholic?
I did not say it was wrong, CR. I am speaking about Andrew. One person. Andrew. He should seek the will of God not the internet. If God wishes him to write about it, may he do so. If God wills for him to be silent, may he do so.
Anonymous: “I did not say it was wrong, CR. I am speaking about Andrew. One person. Andrew.”
And yet you told him: “it is not your responsibility to monitor the REC.” Clearly, you’re saying it’s wrong to do something.
The last thing the laity need nowadays is discouragement from speaking the truth boldly.
I want Andrew to discern God’s will. If you want him to do something else, then tell him.
Anonymous: “I want Andrew to discern God’s will. If you want him to do something else, then tell him.”
But you initially said: “Andrew, I have been to Church and I have realized that it is not your responsibility to monitor the REC.”
Sounds to me like you believe you’ve already discerned God’s will for Andrew. (Some consistency would be nice.)
You misunderstood.
Correction: “CCC 212” > “Can. 212”
I remember how for years people came to this very site to defend Archbishop Gomez on the REC: “He’s so orthodox!” “He doesn’t know what’s happening.” “He’s working behind the scenes”. “He tries to act but the chancery stops him.” Same tired talking points year after year. Now, you’d have to be seriously deluded not to see what’s going on.
A lot of people put in a lot of work to put on this event. People are people. They want appreciation and they want to be told that their work was meaningful and a blessing to people.
When someone who did no work criticizes them, it is not going to be taken well.
Also, when people know these speakers personally, they are not going to appreciate someone who does not know them complaining about them.
They may be a little more careful about how they speak knowing that they are being monitored which is good.
I think the presence of the Courage priest is a sign that they have heard the complaints.
“They want appreciation and they want to be told that their work was meaningful and a blessing to people.”
Irrelevant.
“When someone who did no work criticizes them, it is not going to be taken well.”
Irrelevant.
“Also, when people know these speakers personally, they are not going to appreciate someone who does not know them complaining about them.”
Irrelevant.
“I think the presence of the Courage priest is a sign that they have heard the complaints.”
Then the presence of an anti-Courage priest like Fr. Martin is a sign of what?
Thank you for sharing your opinion although I do not think Fr. Martin has ever spoken about Courage. I know some internet sites like to pit them against each other but that’s the internet…
Even if Fr. Martin hasn’t explicitly spoken about or opposed Courage, his public statements are still in objective opposition to the Courage apostolate. For that reason, Fr. Martin (no less than the scandalous Fr. Boyle) deserves to be labeled anti-Courage (the opposition is material even if not formal).
That is false witness.
It’s inaccurate. It’s false. It’s calumny, which is a sin. Since you are committing it in a public forum and against a Catholic priest, it is possibly serious sin and needs to be confessed before presenting yourself for communion.
The Catholic Faith considers harming someone’s reputation as a very serious sin. It is also an act of injustice to those who may hear you and believe the falsehood.
You can’t justify it in any way.
1/2
“It’s inaccurate. It’s false. It’s calumny”
What is? My claim that Fr. Martin is objectively at odds with Courage? But he is. Compare, for example, where the two stand on LGBT terminology.
Martin accepts it. Courage rejects it.
Consider also where the two stand on the description of homosexual acts in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Martin rejects it. Courage accepts it.
About my claim that Fr. Boyle is scandalous, see the video in which he publicly rejects magisterial teaching.
2/2
“The Catholic Faith considers harming someone’s reputation as a very serious sin.”
Not exactly. The Church holds that harming another’s reputation is sinful in some cases, but not all cases. It’s sinful when one lacks a proportionate reason, as with calumny or detraction. My comments are guilty of neither, however. They’re not false (which rules out calumny) and they reveal nothing that wasn’t already public (which rules out detraction).
Dude, really. Don’t say things about people that aren’t true. No justification for it. Ever.
The more people are on the internet the more they realize that they internet is always offended about something. There is no forgiveness on the internet. People learn to leave the scandals behind and get a life.
The Father Boyle video is 8 years old. I think it was several years later when Lifesitenews made an issue of it that it was discussed here on CCD. It’s an old scandal.
And yes, he is scheduled at the REC, too.
Maybe he and Father Martin and Bishop Barron can have lunch together.
You said that harming another’s reputation is sinful if one lacks a proportionate reason. That is not correct. It is that a person’s reputation may be harmed without sin being imputed if one has a just cause. The proper thing to do is to contact those who host the REC with your concerns. Sometimes, people get anxiety and try to warn others about the problem but that always blows up in your face.
“You said that harming another’s reputation is sinful if one lacks a proportionate reason. That is not correct. It is that a person’s reputation may be harmed without sin being imputed if one has a just cause.”
Both formulations are fine. The one I give makes the point from the angle of when there would be sin; the one you give makes the point from the angle of when there would not be sin. And regarding terminology, you say ‘just cause’, whereas I say ‘proportionate reason’. But if my cause is just, then my reason is proportionate, and if my reason is proportionate, then my cause is just. In substance, I think we’re in agreement.
“That is false witness.”
That is ignorance.