The following comes from an October 2 CNN article by Daniel Burke:
The day before Pope Francis met anti-gay marriage county clerk Kim Davis in Washington last week, he held a private meeting with a longtime friend from Argentina who has been in a same-sex relationship for 19 years.
Yayo Grassi, an openly gay man, brought his partner, Iwan Bagus, as well several other friends to the Vatican Embassy on September 23 for a brief visit with the Pope. A video of the meeting shows Grassi and Francis greeting each other with a warm hug.
In an exclusive interview with CNN, Grassi declined to disclose details about the short visit, but said it was arranged personally with the Pope via email in the weeks ahead of Francis’ highly anticipated visit to the United States.
“Three weeks before the trip, he called me on the phone and said he would love to give me a hug,” Grassi said.
The meeting between Grassi and the Pope adds another intriguing twist to the strange aftermath of Francis’ first-ever trip to the United States. Since news broke on Tuesday of Francis’ meeting with Davis, conservatives have cheered the seemingly implicit endorsement, while liberals have questioned how much the Pope knew about her case.
The two meetings — one with a gay couple and one with government official who ardently opposes homosexuality — has left the Vatican issuing a series of short explanatory statements, seeking de-politicize the Pope’s meetings and agenda.
On Friday afternoon, Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said that Grassi has met previously with the Pope, and had asked to present his mother and several friends to Francis in Washington.
“As noted in the past, the Pope, as pastor, has maintained many personal relationships with people in a spirit of kindness, welcome and dialogue,” Lombardi said.
Earlier on Friday, the Vatican said that the meeting with Davis was not intended as a show of support for her cause and said “the only real audience granted by the Pope at the nunciature (embassy) was with one of his former students and his family.”
“That was me,” Grassi said, adding that he wants to publicize the meeting “to show the truth of who Pope Francis is.”
Grassi said that Pope Francis taught him in literature and psychology classes at Inmaculada Concepcion, a Catholic high school in Sante Fe, Argentina, from 1964-1965. Grassi said that he is now an atheist.
Grassi said the Pope has long known that he is gay, but has never condemned his sexuality or his same-sex relationship. Grassi said he and Bagus had previously met Francis in Rome.
“He has never been judgmental,” Grassi said. “He has never said anything negative.”
“Obviously he is the pastor of the church and he has to follow the church’s teachings,” Grassi added. “But as a human being he understands all kinds of situations, and he is open to all kinds of people, including those with different sexual characteristics.”
At the same time, the Vatican has refused to recognize France’s ambassador to the Holy See, Laurent Stefanini, who is openly gay.
During Argentina’s heated debate over same-sex marriage in 2010, Grassi chastised the Pope for opposing gay rights. At one point, the future pontiff suggested that same-sex marriage is the work of the devil.
“You have been my guide, continuously moving my horizons—you have shaped the most progressive aspects of my worldview,” Grassi wrote to the future Pope in an email, according to National Geographic magazine. “And to hear this from you is so disappointing.”
Grassi told CNN that Francis — then Cardinal Jorge Margio Bergoglio — wrote back, saying that he was sorry to have upset his former student and promising that “homophobia” had no place in the Catholic Church.
Grassi said he believes the Pope was “misled” into meeting with Davis, who served six days in a Kentucky jail for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Davis’ lawyers had portrayed the papal meeting as an endorsement of her cause. After several days of questions and culture-war sparring, the Vatican said that was not the case.
“The Pope did not enter into the details of the situation of Mrs. Davis, and his meeting with her should not be considered a form of support of her position in all of its particular and complex aspects,” Lombardi said in a statement issued Friday morning.
How much longer can the Church take of this? The confusion, lies coming from Rome is about to destroy the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. My friends flee to the F.S.S.P., S.S.P.X. and Institute of Christ the King where the TLM and traditional sacraments are given and wait out this papacy. Our immortal souls are in danger from the current crisis from the Chair of St. Peter, this has to be complete and utter dream, but alas it is not!!! Burke, Ranjith, Sarah can you hear us begging to save our Holy Church and souls??
Francis seems unsure of himself. He tells Ms. Davis to be strong and stand for the truth. Then he backpedals and says he really doesn’t support her very much after all. Then he contradicts her lawyer by saying he met her together with a large group of other people and not alone. Then he reveals he met secretly with a former student of his who is gay, and that that was the “the only real audience granted by the Pope ” during his trip. He is trying too hard to please everyone and is succeeding in pleasing no one.
Conclusion of the story is that Pope Francisco rejoices in meeting Gay married couples but rejects Kim Davis who denied marriage licenses to Homosexuals bearing video cameras because of Christian bible teachings. This even after inviting Kim Davis to come to the Washington Nunciature. What side is he on on the culture wars by which Marxist Liberation Theologians seek to dominate the Catholic Church via the communist Gramsci/Alinsky strategies?
Francis did NOT invite Kim davis to the nunciature. Perhaps you missed that in the story.
While the Holy Father was visiting the US, I seldom watched TV because I did not want to see or hear modernist heretical beliefs. The fact that the Vatican is downplaying the meeting with Kim Davis, while exploiting and building up this encounter with sodomites is absolutely terrible. But wait, we ain’t seen nothing yet. Come Monday, when the Synod opens in Rome, expect to see all Hell breaking loose. There will be a schism or a break in the Church unless God intervenes.
As the Pope Francis traveled through the US it was like watching a family preparing for an ugly divorce. At each turn those on one side tried to portray the family as stable and caring and enduring, while those in an unfaithful relationship flaunted their presence at each stop. Parents covered the ears of their children so as not to let them hear as the dirty laundry was aired. With the Synod beginning many are wondering where they will end up – some see foster care in the SSPX, Protestantism, schism or abandonment to the streets of atheism. How could any outsider want to join this dysfunctional family or return to it. It will be smaller.
What are we to think? Where is Pope Francis trying to take us? And why are we hearing so much more about social issues than about Jesus Christ and His teachings? Why was His holy name never mentioned before Congress, when the world was watching and listening with rapt attention for once? Why all of these secret meetings? What do they mean?
I understand Maryanne, it means we have much to pray about. So many missed opportunities, so much confusion, this pontificate is overtly political and disappointing. It must be a way of testing us so we must remain faithful. Peace to you, :)
Pope Francis requested this audience with this homosexual family. Great way to start a Synod on the Family! The ends justify the means.
In the meantime the Vatican says that meeting Kim Davis, the Protestant hero that went to jail, was not an audience and was unsolicited by Pope Francis.
Who am I to Judge?
the sspx do not affirm the pope, pope francis is the vicar of Christ on earth he was elected thru the works of the holy spirit, the sspx were founded by a bishop who has done a lot of damage to our beloved pontiff I send happy feast day prayers ad multos annos, your holiness
long live the pope
More early fall-out from this month’s certain-to-be-disastrous Synod:
“Vatican Fires Gay Priest on Eve of Synod”, Yahoo News, Oct. 3, 2015:
https://news.yahoo.com/vatican-fires-gay-priest-eve-synod-111749759.html
“Fr.” Krzysztof Charamsa, was ousted, but the real story is that he had been a member, assistant secretary in fact, of the Sacred Congregation for the Faith since 2003 and had been teaching at the [Jesuit operated] Pontifical Gregorian University since 2009.
So this is what the prophecies of La Sallette mean, about “..The Church will be in eclipse”, or what Fr Gabriel Amorth saying that he wanted to exorcise all the Vatican curia, because “they were filled with devils.”
“Fr.” Charamsa was just…
Fr Charamsa was just being honest, but it appears he was letting the cat out of the bag a bit early on the Synod. Quite a cat, by the way.
Endorsement or no endorsement, why was the Vatican so anxious and eager to wash out the Kim Davis story with this one? To calm the fears at MHR that some boom was descending; that the cardinal cabal of homosexualist enthusiasts, from their secret den in Switzerland, would have their credentials confiscated at the Vatican gate and barged back across the Tiber River?
Why the hype and timing of this story so close to the opening of the Synod in Rome?
Go read the related articles over at LIfeSite News.
Note the Homosex Propaganda Spin by our bought and paid for ‘free press’.
Kim Davis is described as being Against ‘Happy Marriage’ – whereas those acting our such Objectively Disordered Hatreds & Perversions are obsequiously pandered to – lest Jail Time 4 Thought Crime be enforced against their alleged ‘Conscience Rights’.
Ant those who Hate Davis & Anyone who fails to Pander to their Anti-Catholic Activism = ‘liberal’. Yeah Right. Ahem.
” LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS ” – – – ” 15. We encourage the Bishops, then, to provide pastoral care in full accord with the teaching of the Church for homosexual persons of their dioceses.
No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral. A truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin. ”
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
Should the Doctrine of the Faith in the CCC – be considered a form of support for Kim Davis ?
CCC: ” 2256 Citizens are obliged in conscience NOT to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary
to the demands of the moral order.
We must obey God rather than men” . (Acts 5:29).
and CCC # 2242.
No it should not be considered support for Kim Davis. The CCC also asks followers to obey civil authority and to do their jobs. She did neither.
SHe could have followed 2256 by resigning her job. Instead, she dragged her county into a failed multi-million dollar legal battle to make herself feel righteous.
By the way, if you are using the CCC to judge Kim Davis up or down, you should consider the fact that she persists in an adulterous affair.
How would you know that for certain, YFC?
Because I am able to read and apply logic. Disobeying one tenant of morality in order to supposedly obey another is clearly the inferior option when you have the option of disobeying none of them. She had the option of not disobeying any of them, yet she chose the inferior course of action.
YFC, if you can put aside the cause (same sex marriage) and maybe ponder this: this is how a government becomes completely corrupt. Those who have a conscience and do not want to violate it, resign and do not stand up for their beliefs.
Anonymous, I am putting aside the issue. In 2004, then SF Mayor Gavin Newsome started marrying same sex couples in violation of the law because he had a personal belief that it was unconcstituional to refuse to do so. He was – rightly – scolded for taking the law into his own hands, and ordered by a court to stop issuing them.
Should he have ignored the courts and kept issuing the licenses?
At family dinner yesterday, my brother mentioned that in his police academy class one of the cadets decided that if need be, he couldn’t kill a suspect. When he resigned, everyone respected his decision. Kim should take the same path.
YFC, thank you for your reply. He knew he was violating the law. Does the mayor of SF usually perform weddings? Was he being asked to do something that violated his conscience? Or did he take it upon himself to right something he felt was wrong?
….we are all sinners, YFC. No matter what Kim Davis is about in her personal life, her calling out the error surrounding so-called same-sex marriage is accurate. Why? Because same sex does not a marriage make.
That said, if you applied the same logic to yourself, you shouldn’t speak out against anything. Especially nothing as concerns the Catholic Church for by your own admissions you do not adhere to Catholic faith/morals.
Homosexuality is a grave sin, offensive to God. It will always be that way, no matter how much Pope Francis apparently wishes otherwise. Here is what has been said throughout the Catholic Church’s history on the subject: (from Fr. Peter Carota, https://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/ )
Leviticus chapter 18 verses 22,
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination”
Tertullian (160-225)
“But all the other frenzies of passions–impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes–beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not sins, but monstrosities.”
cont.
Saint Bernardine of Siena (1380-1444)
“No sin in the world grips the soul as the accursed sodomy; this sin has always been detested by all those who live according to God.… Deviant passion is close to madness; this vice disturbs the intellect, destroys elevation and generosity of soul, brings the mind down from great thoughts to the lowliest, makes the person slothful, irascible, obstinate and obdurate, servile and soft and incapable of anything; furthermore, agitated by an insatiable craving for pleasure, the person follows not reason but frenzy.… They become blind and, when their thoughts should soar to high and great things, they are broken down and reduced to vile and useless and putrid things, which could never make them…
cont.
make them happy…. Just as people participate in the glory of God in different degrees, so also in hell some suffer more than others. He who lived with this vice of sodomy suffers more than another, for this is the greatest sin.”
Saint Peter Canisius (1521-1597)
“Those unashamed of violating divine and natural law are slaves of this never sufficiently execrated depravity.”
Excuse me, but there is no reference in Church doctrine that would support your notion that homosexuality is a grave sin. Sorry. you can’t find that in Church doctrine.
YFC,
We’ve been through this before. For clarity, are you speaking about grave matter or grave sin?
Sorry, can’t find in Church doctrine God approves of sodomy.
But we can find it in common sense and the natural moral law
I don’t think you are going to get an answer to your question Steve Seitz, or to a counter to your well-noted points, Clinton R. or Canisius:
Our Erstwhile Catholic has a stilted notion of Catholic “doctrine”, in fact one that is much closer to Marcionism (Marcion was the fellow about 140 AD that dumped all the Old Testament and a good portion of the New, because the Old Testament God with its clear prohibitions Jesus Christ directly incorporated into His New Testament teaching[“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets..” Mt 5:17]) Marcion even came up with his own sliced-up “Bible”, kind of like the agenda-people here do today. “This, too, will pass.”
OK, then, please provide a reference in official Church doctrine that condemns homosexuality as gravely sinful. You won’t find it in the Catechism. You won’t find it in the various documents that have come out from the Vatican in the last several decades.
what is always interesting in these discussions is that very few of you ever point out that what IS in Church doctrine relates to how the 96% of the straight population are called to treat the 4% who are. Maybe you should try, for once, to reflect the TOTALITY of what the Church teaches, instead of just picking and choosing the parts you like best.
What don’t you understand that certain body parts are designed to rid body waist and nothing else.
YFC,
You’re not likely to find many references to “grave sin” in the CCC because a sin requires both intent and an evil act. Therefore, a sin can only be ascertained after an evil act has been committed which is clearly beyond the scope of the CCC.
Therefore, I will address grave matter. In this regard, I’ll refer you to CCC 2357 which states, “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.'” Please note that “grave depravity” translates as “grave moral corruption” which, of course, is “grave matter.”
“homosexuality” and “homosexual acts” are not the same thing. Homosexuality is NOT regarded as gravely sinful in the Church. Please state the truth.
YFC,
The term “homosexuality” without modifiers is ambiguous. Would it be possible in the future to use a more precise phrase such as “homosexual orientation is not sinful” or an equivalent phrase? This will help all of us to get along better.
Oh, I forgot to mention. It’s not sinful to have a homosexual orientation. :)
So the story of Sodom has no validity ?
Schism is going to happen it cannot be avoided. Our Lady of Akita told us this would happen and behold it is upon us.
Janek,
I don’t think that schism is at hand. Even if the Pope were to institute some form of craziness, a future pope would likely reverse it, possibly using an Ecumenical Council as the vehicle.
….would that schism were only a matter of what individuals think may or may not be,Steve. Sadly, it is not. And whereas a future Pope may (not necessarily “would likely”) reverse the institution of craziness, it is the time in between that is the kicker. I doubt the Israelites in Egypt looked upon their condition as anything but exile….. because that is what it was.
Ann,
I may not have fully understood your comments. But with that said, if the Pope were to do something unfortunate, a future pope would likely reverse his decision in a decisive way. Such things have happened many times throughout Church history. So this would not be the first time. And the reason for the eventual correction is that Christ is the head of the Church. In regard to the interim period, yes, that would be a time of sadness and confusion.
Regarding schism, this is not a Catholic concept. Rather, it’s a concept of the heretic, whether they be Arians or Lutherans. This term is in our vocabulary only as it applies to others.
Steve,
It is precisely that time of sadness and confusion of which people are speaking – and folks are calling it potential schism. This is not just lay folks, Steve, but orthodox bishops. The why is because it would appear, I pray God I’m incorrect, that a majority will turn the Church toward allowing that which goes against the Faith.
I too have faith in Our Lord and the care He exercises over His Church. But again, just wishing the trouble would disappear or not wanting to call it what it is or could be, is not honest. So when there is a majority in heresy, and or heresy is promoted by way of the hierarchy, what to do?
Cardinal Burke and Bishop Scheider say to resist. But to resist the “lawful” authority? Hmmm. Then we…
…. have those who will cry schism. Lest you forget, Steve, the Arians were inside the Church. St. Athanasius was excommunicated.
God bless
Ann,
There have been times in the Church when the majority of Catholics believed a heresy. But if such a thing were ever to happen again, the solution isn’t to severe yourself from the Body of Christ, proper. Rather, the solution is to stay put, pray, love, persuade, and fight the good fight. If Jesus were to appear to you today, this is exactly what he would tell you to do. He wouldn’t ask you to leave the Body so as to help ease your pain and facilitate your pride.
Regarding the St. Athenasius censure, you left out an important detail.
The SSPX may disagree with Pope Francis, but they do recognize him as the Vicar of Christ. The founder of the SSPX was treated unfairly and horribly by Pope Paul VI. Just because Archbishop Lefevbre legitimately questioned a non dogmatic council, he was treated like a leper. Pope Paul refused to see or to talk with him. By the archbishop not saying the Novus Ordo Mass was what infuriated Pope Paul.
What is your point? Lefebvre openly defied the orders of the Pontiff. This is not permitted. Bishops can’t go around subverting ecumenical councils and the liturgy promulgated by the Pope and expect to be treated as a hero.
YFC, your idea of open defiance is an exaggeration of act/intent. If one perceives a necessity, it is not a matter of “defying” the Pope, but rather upholding the Faith.
Your persistence in attributing subversion to those who are upholding what the Church has always taught is verging on the humorous. And whereas “you” may not look to one who does what is necessary to uphold the Faith as a hero, those who look to what the Church has always taught and understand that the Holy Father et al have an obligation to do the same will indeed look upon those you excoriate as a hero. Or at the very least, the tool chosen by God to work His will despite the machinations of those who prefer to subvert the truth.
He was not excommunicated for “subverting ecumenical councils and the liturgy promulgated by the Pope”. Nor was he excommunicated for “upholding the Faith.” He was excommunicated for violating Canon 1382: A bishop who consecrates some one a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person who receives the consecration from him incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.
You are correct – except that I wasn’t zeroing in on the excommunicaitons. Rome doesn’t either. It lifted the excommunications years ago, but still insists that these bishops and priests hold no legitimate authority in the Church. Why? Because they refuse the authority of the Pope to promulgate a liturgy, and the ecumenical council that called for revisions.
….no, YFC, there is no refusal of the Pope’s authority to promulgate liturgy. And yet the Novus Ordo Misse is no revision. As to the zeroing in on the “no legitimate authority within the Church” that is due to the reality that the Society rejects the open door compromise language inherent in VII documents. At present, there are a vast majority of prelates who want the wiggle room of ambiguity. That is why there is no welcome mat despite the reality that the Society is wholly Catholic.
…it is that acceptance of wiggle room in the past that has ushered in the ridiculous issues taking precedence at these lovely October Synods that are erroneously asserted to be about family.
Let’s be honest, okay.
They are suspended priest. No suspended priest has any legitimate ministry in the Church.
Why were they suspended? Because of disobedience to their bishops. They “left the Church” The Church did not seek them out to suspend them because of their beliefs.
However, since the SSPX does its own illegitimate ordinations it is not true that every SSPX priest left the Church. There are some who never were a priest in the Catholic Church.
OK, let’s be honest, and let’s be clear, and let’s not look for wiggle room. Bishops all across the world have made honest, clear, decisive statements on the illegitimacy of SSPX ministry. If you want a good summary, please to watch the several videos 2 weeks ago by Michael Voris/Vortex on Youtube.
Ann Malley, what you want is a sophistry that actually confuses the faithful about the status of SSPX and their ministry and sacraments. You have made that clear over and over again.
So yes, let’s be honest.
…you may want to tweet the Holy Father with your instruction, Anonymous. Your view is not that of the Catholic Church.
….and yet the excommunication was the result of actions taken because +Lefebvre was doing what he deemed necessary to uphold the Faith, Anonymous. And canon law provides for acting out of necessity.
Canon Law does not allow for the actions of Lebfebvre and the SSPX. They were excommunicated for violating Canon Law and are currently still under censure (suspension) for violating Canon Law. It is they who refuse to reunite with the Church.
Heaven help them for convincing the naive that they have some kind of permission from Canon Law to disobey Canon Law.
Canon Law provides for no such thing Ann Malley. You have told a lie.
Yes, indeed, canon law allows for one to act out of necessity. You are continuing to lie to yourself, YFC, and to others as is your usual modus operandi. But the fruits of these matters speak for themselves, especially in October.
canons 1323:4ƒ and 1324 ß1:5ƒ
As to your charge, Anonymous, there is no refusal to reunite with the Church. The Society is part of the Catholic Church but suffering an irregular canonical situation. You prefer not to mention, explore or entertain the obvious reasons why this is as obfuscation and dissembling suits your purposes, much like YFC.
The Catholic Faith is not based on an evolving Oracle of what sounds good now. Sorry.
Since the Church is only weeks away from homo-apostasy and real schism YFC and Anon’s arguments have become irrelevant…YFC your lifestyle is a lie before God Almighty
The official position of the Catholic Church on the Society of st Pius X is:
the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.
Pope Benedict XVI
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Yes, let us repost and repost the “official” position, Anonymous. But not having an “official” canonical status within the Church does not preclude acting out of necessity wherein the Church herself supplies.
God bless you for all of your links. But we’re scalp deep in crisis and so your protestations do nothing more than register as a gurgling bubble on the surface of encroaching sludge.
The Catholic Church is not in a crisis. The SSPX is. They do not do it out of necessity. They do it out of a lack of faith. They are going to hell if they do not repent before they die. They exploit people like you who do not understand the Faith and the Church. That is why people keep telling you to learn the faith so that you do not get misled by these wolves in sheep’s clothing.
The state of ongoing crisis speaks for itself, Anonymous, especially in the commentary of what Catholic bishops actually believe as issuing forth from the current synod. The testament of Faith is in clinging to what the Church actually teaches despite the marginalization and attempted shout downs by those who prefer entertaining the change of doctrine. One may have the Faith that Our Lord will clean up the resulting mess, but that is not Faith in what Our Lord actually said.
The promise of the Holy Ghost to uphold the Church is not the only teaching, Anonymous. And even Our Lord didn’t jump off the cliff in order to “test” God and “prove” Himself. You may think He should have, but I’ll follow His example and pass on the dare.
You are a real Martin Luther aren’t you?
….the Vatican is the one planning a mutual fiesta with the Lutherans in 2017 to celebrate the birth of Protestantism, so you may want to reassess who is Luther, friend. But if you want to jump off the cliff, go for it!
Lutherans also recognize the Pope as Vicar and Bishop of Rome, first among equals. That doesn’t make Lutherans catholic.
….and your proposing that you are a fellow Catholic while spouting modernism and sophistry at every turn doesn’t make you Catholic, friend. By their fruits you shall know them. Not by their identity card.
You really can’t stand it that I actually don’t apply sophistry, as you do, but rather sound logic. It just really get’s to you doesn’t it? One need look no further for your use of sophistry than your own post in which you try to absolve SSPX bishops of their disobedience of the Pope. It’s a pretty obvious to everyone that they are disobedient.
So, Mr. Logic, obedience is the new supreme value?
What is obvious to faithful Catholics is that Father Dariusz Oko’s charitable words, addressing the intrinsically disordered thoughts and actions of Monsignor Charmasa, also applies to you, YFC.
“Monsignor Charmasa has not grown out of the childish notion of a God who only caresses and soothes. He places himself somehow above Christ, because he thinks you cannot use demanding language, yet Jesus spoke of “whitewashed tombs,” “murderers of the prophets.” If the Pope speaks of genderism as a tsunami or disease, will he also oppose him, and claim that he cannot speak that way? ” continued……
continued….
Father Oko said, “This is childishness, an infantile conception of theology. This infantilism has led him (Monsignor Charamsa) to be lost and has become a personal catastrophe. The poor man, I feel sorry for him. We must pray for him, but his case also shows what homosexuality is, to what hatred a homosexual can go, and how badly it can distort one’s personality. “
“he emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,…”
Catharine, please be clear that I have not – and would not – defend Monsignor Charamsa’s actions. Please don’t pretend that I have defended him, or that I have acted as he has acted.
Taken from Catholic Culture.org ….. ‘Gay Vatican official who ‘came out’ may influence Synod in a way he didn’t expect– or want’
By making his shocking announcement, Msgr. Charamsa alerted the Catholic world to the fact that he—an official at the CDF, which handles questions of doctrine; and a theology instructor at two pontifical institutions—actively opposes the teachings of the Church. For years he has been working inside the Vatican, not to defend Church teaching but to change it. He has been, in effect, a double agent.
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/the-city-gates.cfm?ID=1162
continued…..
continued…..Taken from Catholic Culture. org
Msgr. Krzystof Charamsa evidently thought that he was advancing the homosexual cause by coming out as gay on the eve of the Synod of Bishops. I think he miscalculated badly.
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/the-city-gates.cfm?ID=1162
YFC, you do not apply logic. You apply a child’s view of canon law and what constitutes obedience. Much like a first year med student may try to apply what he/she knows of a medical scenario that is a matter for seasoned medical professionals. (…makes for a fun chuckle)
So while you want to play doctor and diagnose the Church’s diseases, you need to be patient, YFC, and understand that you do not have a full understanding of terms or the facts of the case at hand. (…or perhaps you do and you just want to keep others ignorant.)
By your “logic” YFC, the Church would be rendered to Simon Says Now – and Now – and Now – without any connection to the Deposit of the Faith or Canon law outside their being a scrapbook of the funky…
….stuff we “used” to believe.
That would suit you just fine.
I’m not bothered by your attempts repeatedly to smear me. You don’t like what logic concludes, so you attack the person as being childish. It’s an old technique used by people who actually want to skirt the truth.
demanding obedience coming from YFC is laughable…..
Well, Canisius, consider Our Erstwhile Catholic’s newfound supreme virtue of obedience illustrated perfectly, by the degree to which he is obedient to Archbp. Cordileone’s magisterium and authority on the family and marriage.
Hence, why newfound Mr. Logic makes as much logical sense … well, as the logicians, who tend to be atheists and sad sacks in their own personal lives themselves.
..And if that doesn’t work, One Erstwhile Catholic can always wrap himself in the white linen tunic of being a victim and being “smeared”. High comedy, high drama indeed. It is tough life to be Mr. Logic.
Que the violins to play, the Superman Song, Steve: …it’s not easy being “me”. And so all must bow to the dramatic victim in the CCD play.
Whatever his/her motivations may be, I’m just grateful for the non-stop proof of crisis in the Church. You couldn’t pay for a better advertisement. I mean, for all those touting the need to see an “official” statement, document, proclamation that the Sun is hot, we are made aware in fact every day.
God bless :)
Once again the S.S.P.X. is NOT in schism and Yes they do recognize the Pope in their Holy Mass, stop spinning the hatred for the S.S.P.X. like Michael Voris does. Why not go after let’s say, radical pro-abortion nuns, gay priests who want to have press conferences to tell the world they are gay and in a “relationship” with another man just like Monsignor Kryzsztof Charasma tried in Rome the other day. So the S.S.P.X. upholds every Catholic teaching and they are the bad guys just amazing. Like I have said before when Rome wakes up, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre will be vaulted to sainthood for saving the Holy Roman Catholic Faith and True Mass of Times. God bless the S.S.P.X, F.S.S.P. and Institute of Christ the King.
Folks let’s put the Novus Ordo service and the True Mass of All Times side by side on a screen and decide which one is Holy and is Christ centered and which is Man centered and just silly and simply put dull and childish.
They are both Holy and Christ-centered. They are the same prayer with some differences.
And what exactly are those differences? Why were those differences promulgated? How does one defend these Masses as equal when they are different? Is it fair to say that the NO was born of dissatisfaction with the TLM? Who was it that saw reason to establish the NO? Were those reasons consistent with the Faith as consistently understood previously, or was the intent to undermine the Faith? Was the NO advanced by the same strain of infiltrators exposed by Pope Leo XIII as early as 1881? If something exists in the Church, do just automatically go along with it because it gives you cover for your own sins?
The Pope
Ralph, the NO was not born of dissatisfaction with the TLM. It was promulgated by Pope Paul VI. The intent was not to undermine the Faith.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19690403_missale-romanum.html
….the fruit was the undermining of the Faith, Anonymous. So while many may have thought the NO a grand idea – that is stripping the mass of all overtly Catholic symbolism – under the guise of bringing in Protestant, others understood that Protestantizing the mass would have the desired effect of weakening the Faith.
…much like those who put forth the novelties of the October Synods say they are working toward the goal of being merciful, but what mercy is there in destroying Catholic Faith/Morals by behaving as if they do not exist or are immaterial?
Although I doubt you’d find a reality check on the machinations at play before, during and after these Synods on the official Vatican website.
Ann Malley changes her story once again. she is now claiming that the problem with the Mass is that it isn’t different enough from Protestant liturgies. Although I doubt she has ever attended one, it is pretty choice that her objection with the Mass is that it isn’t “different enough”. So let’s for the sake of argument say that there is a resurgence of the TLM among the high churches of Lutheranism, Episcopaleanism, etc. Would you then want to adopt something to preserve the catholic “difference”?
Just asking, becasue we can’t get a consistent set of answers from you.
Now, Our Erstwhile Stalking Catholic (OEST) is “on the attack” against Ann Malley once again re. his XXXth crusade against the SSPX, yet I see he is pained so, by being the victim of “attacks” and smears (Oct. 5, 2015 8:29pm). [If I hear snickering and laughing in the background, your are NOT being nice..]
All of you, stop the smears and attacks, I say. OEST hates the competition.
Ann Malley, honestly, if you believe that the Catholic Mass is Protestantized, you don’t anything about the Mass or the Protestants. If you believe Catholic ‘symobolism” was stripped from the Mass, you don’t know anything about the Mass.
As for the Synod, you are crying before you are hurt.
Learn the Catholic Faith.
Those who know the Faith will not fall for the deceptions of Satan.
The Novus Ordo Missae is a Protestantized rite, Anonymous. If you cannot face the truth of that then there is no hope for you believing yourself immune to the deceptions of the Devil. All he has to do is take off his horns and invite you to dinner and you’re there calling him Mr. Nice Guy.
As to what I “believe” that is not the issue. Reality is the issue. So no point getting your knickers in a knot, it’s just history folks.
If you had any real proof of your postition, you would have presented a reasoned argument, not a belligerent tirade.
….one who is belligerently blind only has the capacity to interpret proof of reality as a belligerent tirade. Get your lens fixed, Anonymous, or better still – get a new one.
God bless and thank you once again for posting nonsense. You provide proof of crisis and sum zero catechesis with every entry you make!
Not so, the Novus Ordo is all about the priest being the “SHOWMAN” and the congregation holding hands, kiss of peace and the rest of the show. In the TLM the priest offers up to Christ for the congregation the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, it is all about Christ not us. Their is more participation in the TLM then the man-made Novus Ordo, please keep your hand holding, kiss of peace, dancing girls in leotards, altar girls, drums, guitars, felt banners, polyester vestments, rock, mariachi, folk music, communion in the hand standing, improper attire, giant puppets, lay lectors, and we will keep our silent reverence, Mozart, Palastrina, Gregorian chant, polyphony, stunning vestments, kneeling for Holy Communion on the tongue, organ, suits,…
Janek …Please let me know where there is a parish which has dancing girls in leotards at mass. Thank you.
Here you go C&:H.
https://www.mn.catholic.edu.au/about/news-events/2014/video-aspire-ensemble-performs-liturgical-dance
And of course, let’s not forget clowns, witches and Barney:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgKweu0ZWVs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WadbbxPoBlk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wedpLBTKd84
im going to have to spend a lot of money to go see liturgical dance in Australia.i hope i make it for the once a year celebration they do there.
Your description and interpretation of Holy Mass is just plain wrong.
The Mass is the Sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine. Baltimore Catechism #357
Janek,
“please keep your hand holding, kiss of peace, dancing girls in leotards, altar girls, drums, guitars, felt banners, polyester vestments, rock, mariachi, folk music, communion in the hand standing, improper attire, giant puppets, lay lectors” – you say it like these are bad things! Why?
Bob One take a good long look at the Church and the complete fall of in Faith and you will know the reason why.. Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi…and that is a fact… but keep believing your delusions
Was this the behavior on the Day Jesus was crucified, only by those who killed him were celebrating. Luke warm Catholics want these sort of “all are welcome” masses.
Because Joe, Bob One and his ilk like to bring Christ down from His Throne uncrown Him and make Him just one of us…
….the “some differences” is stripping down and/or removing overt Catholic symbolism, Anonymous. Much like saying that a protein bar is the same as a steak. Both have protein, yes, but are they the same? No.
AnnMalley, Catholics believe that the Eucharist is not symbolic,. It is the Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. The Mass is not symbolic of the Sacrifice of Christi on the Cross. It is the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross re-presented. The priest’s blessing is not symbolic of the Lord’s Blessing. It is the Lord’s blessing. If that is not enough “meat” for you, I don’t know what to say. The Mass is Heaven on earth.
Well, duh, Catholics do believe in the Real Presence, Anonymous. So that is why when the rite of mass treats Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament like a spiritual protein bar instead of the REAL Food of our souls that It is, there is the problem.
“We must discard from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything that could
constitute the slightest risk of obstacle or displeasure for our separated brethren, that is, for the
protestants.” Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, chief architect of The Novus Ordo18
Jean Guitton, close friend and confidant of Paul VI, stated, “The intention of Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that is should almost coincide with the protestant liturgy.”
“The liturgical reform, that willed by Paul VI and realized with the contribution and satisfaction of protestant theologians, has produced extremely grave harm for the Faith.” Cardinal Joseph
Ratzinger, “My Life”
It that’s not enough of a clue in for you, Anonymous, I don’t know what is. So yes, Our Lord is present in the Novus Ordo Missae, but that reality is not underscored by the rite itself. That is the problem, friend.
That is why having the doctrine teach the truth of Our…
… Our Lord’s presence in the Blessed Sacrament not fully acknowledged in the practiced rite surrounding the liturgy is so dangerous. It represents the disconnect of doctrine from practice.
So when you state, “… The Mass is Heaven on earth,” you are correct. This is precisely why liturgy is critical. For telling folks that a discombobulated service that elevates man and eliminates the rightful hierarchy that is Heaven is Heaven, it is confusing and causes a disconnect to faith and reason.
Ann Malley, you need a thorough catechesis on the Mass.
You must just not pay attention in Church. THIS IS MY BODY. THIS IS MY BLOOD. THIS IS THE LAMB OF GOD. LIVING SACRIFICE. THE BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST. THE BREAD OF LIFE. O LORD. SAVIOR OF THE WORLD. PURE VICTIM. HOLY VICTIM. SPOTLESS VICTIM.
That’s a sample of some of the words used to describe the Eucharist and the words of consecration.
Your charge that the Mass does not teach our Lord’s presence in the Eucharist is wrong.
…and you obviously are paying attention to the reality that your sad argumentation is no argumentation at all. Not Catholic either. Otherwise you wouldn’t feel compelled to capitalize your verbiage.
As to a thorough “catechesis” on the mass, I want the mass to speak for itself, friend. The TLM does precisely that which is why so many want it suppressed in favor of the ambiguous where folks can interpret what they want out of it. That way the “mass” is not offensive to Protestants.
AnnMalley, could you please give us your source for the Ratzinger quote.
I cannot find a book or article titled “My Life”.
It would help if you could provide an accurate title, page number and context.
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal, “My Life,” pp. 105 – 115 as per:
https://theendofallends.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/9-the-mass.pdf
You may not like what the article has to say, Anonymous, but the points made therein, complete with quotes, supporting context, etc as compared to the fruits of this building crisis within the Catholic Church beg legitimate review by believing and concerned Catholics.
I capitalized the “verbiage” because the words were direct quotes from the Mass.
I guess we found you out now because these words are the Roman Canon.
You understand what that means?
annmalley, you must be some kind of prankster. I just see you sitting there, throwing back shots, “lets say something to really wind them up.”
I think you outed yourself with this one.
Thank you for giving the source.
I think your source is questionable because there does not seem to be a book called My Life written by Ratzinger. I can’t find it on any bibliography of Ratzinger’s works.. It does not show up on a google search.
Amazon shows a Spanish translation of this book and there is another website which mentions a book in German which is called something else. It is possible that it is referring to a book which has the English title “Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977, but the quote does not show up in a search of it.
There may be a mistake or translation error.
Does anyone have the book?
I am not interested in the article. I am just trying to verify the Ratzinger quote, which, so far, I am not able to do.
In the article you cited, the quote is in there as you wrote it. It is not given a source in the footnotes.
The “My Life” pages are given early in the paper for a different quote, which also cannot be found in the book named “Milestones.”
Does anyone have a book called “My LIfe” ? or know where these quotes (if legit or illegitimate) really came from?
….Anonymous, you out yourself with every post you make. If you want to learn and grow in Faith, great. But if you don’t, that does not give you the mandate nor the right to attempt to hold others back. God bless you just the same.
Ann Malley, it is very disrespectful to come on the website of a Church that you don’t go to and write things that are not correct and not truthful. Ignorance is one thing, but rudeness is something else. This is what is called trolling on the Internet. It would be healthier and more respectful if you just went on websites that were from your own church. I know sometimes former Catholics can’t let go and feel they have to monitor what is going on in the Church they left to prove to themselves how bad it is and how they made the right choice, but it really isn’t a healthy behavior. It’s like keeping up with your ex. If you have left, move on.
It is untruthful of you, Anonymous, to imply that one who is still married is not just because you don’t understand the relationship. So while you advocate “moving on” you negate the relationship, that while it may not meet your criteria, still exists.
So please stop being rude by asking questions when you have neither the capacity nor the intent to understand when answered. You’re tiresome. Either that or you are like the “girlfriend” who will tell the one she wants to shack up with anything he wants to hear just so that he’ll pay her way to do whatever she’d like to the negation of the man’s lawful wife and family.
Ann Malley, i would like very much if you would lean and grow in the Faith. Stop learning your “Catholicism” from the Internet. Use Church approved sources.
I understand that this group tells you that they are part of the Catholic Church when they are not, I understand that this group tells you that their confessions are valid when they are not. You believe them. If you would stick to Catholic Church sources and Catholic Church approved sources, you won’t have this problem. It takes a friend to tell you. But you are so stubborn and so malicious to those who threaten your world view that there is no one left to tell you. So congrats. You are on the highway to hell. Maybe God will send another.
….it is not the “group” that tells me, Anonymous, but rather canon law and the actual teachings of the Catholic Church to which you claim you belong. And indeed, it does take a friend to tell one. That is why I have looked to those friends whom I can trust, not those who have been told to round up the sheep by any means possible – to include promoting half truths and blind party lines with which to beat the already scandalized sheep. You do so out of a misguided sense of loyalty and that is fine. No animus there. But you should look to your own creeping of stubbornness, Anonymous. Merely repeating the the lines “there is no crisis” will not miraculously take you out of Oz much the same as repeating “you’re outside the Church”…
… will not make it so. God bless you, Anonymous. I pray God send you another who will be better able to instruct you as to the Faith and what being in the Catholic Church means.
Canon Law says that these suspended priests may not say a public Mass. They may not hear confessions. In an emergency, such as a penitent who is near death and cannot get to a priest who has the faculties to absolve, a suspended priest may hear the confession and grant absolution.
It is not an emergency that someone doesn’t like the Mass or Vatican II. Rebellion is NOT an emergency.
The Catholic Faith teaches that these are schismatics who only belong to the Church as deserters. They cannot declare themselves guiltless by “praying for the Pope.” They do not follow him and they have told their people not to follow him. Traditionally, this group would be declared anathema, however, since they know the Church does not do that…
This passage from Milestones certainly justifies Ann Malley’s position that the New Liturgy has an emptiness redolent of the Protestant “service”:
“I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy, which at times is actually being conceived of etsi Deus non daretur: as though in the liturgy it did not matter any more whether God exists and whether He speaks to us and hears us.” (Milestones, Ignatius Press ed., 1998, p. 148
I don’t know if it was a serious question about the autobiography of Ratzinger (in English, “Milestones: 1927-1977”, published by Ignatius Press, 1998, preceded by the French edition (1997) “Ma Vie”) regarding the quote cited by Ann Malley—sometimes these questions from the gallery appear more like the Pharisees’ questions, not a serious desire for truth, just an effort to trip up—however, I know that the English version had been edited (I have one), and passages do not appear in it that appeared in the previous French edition: However, The English edition has some pointed passages I would think would get one’s attention:
Later on, then-Cardinal Ratzinger adds:
“But when the community of faith, the world-wide unity of the Church and her history, and the mystery of the living Christ are no longer visible in the liturgy, where else, then, is the Church to become visible in her spiritual essence? Then the community is celebrating only itself, an activity that is utterly fruitless. “ (Milestones, op cit.)
The English edition of Ratzinger’s 1998 autobiography has some pointed passages I would think would get one’s attention as to the state of the present crisis:
“I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy, which at times is actually being conceived of etsi Deus non daretur: as though in the liturgy it did not matter any more whether God exists and whether He speaks to us and hears us.” (Milestones, Ignatius Press ed., 1998, p. 148)
Now, I don’t know if it really matters to document statements by the Pope Emeritus, proving his sharp criticisms of the present “New Mass”: previously we proved, when Ann Malley came under attack for citing his comments that Vatican II gave us “a fabricated,banal liturgy”, a furious counterattack for sources. We proved it was not said once, but 2x, once by then-Card R. in a 1990 theological review, and then repeated in his review of Monsgr. Klaus Gamber’s book “The Reform of the Roman Liturgy” (1993 English): I have a copy of the book, you can buy one too, and read his comments, now published on the book jacket, for yourself. If you want to.
Pope Francis is doing what Jesus will do, reach to those marginalized by society because of their sin. He is NOT approving the way they live their life but REMINDER them that there is MERCY, REPENTANCE and CONVERSION from SIN.
It looks like Bergoglio is “Peter the Roman” more each day and this from a man who had no desire to be the Roman Pontiff.
Indeed – the Pope also went to a Prison and met with those who have committed awful crimes – not to embrace the Criminal Behavior any more than the Objectively Disordered Hatreds & Perversions that make up the radical homosex agenda…
But Rather – as with Jesus eating with the Tax Collector, to be Pastoral and hopefully encourage them to Turn Away from the Evil and make Repent and Make Amends.
We – All of Us (save for a very few Saints – who often had their own histories to overcome) are Sinners.
It is the Willingness to Confront Sin (even Pastorally) and try to help the individuals to overcome it, that is the Real Story Here.
Now matter how gaily the Resident Harpies try to spin it in to an endorsement of Evil under the guise…
But the Pope did not go to a prison in Communist Cuba.
Many of us will not have a priest to give us the sacraments in 20 years, many of us will die without the sanctifying grace we need to get into heaven. The only Roman Catholic parishes that will survive will be those practicing traditional RC Church doctrines, the 7 Holy Latin Sacraments, and rites. You will know them by their fruits says the Lord. Beware of wolves in sheeps clothing. Many are called but few are chosen. Meaning many will go to hell! Why risk it? Pray the rosary that God will set you onto His path of eternal life, from this string of blogs, many haven’t a clue of what God’s narrow path is!
DOCTOR FACES INQUISITION OVER ‘GAY’-HEALTH COMMENTS
https://www.wnd.com/2015/10/doctor-faces-inquisition-over-gay-health-comments/
The board of directors of Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center will hold a hearing next Wednesday in the case of a veteran medical expert who was dismissed for citing federal government statistics about the dangers of homosexual activity.
= threatened the career of Dr. Paul Church – on the staff of the Boston hospital for nearly 30 years before his removal earlier this year, noted the non-profit group Mass Resistance.
His offense? Citing government statistics showing that the “gay” sex lifestyle poses deadly health risks…
“It is incredible to think they would be able to silence me and…
Wing Nut Daily? Really, McD?
Pope’s private homilies give a glimpse into his view of the Synod proceedings
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/popes-private-homilies-give-a-glimpse-into-his-view-of-the-synod-proceeding
“ – true mercy in the eyes of the Church consists in lovingly presenting the truth, as the Church’s document outlining how to deal pastorally with “homosexual persons” states.
Stressing the need for “clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral,” the document says, “we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral.”
The Letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the pastoral care of homosexual persons” adds:
“Only what…
Let me try to understand the issue. The Pope met with one of his former students, who is gay and his partner of many years. I would assume that the Archbishop of a very large city, the capital of Argentina would know many people who are gay and who are in relationships with other gay people. That should not be a surprise to anyone. So, what is the real issue. The Pope visits the Americas and meets with an old friend for about five minutes and renews acquaintances. Why is that a problem? There isn’t a Pastor in the world who doesn’t know someone who is gay and in a relationship. Why is this a big deal?
Bob One it is a matter of perception… what if the Pope met with an old friend of his along with the man’s mistress what kind of impression and perception does that make. I am praying everyday for a complete break with the Left inside the Church and Schism which will purify the Church from your ilk
Canisius you realize that the Popes live in Italy, right?
Now, I don’t know if it really matters to document statements by the Pope Emeritus, proving his sharp criticisms of the present “New Mass”: previously we proved, when Ann Malley came under attack for citing his comments that Vatican II gave us “a fabricated,banal liturgy”, a furious counterattack for sources. We proved it was not said once, but 2x, once by then-Card R. in a 1990 theological review, and then repeated in his review of Monsgr. Klaus Gamber’s book “The Reform of the Roman Liturgy” (1993 English): I have a copy of the book, you can buy one too, and read his comments, now published on the book jacket, for yourself. If you want to.
When it was shown that the Card. Ratzinger had actually stated these trenchant criticisms of the current New Liturgy, one that he openly says seems to lead to a ” community is celebrating only itself, an activity that is utterly fruitless” (Look around you: look at the “Catholic Community of Pleasanton’s” website, the former “parish” of Fr. Dan Danielson)— the critics first had the dishonesty to say, “Well, he only said that once.” Then when shown Ratzinger had actually said it twice, and documented it so, they said, “Well, he wouldn’t say that now.” ( !!!! How do you know: you didn’t even know he held these positions!)…the only conclusion: Intellectually dishonest, intellectually bankrupt, and self-deceiving.