The following comes from a Jan. 14 release from the Cardinal Newman Society.
The University of Santa Clara’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics is scheduled to host laicized priest Roy Bourgeois later this month, according to the Jesuit university’s website.
Former Maryknoll priest Roy Bourgeois was expelled from the Maryknoll order by a decree from the Vatican in 2012. Bourgeois had been active in the movement to get the Church to change her age-old doctrine on a male-only priesthood. That activity culminated in August 2008, when he participated in a ceremony to “ordain” a woman as a Catholic priest. He continued to express public support for this position after the “ordination,” and was repeatedly warned of the consequences of doing so. He was excommunicated in November of that same year, and laicized and expelled from the order on October 4, 2012.
Bourgeois has received much support for his many controversial positions through the years from Jesuit and other Catholic universities.
Far from shying away from the issue of female ordination, Bourgeois is scheduled to deliver a lecture titled “Women Speak for Themselves: Conscience and the New Catholic Feminism.”
The University’s website calls him “a prominent voice of conscience within Catholicism for decades.”
To read original release, click here.
Are there any real Catholic universities left?
No, John Feeney, now days “Catholic” universities are those universities that are open to atheists, satanists, apostates, heretics, communists, Marxists, Buddhists – just about anyone who dismisses Church Law, Natural Law, anything remotely moral, Our Blessed Lord and gosh, I’m feeling guilt now because I don’t want to leave any group out – except ‘believing Catholics’ of course.
These Institutes of Higher Learning then get ongoing permission from the Bishops, in the name of education, to use the name Catholic in order to attract Catholic dollars from Catholic parents who desire Catholic education for junior. Often after 18 years of their parents guarding the faith of said junior. But he has to learn sometime!
After four years of hard, contemplative study, guest speakers, and naked seminars – I mean nature seminars – out pops someone who is similarly allowed to ‘use’ the name Catholic (That’s what counts after all!) who, golly gee, embraces the teachings of atheists, satanists, apostates, heretics, communists, Marxists, Buddhists – just about anyone who dismisses Church Law, Natural Law, anything remotely moral, Our Blessed Lord and gosh, I’m feeling guilt now because I don’t want to leave any group out – except ‘believing Catholics’ of course.
Any University not on with that program as not allowed to call themselves Catholic!!!
I’d say welcome to the Springtime, but I fear it’s nearing the end of Summer and too many fields are fallow or riddled with rotted fruit which doesn’t smell very good!
The blame for much of our societal decay (if not most of it) can be correctly attributed to the field of education. From top to bottom,
education is programming students with serious error.
It isn’t just Catholic education, either. Many of our problems stem from the rot in education and we need to reform it. You may not have noticed, but public education has successfully corrupted Catholic education. Politicians are in charge of education, and “Politically Correct” error has spread throughout education in general. It’s time to take back control, but it seems nobody has the courage to take any meaningful, effective steps to do that. We have the education systems we deserve for not being more vigilant guardians of our youth.
https://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/TheNewmanGuide/RecommendedColleges.aspx
Thank you Anony…..it is noble of you to mention the Newman guide. We do have a few excellent Catholic Universities that are trying to stay afloat, should we say.
My thumbs up to those who help them (Newman guide’s recommended devout Catholic schools) in some way, through contributions, those scholarships that bless families who need it the most, especially we know how good Catholics families truly need those scholarships even more because most likely in a private good Catholic education, we find less of those available, through whatever means one can. Even our prayers, which are far much greater, would be a blessing for the few Universities trying to survive in this very hostile environment of a world.
With this culture, it’s truly hard to stand tall under all that pressure of today’s troubles of the heart. Yes troubles of the heart, at least those of us who understand and care, our hearts ache so much at the state this world is in, yet I still see God’s light shining giving us hope and telling us to not give up….we see it through those little new born babies. That is why we need to hate abortion, hate it because it is unjust!
The world must go on….Life tells us that and as long as we breath life, we must do what our Lord wills, even in little ways, ways in which many do not see but only the Lord see’s or even if God chooses it in big ways, for the world to see, how ever God wills, it, hey that is what we should seek! Yes I know things always look dark but we must not allow the darkness to slow us down with negativity, we must seek Christ and remain optimistic.
After all, do we believe that this world is only temporary? Can we work towards trusting God. This University is dark but our protests and prayers for it’s conversion and repentance on the wickedness it permits, are noble actions that bring the light of Christ to it’s students, who need it desperately. They may have been indoctrinated to the ways of the world, but they are young and there is always time for conversions, that is why the world must go on….God giving us those blessings in the conversions permitted due to life still moving.
Christendom and Fisher-Moore
Canisius also John Paul II University etc…..
Like I said it’s not easy trying to please everyone but as we can see, there are those few excellent Catholic Universities which are trying to stay afloat….thumps up to those who act by supporting in some way these Universities and it’s students to be able to afford them.
Thanks again Anony for the link! Hope this helps families as they try to make wise choices and hopefully those who are doing well financially can donate scholarships for students who want to attend these good schools but often find themselves tight and struggling to do so.
John Feeney, Yes! The Cardinal Newman Society puts a list of these out every year. St. Thomas Aquinas College in Santa Paula California is one of them.
“The SSPX is the problem. The TLM’ers are the problem. Vatican II is a ‘springtime for the Church.’ “
Steve..I don’t see how the SSPX is much different from Fr. Bourgeois. Insubordination is insubordination. No one I know thinks the TLM is a problem. If Catholics prefer it good for them, I just don’t believe that the “regular” mass at my parish is any better or worse. Viv “la dif and all that!
“Insubordination is insubordination.” Pretty tough stand, C&H. Would you make the same comparison between a beggar who stole a doughnut off your catering truck to feed his child and someone who stole a doughtnut off your catering truck on a dare only to smear it into the ground or toss it into the street?
Not that you have a catering truck, per se, but you get the idea.
Ann – Not really a good analogy. Actually I have a van. However both the SSPX and Bourgeouis as well as the Jesuit peace guy I read about in the Catholic paper who wouldn’t work where assigned are disobeying the magisterium of the Church and being, I think, pretty arrogant about it. As I said “Viv ‘la dif” but we need something to hold us together. If people want to form little splinter groups, they can, but then they verge on being the new Protestants.
There is within the Church today a special danger for those who, often for seemingly legitimate reasons (abuses of the liturgy, the open promotion of heresy even by clergy, and similar causes), have sought refuge in traditionalist movements on the margins of the Church. These groups, distinguishable from those who love the Tridentine tradition of the Mass and sacraments and who celebrate them in Communion with the Pope, go their own way outside of the laws of the Church. They typically rationalize their disobedience by attacking the Second Vatican Council, the current liturgical rites, ecumenical and interreligious dialogue, and often Pope John Paul II personally, never distinguishing between teaching and law on the one hand, and the abuse of it by dissenters and the disobedient on the other. These groups, such as the Society of St. Pius X, of Pius V, the “We Resist You to Your Face” movement, Br. Dimond and Holy Family Monastery, make ready use of scandals to gain support among the unwary, who, discouraged by their local situation, may think they are joining a more perfect orthodoxy and a more loyal remnant of Catholics. Thankfully such motives may excuse the average person who takes comfort in such groups, at least initially, though as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches to take scandal in other’s sins is istself sinful. cont
However, there is a great danger that starting from the material schism of refusing submission to the Pope, that all these groups have in common, the Catholic cannot long maintain the schizophrenic position of saying they are being submissive to the Pope while disobeying him. At some point they must choose and formally adhere to the schism of the group. In some cases the group identity depends on some formal repudiation of the “Novus Ordo” Church, very effectively hastening the spiritual demise of the lay adherent.
Also unfortunate for such souls is the fact that these ultra-traditionalist groups profess to be doctrinally orthodox, an orthodoxy which necessarily includes the teaching that Outside the Church There Is No Salvation. This means that someone who has formally separated himself from the Church through heresy or schism, or knowing the Church to be true failed to enter her, cannot be saved, unless of course they renounce their own will and reconcile with the Church. Unlike the non-Catholic Christian, can the super-orthodox claim invincible ignorance of this teaching? Can they escape the condemnation of Pope Boniface VIII, who in first elaborating it said, “this authority, although it is given to man and is exercised by man, is not human, but rather divine, and has been given by the divine Word to Peter himself and to his successors in him, whom the Lord acknowledged an established rock, when he said to Peter himself: Whatsoever you shall bind etc. [Matt. 16:19]. Therefore, whosoever resists this power so ordained by God, resists the order of God …? No wonder that given enough time such groups inevitably produce those who claim that the See of Peter is vacant, since the logic of their schismatic attitude is ultimately irreconcilable with the doctrine of papal primacy, as enunciated by both Pope Boniface and Vatican I.
Colin B. Donovan, STL
Actually mine is a rather excellent analogy C&H because those seeking the TLM are starving for not only real meat, but also a full meal. You may go ahead and brand that Protestant if you’d like, but increasingly it seems that the only ‘thing holding us together’ rather than being Christ and His actual teachings is the misapplied obedience that would have no firm doctrine at all in order to facilitate a man-made false unity.
If you don’t understand that, that’s okay. Viv la dif is not precisely Catholic thought or the adherence to actual Church teaching.
And as Anonymous so rightly pointed out on another thread, St. Thomas Aquinas admonishes us to:
(1) the unity of faith. All Christians who are of the body of the Church believe the same doctrine. “I beseech you . . . that you all speak the same thing and that there be no schisms among you.”
The modern Catholic Church too often does not speak the same thing. So the only one causing the ‘little splinters’ are those in charge of the flock. They should look to themselves for the sin of arrogance as many erroneously believe that the obedience card is all it will take for people not to identify the inconsistent Elephant in the room.
God bless.
Again, Anonymous, thank you for posting this lovely piece by Colin B. Donovan, STL who writes:
“… the Catholic cannot long maintain the schizophrenic position of saying they are being submissive to the Pope while disobeying him.”
One is required to submit to authority in all matters except sin, Anonymous. Submission does not require sin or the occasion thereof. But whereas being surrounded by heterodoxy may not present an occasion to you, it presents a grave occasion and scandal for others. (Much like some could go to South beach, FL and be fine while others would be assailed by overwhelming temptation.)
And this is not by mere tale bearing, but rather through experience. It is required also to, “Know thyself.” So knowing, many are forced via the “schizophrenic position” of those who are technically in full communion with Rome all-the-while permitting that which is detrimental to the Faith in practice to seek refuge.
In Other Words: One cannot maintain the schizophrenic position of saying they are Catholic while, in practice, allowing and/or disobeying what the Church has always taught.
Thank YOU again for the quote.
Reread 1 Corinthians 8:7-13
Physician heal thyself. And do not lump the SSPX into the same group as Sedevecantists. That is a slur as the Society very much holds that the Pope is the Pope and prays for him daily – dare I say, hourly and more since the Society is represented all over the globe.
But Ann … regarding your 6:26: This isn’t about the TLM. Those who are starving for it may attend. Here in CCD parishes which have them are profiled all the time. So what is the problem? Yes, viv ‘la dif. With over a billion of us, various cultures and pr eoples are going to approach the faith with some variations while at the same time being one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. Even I usually give people on option of fish, chicken or steak and the Church does the same.
You seem so unhappy with the Church, at least as it exists today. Other than more TLMs being available, which is happening all the time, what, specificaly do you want to change so that your more comfortable?
Thank you for your post, C&H. I appreciate it. As well as your catering analogy. Food – the great unifier!
Regarding it not being about the TLM, no, it isn’t just about the Traditional mass alone, or even the Latin language, but rather about the fullness of the deposit of Faith and the consistency/clarity in teaching. That is teaching the truths of the Faith and the *motives* behind said teachings/disciplines.
Why do we abstain from meat on Friday? Why do we have to attend mass on Sunday and Monday. Why is sex outside of marriage a mortal sin? Why is same sex marriage impossible? Why are those of other faiths in need of conversion, not confirmation in invincible ignorance.
This last one is why there is a reboot on evangelization – Catholics are in decline as other religious groups have been very aggressive while we, with the Truth, have idled in the theory of acceptance. As if people today are somehow incapable of the conversion of heart offered to their ancestors.
to C&H cont:
There is also a vast inconsistency that one recognizes when having to attend so many different parishes, especially when rearing a family, too. Perhaps not in written doctrine, but in practice and what comes from the pulpit, absolutely. It’s exhaustive. And while CCD may post what seems to you an abundance of Latin Mass, the reality is there isn’t an abundance of Latin mass. Not by far. Many Bishops fight it, C&H, despite the so-called viv la dif. It is not a friendly offering of chicken, fish, or beef by any means. Rather they pull out the beef as a last resort when folks look like they’ll go to a different restaurant. Or the pull out the beef when others have discovered how satisfying it is at another restaurant.
That is why many Latin mass folks get angry, bitter, feel persecuted (because often they are and by their own Pastor), and marginalized. That is why I use the analogy of the Good Samaritan to describe many an Independent Chapel and the SSPX (Not Sedevecantism). Because it is precisely the attitude of ‘getting on with business down the road’ that enables the Priests and Levites to ignore their own dying sheep…. or at least treat them as troublemakers/obstacles instead of earnest and faithful souls.
That is also why this supposed rediscovery of the Rosary, Eucharistic Adoration, and days of fast and abstinence rings so – you, don’t say. No kidding. Because these practices/teachings have always borne fruit. Real fruit. That is why there is such resentment against those who poo pooed them in the past and/or behave as if theirs is some brand new discovery of today.
to C&H cont:
Much like the victims of the grotesque pedophile scandal, I’d say I’d like somewhat of an admission of guilt from the Vatican. A mea culpa of, “Yes, we knew. We tried something different (like psychological approach and reassignment) and it didn’t work.”
I’m not speaking on behalf of any group, C&H, just myself. But sadly there is no law suit that can be brought against Holy Mother Church for the spiritual sins of those entrusted with authority who misuse it. And that’s about where I’m at on the subject. I’d just like some honesty. Real honesty from the top. Not pats on the head and distraction while we get on with the show. The past matters a great deal, C&H, if it is left un-confessed and un-repented. One cannot gloss over it without tremendous fall out.
Thanks again for ASKING, C&H. God bless!
The idea is moral relativism and it is evil.
What I mean is, there may be an occasion when stealing could be justified but not all sins are like that. Some, like abortion, adultery, homosexual sex are intrinsic evils and are grave sins under all circumstances and for all reasons. If done with full knowledge and full consent of the will, they are mortal sins. Heresy and schism are also gravely sinful. There is no circumstance or reason which can render them not sinful.
The reality is false obedience and that is evil.
Yes, Anonymous, there may be an occasion when stealing could be justified. So if one can justify stealing, how could one not justify or at the very least understand when Catholics resist being stripped of their rightful patrimony under the threat of calling schism/heresy.
Especially when the one’s doing the stealing are seen to seemingly toss the proverbial doughnut in the street to be smooshed on a dare. Simply because ‘they’ can. Those accused are simply reacting to the visible reality of seeing their children and themselves starve. Often at the behest of those controlling the pastry, because they’ve decided there will only be dry rice cakes from now on. While at the same time advertising and having a written charter statement that says doughnuts, custard filled and filling.
And when the food being offered is that fullness which the Church has always offered, it is even more difficult to brand these supposedly heretical/schismatic Churches as poisoning the Faithful.
For it is the heresy that is introduced by ambiguity that is robbing Holy Mother Church of Her children. Those Traditional Catholics falsely accused of schism/heresy would have no leg to stand on if that were not so.
I pray God for unity in Truth as it is His gift and not of our making.
Ann Malley, I agree with C & H, as well as the other posters. I myself do not like the false modernism which has crept into the Church and am not afraid to speak up about it. Per your rational, however, it would seem that I am in grave error by staying there. As would be the Pope himself!
Tracy makes an excellent point. Its like that expression that goes “don’t leave Peter(the Rock) because of Judas( the traitor)”….
for those that don’t get it, ask me and ill explain….
Tracy,
Nobody is intimating that you are committing grave error. You know yourself. You also know enough to recognize the false modernism as opposed to one who, through no malice whatsoever, will be swept away in its inherent ambiguity. Or at the very least tempted against holding fast to Truth. (That is why so many Catholics voted in such a pro-death administration right here in our own country. Confusion. Obfuscation. Growing of the gray area.)
As to the Holy Father, his is a huge job. That said, it is incumbent upon him to guard and relay the fullness of the Faith. And the knives are out all around. Knives that have been emboldened specifically by the false modernism which has crept into the Church. But those who guard Her are far from blameless as they were the very gatekeepers who lowered the defenses. Much like in the Pedophile Scandal, THEY KNEW. And they trained others to maintain that momentum, that of pastoral ambiguity.
But if ambiguity worked, why the call for the new evangelization? And an evangelization of what precisely? What the Church has always taught.
So now what? Can the Pope swing the bus back around on a dime? No. Faithful will fling out the windows – much like they did with the freakish redirect that changed the mass and tradition. The prudent approach is to slowly redirect the bus while calming the passengers who can see the change in scenery out the window.
To clarify, Tracy (I get ahead of myself)
My beef is with those inside the bus shouting at those who are outside the bus, those who are helping point out the right road and graveling the tires that is, that they are bad because they’re not inside the bus. Kind of like shouting down a sailor for not being ‘inside’ the boat when he’s at the top of the mast replacing a blown sail. No, it isn’t the safest place at the top of the mast, but somebody’s got to go up there. And, no, it’s usually not the Captain either. The chain of command argument doesn’t necessarily come into play either as often those on deck need to ‘think’ on their own and engage action with regard to the primary directive – don’t let the ship sink. The Spirit moves where He wills to safeguard the ship despite the passengers who might scream, “Don’t go up there. The Captain didn’t say you should do that. Get down!”
That is why the infamous Anonymous comes across as ungrateful, uncharitable and blind to the grace he/she has received in his/her attacks. There is no sight or acknowledgement of the efforts of others.
He/she condemns the Society as inevitably leading to heresy/schism as if there is no hope/grace to be had. IOW: Painting a bleak one sided argument. That is why I pointed out that the same bleak, one sided argument could be used to say that all those surrounded by modernism are doomed to be modernist Catholics.
And as you demonstrate, Tracy, that is patently false.
The point Tracy made was this, Abeca:
“…Per your (me) rational, however, it would seem that I am in grave error by staying there. As would be the Pope himself!”
I have never advocated that Tracy or you were in grave error. Quite the opposite as, I believe, as I have thanked you both for being such strong souls. Not easy in the current climate of the Church. If I haven’t done so, I do so now. Good job and Deo gratias!
I also have never advocated that any leave the ‘Barque,’ but rather I take issue with those who erroneously/hypocritically attack the SSPX as being schismatic and heretical for wanting nothing more than to defend the fullness of the Faith in word and teaching.
Much like the admission from BX16 that the TLM was never abrogated, I would that the Holy See to come out clearly – in word and ACTION – to demonstrate that the fullness of the Truth will not be shunted to the corner by a Bishop’s decree (like Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament) or changed.
It’s the pregnant pause of the last 50 + years that I take issue with. As if the hierarchy were bent on bottom up leadership, letting tradition and modernism duke it out, instead of plowing ahead with Truth for fear of offending or perhaps getting crucified.
God bless you, Abeca. Keep up the good fight!
I will continue to pray for the SSPX. They do need to reunite with Christ’s church still.
Thank you for your prayers, Abeca:)
Your welcome Ann M, thank you for your prayers too.
You are an honest soul, I appreciate your honesty.
The Church used the Traditional Latin Mass for hundreds of years. Now, in 2014, Steve Phoenix says that it’s a problem. His statement is either a joke or a lack of rational thought process.
It was sarcasm, John Feeney. Steve Phoenix is no fool.
Looking back during St. Ambrose times, during the Council of Trent and even today…..we are facing crises in the church due to human sins.
I know many born later on after the Vatican II and there are many who are doing good work as God commands them. Catholic Answers has helped educate many on the abuses that were permitted in Holy Mass, EWTN also has helped in many ways, etc etc……The list goes on.
Thank you Ann.
Anytime :)
Can someone provide a cogent argument against the ordination of women? As far as I can tell, even the Church is on pretty weak ground there.
If the only arguments for an all male priesthood is that Jesus happened to be male, or that the Church emerged from a patriarchal society and is now immutably mired in tradition for its own sake, it’s maybe time to reexamine that.
It’s in the Bible in one of Saint Paul’s Epistles. Read your Bible.
Saint Paul. Of course. Women can never be ordained, as that would involve the disgraceful act of allowing them to speak. (1 Cor 14) or worse yet, teach (1 Tim 2:12).
Saint Paul requires a contextual reading. He was a misogynist, homophobe, apologist for slavery, and generally socially backward, but his role is a historical and anthropological one. He was a second-generation evangelist, zealot, and administrative figure, not a prophet or firsthand witness to Jesus.
Without him, there might not be a Church today, but that doesn’t mean that he had any profound (or divine) insight on sexual politics.
Siollan, there is the choice of what a Saint told us and what a Modernist (you) tells us. I’ll stick with the saint. Let us know when you’re canonized.
Saint Paul was never canonized.
Siollan now I know why you resist..wow…you are something else. I wish Skai was here or even Rick Delano, they reasoned so well, they would have you on your toes with their reasoning expertise…what I mean is that they knew how to convey well and correct the heretical points of view that kept popping up through many posts.
You forgot that he couldn’t even stay on his horse, and he had a pretty bad reputation on ships too.
Valid observations, YFC, which is why I’m thinking it would be the charitable thing to lay off the Paul bashing :)
Siollan, Saint Paul was a saint. You’re not. You obviously hate Saint Paul. Are there any other Saints that you hate?
Thank you John Feeney for your wonderful observations…..what else can we conclude from Siolan’s comments….
haha YFC are you speaking ill of your self again?
The Holy Spirit is the Author of Scripture.
Anonymous thank you for reminding people that. It is an important reminder. God bless you for our charity.
Again you come at the question of Faith from a cultural/historical/nationality viewpoint instead of that of a believer, Siollan.
You discount St. Paul. Okay. What of the New Testament would you hold to be true? Anybodies? With the view you propose, you couldn’t accept any of Christ’s words or the commandments because they were handed down by a swarm of misogynists, homophobe, apologists for slavery, and generally socially backward men. All products of their time.
What you are seemingly blind to in your analysis is that you are merely a product of your time, too. You only hold the so-called advanced opinions you do because of the environment in which you live (in addition to the Catholic name you treat more like a nationality.)
So you are an avowed homophile. You accept the cultural shift because your being Catholic is not based in belief. (No slam, just observation.) That being said, you do have a line that will be crossed one day. At least, I hope so.
Think about it. If the age of consent was lowered by vote or popular opinion, would you adopt the position of a pedophile? Not necessarily an abuser, but one who promoted the deep seated desires/objective reality of those attracted to children? Would you defend the pedophile’s need to express their sexuality freely?
Perhaps you would. Perhaps you wouldn’t. Perhaps if you had children of your own, you really may not. But who knows if one is forever swayed by the pressure of shifting cultural influence. But that is not Faith, Siollan.
Ann: Your point about the age of consent makes no sense to me. But child brides (even in the single digits) were common and socially acceptable in classical Judaic, Byzantine, medieval Christendom, and even early American eras. Age of consent at 16 is a thoroughly modern (c. 19th century) phenomenon. Modern progress.
I wonder if you’re aware that you’re a product of your time as well. It’s the only time you have. I don’t see any issue with that at all.
What of the New Testament do I hold to be true? All of it. But there’s an inverted pyramid of relevance to it:
1. The Gospels, and anything relating to the life and teachings of Jesus and disciples. (obviously, core teachings)
2. Epistles and material relating to the formation of the early Church (which require historicism, as they’re heavily inflected with culture, and if you’re unable to separate the rigid culture from the fluid belief system, the entire enterprise risks collapse)
3. The convoluted mess of psychedelic eschatology at the end.
I don’t discount Paul. But the ‘handed down’ part is right… The shape the Church ultimately took has possibly more to do with the influence of Paul than that of Jesus. That’s important to discern when major contemporary issues affecting the Church’s viability (entrenched and obsolete ideas of sex and gender, for instance) trace to a second generation figure whose ostensible role was to convey a message.
Thank you for saying, Siollan, that you believe:
“… The shape the Church ultimately took has possibly more to do with the influence of Paul than that of Jesus. That’s important to discern when major contemporary issues affecting the Church’s viability (entrenched and obsolete ideas of sex and gender, for instance) trace to a second generation figure whose ostensible role was to convey a message.”
Discounting Paul means that you discount the New Testament, or at least major portions of it. You seem to believe that the Church needs to update what now is entrenched and obsolete ideas of sex and gender.
These issues are not obsolete, Siollan. And the viability of the Church lies squarely in honoring the deposit of Faith and Truth She has been given. Not pretending that people in another age didn’t face much of the same sexual temptation we do today.
God bless you in your quest.
Ann Maloy you answer people here so eloquently. You convey your thoughts very well. Whether one agree’s or not, you do a pretty good job at conveying. I enjoy your replies to those who resist the church and it’s truths. I hope that it moves their hearts in the right direction. God bless you for your usage of those gifts.
Abeca, I certainly agree with you! I also appreciate Ann Malley’s beautiful replies. God bless you Ann Malley for using those eloquent gifts to serve God and may God bless you too Abeca! : )
Thank you Catherine…you too…. : )
Thank you Abeca and Catherine. I pray God to reward you both for your prayers, support, and love of Truth.
Did I say I discounted Paul? I think I merely said it’s fairly easy to determine where Paul diverted and embellished in the process of conveying. You seem incapable of distinguishing between message and messenger. Probably the greatest “shift in cultural influence” in two millennia occurred in the first century.
And you’re selectively embracing Paul anyway. Do you cover your hair at all times? Are you silent and submissive in the presence of men? Are you mindful always of your secondary status? Are you aware that your continued voice in discussion is disgraceful given your assigned set of chromosomes?
I think I’m defining the viability of the Church differently than you. I get the sense that you see viability as ritualistic, cultural, aesthetic and linguistic preservation of some moment (1962, or maybe 1296) that you see as somehow superior. I see viability as the capacity to reach and influence. What’s a messianic religion if it withers to an arcane cultural relic at odds with contemporary life? If that occurs due to the influence of intermediary figures, is it not their fault?
Thanks for offering your take on faith, though. You’v convinced me to hate the gays and treat moment as pets. See you in heaven!
I don’t know if I’ll see you in heaven or not, Siollan. I hope so. That said, yes, I do take a traditional approach to family hierarchy and cover my head in Church – not out of a sense of being a second class citizen, but because I respect the men present at mass (that is I respect their desire to focus on God and I respect their God given nature of “dang-that-woman-looks-good”.) I have no desire to call attention to myself at mass as all glory should be given to God at mass. (Truth be told, my Norse ancestry has given my girls and I a rather glorious set of genes in the Pantene hair department. So covering that up isn’t such a bad idea if one wants to give glory to God or not pose a distraction.)
I also do not take undue offense at the position in which I’ve been given. That of heart of the home and helpmate, not Captain. I don’t take offense at a man behaving as a man. Or a woman behaving in a traditionally female fashion. (For all the talk of what comes naturally by progressives, I find their dismissal of actual nature to be an real obstacle.)
As to The Church’s viability being ensconced in the ability to reach and influence – what ability is there to reach and influence when the positions of the Church are changed willy nilly to suit an increasingly confused world.
to Siollan cont:
That’s why your so called acceptance of St. Paul while undermining him at the same time is counterproductive to belief.
As for ‘hating’ the gays and treating women as ‘pets’, that’s your own insecurity projecting itself onto me and others. Embracing reality and acknowledging that one isn’t necessarily playing the lead in the play doesn’t mean that the play is a waste and/or every actor doesn’t play a critical role. That’s more of a Diva syndrome, Siollan.
God bless.
Sure. Paul said so in the bible, clearly. More, Jesus had 12 opportunities to ordain a woman. Each time He refused, and ordained a Man instead. 12 times. 12 is a biblical number, representing the 12 tribes of Israel and “perfection in government”. The Church, which is the Body of Christ (see bible again), cannot go against Christ. Get it?
So why don’t we have only 12 priests?
And if we are sticking to the strict letter of the epistles, why don’t we have female deacons?
“So why don’t we have only 12 priests?”
For the same reason we don’t have only 12 Catholics: Jesus wanted His Salvation preached to the ends of the earth. It should be coming to a town near you soon!
There you go. Two strains of heavy contextualism. Biblical numerology is about as abstract a a reading you can undertake, and assigning a literal meaning to the circumstance of the 12 Apostles sex is interpretive, even if it’s longstanding… and it’s outmoded. It’s the product of a gender-stratified world that no longer exists.
An alternate reading would be: the Apostles (as well as Jesus) needed to be male in order to have the necessary social capital to accomplish what they needed to in the place and time they existed… Also, in ordaining the Apostles, Jesus was essentially handing them a death sentence. All but one (save Judas) were martyred.
Actually you are wrong Siollan, John the Apostle stayed with Our Blessed Mother until her Assumption, he died a natural death
You’re right. John was the only one who died a natural death. Judas was suicide, the other 10 were martyred. So if being a disciple had a 91.7% chance of meeting a violent end, that could conceivably have been a factor in choosing males.
And you believe, in light of current cultural trends, that potential martyrdom is no longer part of the risk factor in becoming a priest? Good grief, Siollan.
That said, you sound more like Benedict Cumberbach everyday with your auto-analysis and stats. Makes for a swift pace Sherlock Holmes drama, but not a sound Catholic.
Siollan, interesting how you personally interpret the words and actions of Jesus.
You are most sexiest regarding martyrdom. Women were martyred as well.
Throughout the Bible, God is God the “Father”, and He loves each of us with a Father’s love.
The Blessed Mother Mary was the closest to Jesus, and He did not make her an Apostle – one of the 12. In the Bible it is an honor to be a good woman.
It was not necessary that God chose a woman to be the Mother of God.
God could have come to us any way he choose since He can do anything.
He choose a woman which elevates all us females. There is no greater honor than to be the Mother of God.
Everything we do, whether good or evil, goes down into our unconscious mind… So at the end of every human life there will be pulled out of our subconscious or unconscious mind the record of every thought, word and deed. This will be the basis of our judgment. Archbishop Fulton Sheen
They will all have to answer to our Lord for this scandal!
I love Santa Clara University and ourJESUIT Bishop of Rome, things are looking up!!
Just like you love Modernism!
There is that saying from holy scriptures…don’t’ let you right hand know what your left hand is doing. So the homosexuals who love the Pope for what they perceive of him, don’t really know what he is really up to…..the enemy must not know, in order to save their soul. Remember a saint once said “it’s about saving souls not about who is right or wrong”
TEM, I would love to know what makes you so fond of Santa Clara University and the Jesuit Bishop of Rome :)
Tracy you are so clever. hmmm if I can guess, I bet it has something to do with homosexuality?
Santa Clara advertises itself as “JESUIT and CATHOLIC”. It includes a Jesuit School of Theology located in Berkeley CA which advertises itself as “Ecclesiastical Faculty accredited by the Vatican Congregation of Catholic Education”.
Everyone should send copies of this article to the Diocese Bishop, Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco; to the US Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò in Washington DC; and to the Vatican.
Per the Code of Canon Law, the Diocese Bishop has the authority to allow or not allow them to use the name and advertise themselves as “Catholic”.
Allowing and giving known heretics and schismatics to speak on campus and giving them a stage to convert others violates ‘Ex-Corde-Ecclesiae’, Part II Norms and Grants: Article 2 #4; Article 4 #3; Article 5#2.
It appears by SCU’s web site that they do not use the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” as one of their required student texts in order that the Faith will be completely and accurately taught.
The CCC includes the Doctrine of the Faith in entirety.
” These, then, are the four elements which comprise the storehouse of memory which the Church hands down: the profession of faith, the celebration of the sacraments, the path of the ten commandments, and prayer. The Church’s catechesis has traditionally been structured around these four elements;
this includes the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is a fundamental aid for that unitary act with which the Church communicates the entire content of her faith: “all that she herself is, and all that she believes”. – Pope Francis (Encyclical Letter LUMEN FIDEI, 2013)
Do not attend or financially support any College or University that perports to be “Catholic” if it does not use the CCC as one of their required texts for Freshmen and Sophomores.
Uh, Archbishop Cordileone is not the man in charge down in Santa Clara, so why would one write to him?
Bishop Patrick McGrath is the Bishop of San Jose, where this college is located.
Good luck with writing to Bishop McGrath.
Support the ordination of women, get excommunicated. Molest a child or protect child abusers, get promoted.
PJY, your post reminds me of what the Vatican did to — excuse me, FOR — Cardinal Law.
After all his crimes against children, he was given a basilica in Rome, a post there, and of course a salary from the money WE donate to Holy Mother Church.
The man should have been sent to work in some humble parish in South America, where they really need priests. Then maybe he would have been able to do penance for his crimes against children, rather than living the good life in Rome.
There seems to be an overall negation of the need for penance, Suzanne. And from the top down. That is a Protestant spirit as – unlike modern translations of the Bible would have us believe – prayer *and* fasting is required to drive out certain demons. Penance. Demonstrated contrition.
That is why, to me, it isn’t so much the Pedophilia scandal that is the main issue in the dissolution of Faith among the Faithful, but rather the hierarchy’s ‘worldly’ approach to reparation. Paying fines, psychoanalysis, public apology, and even to some extent defrocking.
If the Church advocated for real penance as She used to – the very same you ascribe to in your post – there might be more belief in the contrition of Church leadership and belief in the BELIEF of Church leadership that one must do penance before God instead of slink off to a corner and get a day job. As if the only authority one need fear crossing is that of State law.
The school calls him a voice of conscience, but he is just the voice of rebellion and dissent. If women were to become priests it would not be long before you have a pregnant priest. It would just happen, because all humans are sinners. Then there would be women priests on contraception or horrifically a woman priest who had an abortion. I sure there are priests who have paid for an abortion and contraception. How much more could we complicate our faith and twist what priest are suppose to represent. In persona Christi, not.
Wonder why the Diocese of San Jose doesn’t protest or give guidance in this matter. Their silence probably means they agree with Santa Clara University. If this is a Catholic school, I am a monkey’s uncle.
In the Catholic Church, the phrase “female priest” is about as accurate as the phrase “male nun.”
People may THINK they “have a call” from God, but this “call” needs to be discerned by the Church they wish to serve — it’s not a right, not a private revelation, not a “thing” they own like a car.
This is precisely why the Holy See in more recent years has also been forced to make it clear that:
— a male priest who goes through a sex-change operation can no longer be a priest.
— a man who goes through a sex-change operation cannot become a Religious Sister.
— a woman who goes through a sex-change operation cannot become a priest.
The sad thing is that so MANY people do their own thing (like this “female ordination ceremony”) and then expect the world to accept their action as valid.
With this kind of reasoning, I can issue my own passports, driving licenses, etc.
How can a supposedly “Catholic” university welcome a dissident laicized and excommunicated man like Roy Bourgeois and give him kind of “bully pulpit” from which he can continue to cause strife and discord without giving it a second thought. This is not about intellectual freedom or open ended academic discourse. No….this is rank rebellion and an affront to the Catholic Church
Father Lahey, you are right on target!
I know you are the pastor of St Andrew Parish in Daly City, and that you are no rebel when it comes to the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church.
If only ALL OF OUR CHURCH LEADERS were of like mind, rather than confusing the faithful by inviting such public dissent-mongers into our schools and universities!!!
Will this NEVER END???
I personally am so sick and tired of this garbage that is allowed to go on…..
Holy Father Francis we need you!!!
The tensions that developed after the Council are not surprising to those who know the whole history of the Church. It is a historical fact that whenever there is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit as in a general council of the Church, there is always an extra show of force by the anti-Spirit or the demonic. Even at the beginning, immediately after Pentecost and the descent of the Spirit upon the apostles, there began a persecution and the murder of Stephen. If a general council did not provoke the spirit of turbulence, one might almost doubt the operation of the third Person of the Trinity over the assembly. Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
Amen, Siollan.
Traditions are like poker hands. Some you should hold. Some you should fold as soon as possible. The art is discerning which hand you have.
Mike Magee, apparently you haven’t read St. Paul’s Epistles. If it’s a choice between a Saint and a Modernist I’ll go with the Saint everytime!
mike magee I wonder if you truly know what you are agreeing with. Perhaps you are not informed so well. Amen to Siollan??? almost made me fall off my chair…..should we take you out of your ignorance? hmmmm
Elizabeth, I’m Elizabeth M. and we are of like mind.
The Catholic Church has done its homework and carefully reviewed it – and a Male Priesthood Is the Catholic Way.
Radical Gender Feminists Misandrists (those hateful to Men & Boys, Masculinity and Normal Heterosexuality) Fill the Faculty at these allegedly ‘Catholic’ Institutions – and work to Destroy the Church they Hate so much – using Catholic Funds to pay their Huge Salaries.
The ‘Womyn-Pest’ movement is just part of the pogrom. They Could go and set up a soap box on a street corner and see if they can attract more than fleas & flies as followers – or as with certain Episcopal congregations Chase the Congregation Out in to the streets (meeting under a tarp in a parking lot0 -and ‘our Turkey Baster Creationist’ Courts let them keep the building and bank account.
But it is Inside the Catholic Church where they feel they can do the Most Evil – so there they perch, like so many Resident Harpies of Anti-Catholic Hate.
BTW – The ‘Trannies in the Kiddies Toilet Bill’ (Privacy Act) will come up for a vote in CA, unless the same ‘Turkey Baster Creationist’ Imperial Courts shut that act of Conscience down too…
For a look at what Churchill referred to as “A new dark age, made more sinister by the lights of perverted science, Check Out:
Our Crazed Sexuality Standards By Mona Charen https://townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/2014/01/14/our-crazed-sexuality-standards-n1778398/page/full
Meanwhile, the California bishops are calling for prayers for rain . . . You couldn’t make this stuff up.
Of COURSE they are praying for rain — we’re in a drought.
When you are in need, you pray.
Yes, Suzanne, the CA Bishops are praying for rain while letting myriad souls fall into Hell for lack of solid teaching. Not to discount those Bishops who are seriously trying to do their job – that of saving souls.
It’s just odd that the Bishops would be so concerned about drought when typically natural disasters were viewed as a punishment for an unfaithful faithful. Like Our Lord is sending the message but the Bishops who should understand the cipher have up and lost the code key.
Would everyone please stop call this poor excuse for a man, Father. He is not a
priest. Wonder if he ever really and truly was one in his heart?
‘The University’s website calls [Roy Bourgeois] “a prominent voice of conscience within Catholicism for decades.” ‘—the ‘voice of conscience”/”freedom of conscience” argument, stemming from the post-Vat II free interpretation of the V2 document, Dignitatis Humanae, “Declaration on Religious Freedom:” Par. 2: “This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly…”
People are free to choose Heaven or Hell.
Universities that advertise themselves “CATHOLIC” are not free to support heretics and schismatics.
Running on Fumes
The following episode of Church Militant TV points to the ‘Spiritual Suicide’ being pushed by the Gaystapo in the Church – and particularly the pathetic farce of Academentia…
Particularly the need to Save the Souls of Young Catholics – who are targeted by so much evil, even at ostensibly ‘Catholic’ Universities.
https://www.churchmilitant.tv/daily/?today=2014-01-17
Jan 20, 2014, Siollan comments: “Saint Paul requires a contextual reading. He was a misogynist, homophobe, apologist for slavery, and generally socially backward,…” Siollan, presenting the classic radical feminist deconstructive view of Scripture, charges that essentially Scripture is patriarchal, misogynist and malignant, and so wishes to re-write or at least re-interpret them for a modern age, in order to push the women’s ordination agenda. I assume that Siollan as a Vat 2-Catholic knows that Dei Verbum (DV) defines the source of Catholic teaching to be Scripture and Tradition, but also that tradition is an equal co-anchor of the sacred deposit of Faith. So, for example, “Hail Mary, Full of Grace” refers to the Immaculate Conception, the interpretation developed by Duns Scotus and finalized in 1854. But the Immaculate Conception is not specified exactly in Scripture. So not all teaching is written alone in Scripture (DV n. 9 “Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed.’) but that Tradition supplies the balance. (Tradition BTW also canonized “St Paul”—not a formal papal act.) So, why there is no female ordination is evident because of the solid testimony of Scripture and Tradition. Yet this is all irrelevant to Siollan because a “new hermeneutic” must be applied that rewrites Scripture and serves the her desired post-modern age reality. Siollan is free to do so. None of the original Protestant reformers however attempted to impose women’s ordination— because Luther, Cranmer, Wycliffe, Hus, Calvin and all the others knew there was no basis for imparting orders to women in the Christian canon of faith. No matter. If St Paul is a beast, one can make oneself an angel of a “new revelation”. (Could it be however the angel Moroni?)
I fail to understand why the Modernists who condemn the teachings of the Church and hate Saints stay in the Church. Maybe to destroy the Church and then turn it into The Church of Anytthing Goes.
Thank you. Love that analysis. You’re off a bit, but perspective is well-founded and informed. I didn’t know the Hail Mary was so recent. I’m probably post-Feminist, and not even female, but absolutely in favor of interpretation of Scripture that allows it to reach, rather than alienate, a broad population.
Your point about the Reformation doesn’t really work, as it was still a good three centuries ahead of any kind of real gender equality movement. A lot of what resulted from the Reformation (Calvin’s Geneva and Puritans, for instance) were reactionary and more socially backward than the prevailing culture of the time.
You’re fairly close otherwise, though. I think my point was more that Paul imparted subjectivity and a cultural point of view (incidentally) in the process of conveying an essential message. The fact that he left a paper trail that ultimately became part of the Biblical Canon (obv., a greater form of canonization than papal decree) doesn’t make him immune from scrutiny as a person, and incidental progenitor of culture.
If there is no capacity to determine what tradition is simply adherence to a repetition of pattern, even if obsolete and largely arbitrary in origin, because the repetition itself is unassailable, then you risk careening into irrelevance.
We live in a world now where institutionalized patriarchy is nearly universally rejected. I can’t see the Church surviving more than a few more generations in that mode… Can you?
Siollan, it is not whether or not you can see it, but rather the promise that Our Lord gave to protect Her and the ‘Truth’ that She contains.
That is why the following:
“…We live in a world now where institutionalized patriarchy is nearly universally rejected. I can’t see the Church surviving more than a few more generations in that mode… Can you?”
is so off base when looking to the survival of Holy Mother Church. It is not dependent upon ‘man’…. or ‘woman’ for that matter.
God bless.
St. Louis de Montfort on the Hail Mary:
The Most Blessed Trinity revealed the first part of it to us and the latter part was added by Saint Elizabeth who was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Holy Mother Church gave us the conclusion in the year 430 when she condemned the Nestorian heresy at the council of Ephesus and defined that the Blessed Virgin is truly the Mother of God. At this time she ordered us to pray to Our Lady under this glorious title by saying:
“Hail Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death.”
I didnt assume for a moment, Siollan, that you were a female (Siollan is an old Irish saint and bishop of Lismore in Hibernia, and usually a male name), but you presented the radical feminist critique of S. Paul and more generally of Scripture, namely that it is tainted by misogynism, acceptance of slavery, and that therefore scriptural revelation is a poisoned stream. (I also did not claim the Hail Mary was ‘recent’ as I think “one of the Anonymous clan” misinterpreted my point, but that it was the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception that is contained in the Hail Mary was declared in 1854; however this doctrine is not specifically found “in Scripture”. Duns Scotus certainly was earlier in history than 1854, his death being in 1308!)
More of a concern to me is the “contextualizing” (some would call it ‘historical criticism’) of Scripture that passes for interpretation today—it is actually judging the objective content based on “our [subjective] experience” now, and also as though we know so much more than the inspired writer.
It gets down to this: did the 3rd Person of the Trinity speak in the Scriptures, and therefore they should not be de-constructed, but accepted as they are? Or do we dis-assemble everything into its parts and then decide on the basis of constantly changing “scholars'” view of matters what these parts mean.
Just for example, up until the 1970′s, it was popular to point out that there was no evidence of Pontius Pilate existing, so we should just assume the trial of Jesus in the Passion narrative was a fable. Then, lo and behold, a dig at Caesarea Maritima in the 1970′s unearthed a facing stone that had been used in the reconstruction of an arena: the facing stone had an inscription and dedication that was original and inscribed by Pontius Pilate. So all the “expert Roman historians” were wrong. Maybe we need to (1) see the Holy Spirit as writing the Scriptures, as they are; and (2) maybe we need to realize they are “actual historical accounts” of a real event. Even some of our bishops seem to falter on these two points.
Some of our Bella Dodd bishops falter on many points!
Also, my point, Siollan, on the Protestant reformers, was that these were the most acutely-aware bible-based reformers of their day. Given their revolt against Tradition, as well as their egalitarian principles, they would have been the ones likely to develop a new tradition of women’s ordination. They didnt. Why? Because there was no basis for it, either in Scripture or in their version of Christian “tradition”. They had lines they would not cross. Today all of that is blasted apart by progressivist insanity: every line, no matter how well founded or sane, must be crossed.
The Catholic Church does not ordain women.
Some “pretend” groups using the name “Catholic” do, but they are not part of our fold — for example, the so-called “American Catholic Church” and others who mislead the faithful by offering to perform weddings on a dock, for two men, etc.
I do wish the Holy See had some sort of patent for the word “Catholic” — it would make life much less confusing and bizarre.
These Radical Gender Feminist / Gaystapo Pogroms permeate the pathetic farce of Academentia like fluoride in the water, and provide Big Money for Misandry (Hatred of Men & Boys, Masculinity & Normal Heterosexuality) as The Tenure Track…
SEE
Jail For UC Davis Embezzler
Former UC Davis official Jennifer Beeman was sentenced on Thursday to 180 days in jail and five years probation
Beeman Pled no contest to two felony counts of embezzlement and falsifying accounts. Neither charge involved her falsification of campus sexual assault statistics
Beeman “significantly over-reported the number of forcible sex offenses” For 16 years Beeman headed the UC Davis Campus Violence Prevention Program (CVPP)
UC Davis officials would not tell CalWatchdog whether the university had disciplined or censured Beeman over the falsified statistics. She remained in her job
By K. LLOYD BILLINGSLEY CalWatch 6/6/11
https://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4261%3Aucd-official-cops-plea-in-embezzlement-case-faces-probation&Itemid=100
See Also: Former CASA Director Pleads Guilty to Four Felony Charges, Receives Three Years
Why continue referring to Santa Clara as a Catholic University?
At this point it has evolved to that as an anti-Catholic institution.