Sunday, June 10, 2012


Click twice on video to go to full screen:

Progressives in liberal politics or radical progressives in the Church usually resort to emotional arguments to get their way even when it is clear that a sober critique of positions is the only way to go devoid of emotionalism. For example for those radicals in the Church who promote a revamping of Catholic sexual morality by tossing out natural law and two thousand years of Scripture and Tradition, the appeal is to the emotions, such as compassion, dialogue, empathy, feelings and a more populist approach to morality, which usually ends up in traditional immorality.

I think the approach I describe above is more "feminine" in nature than the more masculine approach of the hierarchy and straight forward Catholic teaching on morality. Pastoral theology in general is more "feminine" than doctrine taken at face value. All of this reminds me of the book, "Men From Mars; Women Are From Venus." One needs this perspective to understand the current fights in the Church over morality and pastoral sensitivity (even the word sensitivity is feminine, isn't it?)

For example, most parents who have homosexual children love their children despite their sexual orientation or any immorality associated with sex, homosexual or heterosexual. But this love is then used as a springboard to prevent the Church's hierarchy and those who catechize based upon sound doctrine from stating the Church's official positions on sexual morality. This tactic then holds hostage those who accept the Church's teaching from giving a clear, concise presentation of those teachings out of fear that these clear and unambiguous teachings might create anger toward the church from parents of sexually active children and from the adult children themselves stemming from the clever hermeneutic that the mean old men in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church are denigrating and bashing homosexual children who are active sexually or even heterosexual children who are active sexually. The real fear that is instilled in orthodox Catholics by radicals in the Church, such as the leadership of the LCWR is that somehow the orthodox minded are now bigots promoting violence and prejudice toward the illicitly sexually active of the Church!

This brings us to the masses of good sisters in general. One large group of Religious Women is under the umbrella of the Vatican recognized "Leadership Conference of Women Religious" LCWR. A Vatican study of this organization and its "doctrines and leadership" shows in a very critical and perhaps unpastoral way the doctrinal ambiguities of this umbrella group and also legitimate doctrinal concerns.

But what has the progressive, bleeding heart segment of the Catholic Church done? They have shifted the discussion away from legitimate concerns about a small group that provides leadership to Women Religious Orders to a broader coalition of sisters to the grassroots sisters themselves in all the congregations represented and not just to the living sisters today, but to the sisters of yesteryear and made this doctrinal assessment by the Vatican into a bashing of all sisters by the mean old men in the Vatican. This shows you how disingenuous radical progressive Catholics can be and the smoke screens they use to deflect everyone from the actual and legitimate concerns of the Church about LCWR or any other radical liberal group in the Church!

Now you are seeing prayer rallies for the good sisters springing up here in there in our country, a political ploy to divide and conquer the "mean old men" in the Vatican. It really is sad what progressives do in the Church in this regard.

Bishop Leonard Blair of the Toledo diocese, who was appointed in April along with Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain and Springfield, Ill., Bishop Thomas Paprocki to oversee the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), made the comments in a column in the Toledo diocesan newspaper Friday:

"A key question posed by the doctrinal assessment had to do with moving forward in a positive way. Would the LCWR at least acknowledge the CDF’s doctrinal concerns and be willing to take steps to remedy the situation? "

Regarding the response of LCWR leaders to announcement of the Vatican's move, Blair writes:

"The response thus far is exemplified by the LCWR leadership’s choice of a New Age Futurist to address its 2012 assembly, and their decision to give an award this year to Sr. Sandra Schneiders, who has expressed the view that the hierarchical structure of the church represents an institutionalized form of patriarchal domination that cannot be reconciled with the Gospel.

"This situation is now a source of controversy and misunderstanding, as well as misrepresentation. I am confident, however, that if the serious concerns of the CDF are accurately represented and discussed among all the sisters of our country, there will indeed be an opening to a new and positive relationship between women religious and the Church’s pastors in doctrinal matters, as there already is in so many other areas where mutual respect and cooperation abound."

Read Bishop Leonard Blair's complete article, "Reality check: The LCWR, CDF and the doctrinal assessment" BY PRESSING HERE!



Gene W. (formerly Pin) said...

These ol' gals are having a hissy fit...LOL!

Templar said...

If they REALLY believe what they say they believe, I hope they stick to their guns and get martyred for their cause. I think they're wrong of course, but if you're not willing to pay the price for your beliefs you're a coward as well as a heretic.

At least Luther had the hutzpah to go it alone and leave his judgement to the Almighty.

ytc said...

I might just point one thing out. While this is not an attack on individual congregations of women, and is only an attack on the superiors general, I must say, superiors general must be elected by the chapter of women and get of 50% of the vote. So at least half of women religious support this heretic business.

Militia Immaculata said...

I'm afraid I don't understand the first cartoon directly below the video (the one where the bishop has a crosier that has 4 "feet"). Anyone care to clarify for a simple mind like mine? Thanks!

Templar said...

I think MI that the cartoon is implying that the Bishops are old and feeble because. The cartoon is not terribly clear literally or figuratively.

James I. McAuley said...

Father Jim,

I am not registered over at Father Z`s, but there is a reference to Sister Farley`s book being used and cited by Prof Kiernan Scott. Scott is an ex Irish Franciscan Friar, who formerly taught at St. Bonaventure University when I was a student there in the late 1980s. Scott was married (maybe still is) to an ex nun. He was obcessed, per my wife who had him as a teacher for Christian marriage, with homosexual acts and harangued the students extesively that they were normal. So, he was doing these things long before Sister Farley`s book showed up..