Are they leading the way for Catholics throughout the world in this post-Catholic era? Time will tell.
I wonder what the pew-forum will say about this as it concerns the success of Vatican II changes that has led to this new springtime for the Church? The laity, as Vatican II teaches, has its expertise and witness in the secular world. Voting Catholic, one would think, is what Vatican II called Catholics to do as the secular is where they witness to their Catholic Faith.
Seems though they are now witnessing to their post-Catholic faith which is actually godless secularism.
18 comments:
Perhaps they did vote Catholic as they were taught it.
Kyrie eleison.
This should be a long-awaited wakeup call to those who believe in a "Reform of the Reform." It's not happening.
Instead, what we are witnessing is a near complete collapse into apostasy, which will result, in short order, in open persecution.
The few Catholics that remain and make it to the Triumph will then pick up the pieces, but they will restore, not reform.
Those who voted for gay marriage in Ireland were indoctrinated into the New Order religion. They are presently lost to the Church. The only way back is through chastisement, which will surely come.
Catholics have every reason to believe (not least of which is episcopal approval) that the Blessed Virgin appeared in Akita, Japan, during the 1970s and warned the world of the consequences of sin. It is time to start repeating those words far and wide, as we are witnessing their fulfillment before our very eyes:
The third message on October 13, 1973, the actual anniversary of the final visions and miracle of Fatima is as follows: "As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before.
"Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by my Son.
"Each day, recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and the priests.
"The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, and bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their Confreres. The Church and altars will be vandalized.
"The Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.
"The demon will rage especially against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them."
DJR
And while an entire nation, that was at one time the most Catholic in the world, turns it's back on Christ, the pope is silent. The bishops for the most part are silent. They don't want to impose their religion on anybody. Would they be silent if there was a movement to allow slavery or racism or sexism?
The pope has raised his voice about the enviorment, he constantly calls up strangers in dioceses that have lawfully appointed bishop and interferes. It has never been a perogative of the bishop of Rome to interfere in diocesan matters unless there was confusion about the Faith. But certainly when an entire nation abandons the Catholic Faith justice demands the pope say SOMETHING. Isn't he auppossed to confirm the brethren in the faith? What is he doing, why is he silent? Could it be that Francis agreea with the people of Ireland? Silence gives consent according to St. Thomas More who gave his life in defense of marriage. Oh wait. We are now suppossed to have open diacussion about what marriage means, like it is open to discussion. What Rome is doing and not doing is shameful. Christ has been demied by Peter again.
I realise this is serious and not good. But for context I am not sure that anyone looks to Ireland for leadership in anything, certainly not compared to Italy and UK where, if I understand correctly, homosexuals have been allowed to marry for quite some time. If they are following anyone, it may be the Netherlands, Belgium, and the Scandinavian countries into irrelevancy. But that is the real path to Hell, anyway: non-challance.
Re: "The pope is silent"
"In points he’s made before in other settings, Pope Francis on Friday criticized what he called the “ideological colonization of the family,” language that many took as a reference to gay marriage, and also defended a previous pope who upheld the Church’s ban on contraception.
“The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life,” Francis said.
A Vatican spokesman confirmed Friday evening that, at least in part, the pope had gay marriage in mind."
The pope has said before that marriage is between a man and a woman, and has also defended Paul VI and his position on contraception on multiple occasions — including beatifying Pope Paul last October, the last step before sainthood.
In November 2014, for instance, Francis defended the traditional concept of marriage to a three-day Vatican conference.
The man/woman nature of marriage, he said, is “an anthropological fact … that cannot be qualified based on ideological notions or concepts important only at one time in history.”
All from CRUX Jan 16 2015
Re: "The bishops for the most part are silent"
A STATEMENT FROM Catholic bishops that it would be a “grave injustice” for same-sex marriage to proceed is being distributed to over 1,300 parishes throughout Ireland.
The missive was put together by the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference and seeks to inform members “in preparation for the debate which will inevitably unfold during the coming referendum.”
The 16-page document entitled “The Meaning of Marriage” argues that, “The union of marriage provides for the continuation of the human race and the development of human society. ”
The Journal 3 Dec 2014
Thanks for posting the pope's efforts. Pope Francis haters continue to spew calumny about him; certainly a mortal sin and disorder rivaling gay sex!
"Thanks for posting the pope's efforts. Pope Francis haters continue to spew calumny about him; certainly a mortal sin and disorder rivaling gay sex!"
Really Father. Is it a "minor mortal sin" as you once said or just a regular one?
And it has nothing to do with gay sex. It has to do with the denial of a sacrament. A sacrament estblished by Christ Himself.
I get the impression that you don't think what is happing as a "big deal".
Do you REALLY believe all the teachings of the Church or do you just like the idea of being considered special? Is it just the whole priest mystic......and newsflash for you, that mystic has long ago been trashed by you priests. So if you still hold that view it's all in your imagination.
And as for the pope, one, single solitary moment saying something about the idealogical colonization of the family. What the hell does that mean? And oh Father Lombardi said it in some part may have possibly reffered to gay marriage. My my what a strong defense of the Faith. Who is kidding who. We have a sick Church were the vast majority of it's members don't really believe what the Church teaches, laity and most definitely the clergy.
But really Father, do you REALLY believe everything themChurch teaches? Because if you did you wouldn't rationalze error.
I wonder when the campaign for that vote started, and also when the campaign against he Church began? I don't think this one can be blamed on Vatican 2, though I am sure those reforms were used to the Churches opponents best advantage. Catholic Ireland had to be viewed as a strategic high value target by those advancing the gay agenda, and those advancing that agenda are a worldwide organization. I am certain the same tactics will be used globally. I for one see that votes campaign beginning on the other side of the pond with the NYC Saint Patrick Day parade
Interestingly, Ireland is not in fact an “officially Catholic" country. A 2011 survey indicated that 83% of the population is “nominally Catholic” but the vast majority, it seems, are more “cultural Catholics” than religious Catholics and some of those who identify as Catholics do not even believe in God:
http://www.dochara.com/the-irish/facts/about-religion/
In this context a vote to approve same sex marriage in Ireland is perhaps no more surprising than it is in any other “Catholic” country that has approved same-sex marriage such as Spain did in 2006 although not in a referendum, a decision upheld by the Constitutional Court in 2012. Such results are evidence of the waning influence of the Roman Catholic Church in these countries but not necessarily of deep divisions over the issue among practicing Catholics much less of some perversion of Church teaching.
By the way I believe that same sex unions are still not permitted at the national level in Italy. Here is an interesting Wikipedia survey of the global situation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Italy
The problem is if Pope Francis appoints openly gay people to Vatican posts as he has been reported to have done, then he sends out a mixed message: do as I say not as I do.
"Who am I to judge". I have never heard a Pope make that such a loosely worded statement before. Don't they have a T-shirt for that now? Do the people of Ireland feel that in voting the way they have it's because of "Who are we to judge"?
Unfortunately, one can only assume either: The Pope believes what he says; he is confused or he has bad advice. Whatever the case, the Church is obviously in a much worse state than it has ever been since the Second Vatican Council.
I think RCG is right in that many people in Ireland probably voted as they were taught or as they think the Church now teaches and believes.
As DJR says the "Reform of the Reform" is not happening and, as Benedict XVI is on record as saying, the Church will become much smaller and more faithful - as DJR also says restored rather than reformed.
The fact that we have got to the stage where Catholic priests in England and the US have had to petition the Pope to uphold Church teaching on marriage says it all. Unheard of before this papacy.
Time to wake up those who have their heads in the sand - in fact not just their heads some seem to be buried up to the ankles in denial that something is seriously wrong.
Jan
Jan, And with all self-righteousness, you count yourself among the "much smaller and more faithful" Church, standing in the front of the Temple, announcing, "God, I thank you that I am not like other people - robbers, evildoers, adulterers - or even like this tax collector!"
And the Catholic Priests of England and the US have NOT "had to petition" the pope to uphold Church teaching. For polemical reasons, they CHOSE to do so to make a public point.
Anonymous, 12.2, I don't consider it self-righteous to stand up for the Church's teaching. It is a personal choice on your part whether you do or don't. What is the political motive you speak of on behalf of the priests? When can you recall priests ever having to petition a Pope asking him to speak up for Church teaching?
Jan
Jan said...<<<""Who am I to judge". I have never heard a Pope make that such a loosely worded statement before. Don't they have a T-shirt for that now? Do the people of Ireland feel that in voting the way they have it's because of "Who are we to judge"?">>>
Jan, the transcript (such as the one on the Vatican Web site) that featured Pope Francis' "Who am I to judge" response to a reporter's question reflected the Church's teachings in regard to homosexuality.
During his answer in question, Pope Francis made the following clear:
-- An investigation of the priest in question (accused of sodomy) did not substantiate the claims against said priest.
-- Homosexual "lobbies" are bad for society.
-- A homosexual who seeks to reform his life, seeks the Lord in good will, repents then refrains from sin...put simply, "go and sin no more"...is a person who is not to be judged.
That was Pope Francis' context of his "Who am I to judge" comment.
The majority of news media outlets failed to have reported the above information or context of Pope Francis' statement in question.
Mark Thomas
Unfortunately, one can only assume either: The Pope believes what he says; he is confused or he has bad advice. Whatever the case, the Church is obviously in a much worse state than it has ever been since the Second Vatican Council.
I think RCG is right in that many people in Ireland probably voted as they were taught or as they think the Church now teaches and believes.
As DJR says the "Reform of the Reform" is not happening and, as Benedict XVI is on record as saying, the Church will become much smaller and more faithful - as DJR also says restored rather than reformed.
The fact that we have got to the stage where Catholic priests in England and the US have had to petition the Pope to uphold Church teaching on marriage says it all. Unheard of before this papacy.
Time to wake up those who have their heads in the sand - in fact not just their heads some seem to be buried up to the ankles in denial that something is seriously wrong.
Jan
May 24, 2015 at 8:27 AM
Mark, I qualified that by saying that unfortunately the Pope by saying "Who am I to judge" either means what he says or doesn't understand what he is saying or is being given bad advice. Pope Francis is not foolish, is he? Only a foolish man wouldn't realise that in making a statement like that to the media - particularly from a Pope - that it was going to be construed in the worst way imaginable by that media, particularly with regards to homosexuality and that statement "who am I to judge flashed around the world" and tell me who is going to jump on to the Vatican website and read the context of his statement?
And another thing - up until that point at least the Pope has always been considered the ultimate judge on earth. So in making that statement Pope Francis also undermined the papacy as he "The Pope" is no one to judge.
Fr Linus Clovis hits the nail on the head: "To the consternation of Catholics and the satisfaction of the world, Pope Francis, by word and action, has provoked many major controversies, the most egregious of them being the “Who am I to judge?” comment. This pontifical question instantly disarmed all those resisting the incursions of the gay lobby. The Holy Father failed to make the required distinctions, namely, that the Church does not judge persons but that she has the right and duty to judge their actions and teachings. The Church has passed no judgement of the personal morals of even arch-heretics, though she has certainly warned the faithful of the perniciousness of their teachings. In writing to the Corinthians, St. Paul himself sanctions this position: “But rather I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Drive out the wicked person from among you” (1 Cor. 5:11-13)."
Jan
Jan - You DO consider yourself among the "much smaller/more faithful" members of the Church, don't you? That's exactly the attitude of the Pharisee who stood by himself and gave thanks that he was not like others.
You write dismissively, self-righteously, of those who have "their head buried in the sand" because, self-righteously, you and your "smaller, more faithful Catholics" are the ones who REALLY "stand up for the Church's teachings."
And those who you consider to be among the "much larger" Church are, in your view, less faithful because they, unlike you, don't "stand up for the Church's teaching."
Yes, your finger-pointing and your accusation-making is self-righteousness.
No priest HAD to petition the pope to uphold the Church's teaching. They CHOSE to do it to make a polemical, political point. The political motive is clear - those who CHOSE to publicize this petition, and to THREATEN priests who chose not to sign - it meant to divide, not unite the Church. Their motivation is not fidelity, but partisan division.
Anonymous:
"They CHOSE to do it to make a polemical, political point. The political motive is clear - those who CHOSE to publicize this petition, and to THREATEN priests who chose not to sign - it meant to divide, not unite the Church. Their motivation is not fidelity, but partisan division."
What evidence can you present that the motivation of either some or all of those who signed the petition is partisan division? And that their motivation was "political" and meant to divide? By your blanket statement you are making serious accusations against All of those who signed the petition. Your own statement is polemical,inflammatory, and derogatory and, lacking any evidence to support what you say, could be considered calumnious.
"And those who you consider to be among the "much larger" Church are, in your view, less faithful because they, unlike you, don't 'stand up for the Church's teaching.' "
I don't know why there would be a problem with someone 'standing up for Church teaching'. The Deposit of the Faith is after all what has been given to us either directly by God Himself, or by others under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. That there is a problem today of those within the Church disobeying her teaching or wanting to change doctrine is nothing new . Neither is it new that there are those within the Church pointing that out. Go back and re-read St. Paul.
Anonymous 7.52 - you trot out the old, trite argument used against anyone who stands up for the Church's teaching that they are acting like Pharisees and being self-rightous. That is an argument often used to try to subdue any protest against liberalisation in the Church. If you don't support the Church's teachings then say so. I would think that would be more honest than hiding behind a trite old argument that doesn't wash with me or any others who are standing up for the Faith in the midst of moral decay.
And, as George says, you have no evidence to make the statement you have against the priests who are standing up again the liberal brigade in the Church. They have to take a stand when leadership is so lacking in this area and confusion abounds.
Jan
Post a Comment