Friday, August 24, 2018

FATHER THOMAS ROSICA, CARDINAL CUPICH AND POPE FRANCIS, WHAT IN THE NAME OF GOD AND ALL THAT IS HOLY DOES THE CLERICALISM OF THE SANCTUARY OF PRIESTS AND LAITY HAVE TO DO WITH PRIESTS AND BISHOPS RAPING CHILDREN?

Father Thomas Rosica recently wrote perhaps the most sinister form of clericalism of a pope ever, which was:

...the Church is now 'ruled by an individual rather than by... its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture'

Under Pope Francis, the Church is now “openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture,” 

But in today's on-line version of the National Chismatic Reporter (NCR), Fr. Rosica quotes what Pope Francis said early in his papacy about the clericalization of the laity as it concerns the sanctuary which is one of the fruits, by the way, of the Second Vatican Council! I have some comments on that after this quote:


Clericalization means focusing fundamentally on the things of the clergy and, more specifically, the sanctuary, rather than on bringing the Gospel to the world. Clericalism infects the clergy when they become too self-referential rather than missionary. But it afflicts laypeople worse, when they begin to believe that the fundamental service God is asking of them is to become major donors, recipients of Papal honors, "ministers of hospitality," lectors or extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist at church rather than to live and spread the faith in their families, workplaces, schools, neighborhoods and in places where we priests cannot enter.
The reform that is critically needed, then-Cardinal Bergoglio continued in that interview, is "neither to clericalize nor ask to be clericalized. The layperson is a layperson and has to live as a layperson with the power of baptism, which enables him or her to be a leaven of the love of God in society itself, to create and sow hope, to proclaim the faith, not from a pulpit but from his everyday life. And, like all of us, the layperson is called to carry his or her daily cross — the cross of the layperson, not of the priest." Clericalism afflicts many lay Catholics today. While the reforms of the Second Vatican Council have done much to eradicate clericalism, some of it never died, and there is a new wave of it that is alive in the church today.

Fr. Rosica quotes this in the context of stating that the current Armageddon we are experiencing in the Church having to do with Bishops who mismanaged homosexual priests who break their promise of chaste celibacy by sexually abusing mostly male minors in the most grevious ways possible, is a product of clericalism--that priests and laity are more concerned about the "sanctuary" meaning liturgy and liturgical ministers and not going out from themselves to the margins of society.

What rubbish! As Marc says, the current crisis has to do with priests raping minors and bishops not reporting it to law enforcement, and through psychiatric and spiritual renewal of these perverts, the bishops placed them back in ministry in different parishes in their diocese or sent them to other dioceses where the abuse continued unabated.

The true clericalism is that of the bishop and by way of extension, of the pope, who allowed bishops to cover up the abuse to protect the image of the Church and of bishops and priests. That has nothing to do with the things of the sanctuary!!!!! It has to do with immorality, breaking both canon and civil law and then covering it up. This is truly clericalism.

But the most obscene part of what Rosica says that the problem we are now experiencing is that the laity want to be clericalized by things of the sanctuary. But what he says is true only of a minuscule number of laity in this quote from above which most priests told the laity Vatican II wanted them to do!:

But it afflicts laypeople worse, when they begin to believe that the fundamental service God is asking of them is to become major donors, recipients of Papal honors, "ministers of hospitality," lectors or extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist at church rather than to live and spread the faith in their families, workplaces, schools, neighborhoods and in places where we priests cannot enter.

BUT WHO IN THE NAME OF GOD AND ALL THAT IS HOLY HAVE CAUSED THE LAITY TO THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THEY CAN DO FOR THE CHURCH ARE THE LITURGICAL THINGS?  THE POPE AND BISHOPS OF THE WORLD AT THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL AND BUGNINI WHO REDESIGNED THE LITURGY AND LITURGICAL THEOLOGICANS WHO CONVINCED PRIESTS THAT THE LAITY HAVE TO DO ALL THESE LITRUGICAL THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AND WHAT IN THE NAME OF GOD AND ALL THAT IS HOLY DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH HOMOSEXUAL PRIESTS RAPING TEENAGE BOYS OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN THE MOST HEINOUS  MANNER AND BISHOPS WHO MISMANAGED THEM IN THE MOST HORRIBLE WAYS POSSIBLE?


AND WHAT DOES THE LITURGICAL CLERICLALISM OF THE LAITY HAVE TO DO WITH THE VATICAN, I.E. THE POPE,  PROMOTING THEODORE MCCARRICK TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF WASHINGTON, DC AND THEN A CARDINAL WHEN THOSE WHO DID THIS SHOULD HAVE AND MORE THAN  LIKELY DID KNOW HE WAS AN ACTIVE HOMOSEXUAL HAVING SEX, EITHER CONSENSUAL OR NOT,  WITH HIS PRIESTS AND SEMINARIANS?


LET'S SPEAK OF THAT KIND OF CLERICLAISM! NOT THE CLERICALISM OF THE SANCTUARY DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

"MOST HEINOUS MANOR"

Is this manor in the same area as Ascott-under-Wychwood Manor, or is it closer to Childwickbury Manor?

Cheers!

Dan said...

Father, I see you haven't caught on yet that the "elite" in the Church want to destroy the Church.

It's very sad when it does...

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

MANOR

You must get instant notification of my posts because I had three immediate revisions of it i after my first attempt to post with the first revision correcting your snark. Go check.

Anonymous said...

The snark was not in need of correction.

Your confusion of manor with manner was.

Glad you caught it.

So, have you been to Ascott-under-Wychwood Manor?

TJM said...

The left in politics engages in projection and deflection to mask what they are doing, so it is with the religious left as well. I hang on because there will be a new papacy and better days ahead

Victor said...

"Clericalism" has become another multi purpose label whose meaning mutates to condemn one's opponents a la George Orwell. The Soviets were very good with that kind of mutating of words.
The Modernists of the liturgical movement made a big issue of clericalism, and I see that Fr Rosica uses that catchword for similar gains.

Anonymous said...

Bee here:

Fr. McD: Watch out! The ones most guilty of clericalism who post on this blog will label your comments as "un-Christian."

:-)

God bless.
Bee
P.S. Please say a prayer for a priest I know, Fr. Mike, who suddenly without warning had a burst aortic aneurysm, and although he survived (90% are fatal), he is in critical condition in the hospital. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Once again shows they don't care about victims just ideology. Is. Their hatred for Tradition.

ByzRC said...

To your questions, not a damn thing.

It seems that whenever these types of situations arise, Pope Francis, among others, seems to blame everyone except those who should be accepting responsibility for their wrongdoings. It is deflection pure and simple to redirect most people's attention and thought process away from that which many in positions of authority within the Church do not want to fix. One can only wonder and speculate as to the "WHY??????" that becomes an additional pink elephant in a room that is already crowded with other pink elephants. This is like saying that if we, the laity, take responsibility for our actions, reject our sinful clericalism and join our bishops in prayer, fasting and repentance, the problem will be solved. The obvious reality here is that the "framework" for attracting, retaining and promoting homosexuals, despite it being an underground, theoretical framework, remains in place.

Refreshing to his Francis' commentary that almost sounds anti-big donor! That's a first!

Carol H. said...

Anon at 8:09 am is trying to deflect us away from the topic of this post.

I wonder why.

ByzRC said...

Carol H -

I don't and, I hope you spend very little time on whatever that means as well.

TJM said...

Carol H,

It's Kavanaugh. That's just what he does.

Anonymous said...

Have you been "deflected?"

I thought not.

I don't wonder why...

Adam Michael said...

The only clericalism that I see at work was that some predatory homosexual priests, bishops, and cardinals used their office in the Church to abuse teenage boys and seminarians and then hide it from the law. Since we cannot abolish the priesthood, maybe we should work on the homosexual predator problem?

Gene said...

We stayed at the Tropical MANOR in Daytona Beach when I was in grammar school (speaking of grammar). It was the 50's before Vatican II, but I was Presbyterian then. The country was strong, united and, although sin abounded as it always has, there was a sense of shame and guilt and a moral imperative was instilled in kids growing up. I remember a fire and brimstone Calvinist minister preaching in our church once. He addressed our prosperity, our national pride, and warned that we Christians should not be lulled into moral complacency by this "golden age" of America. He closed his sermon by taking off his glasses and, leaning out over the pulpit and pointing to all of us (as it were), said in a booming voice, "Brothers and sisters, it takes a steady hand to hold a full cup."

TJM said...

Gene,

My view of the Country in the 1950s iis the same as yours. I was a Catholic, and shock, shock, the prierts and nuns taught morality, decency, and the Faith. And the Sunday Mass was a feast for the eyes and ears: Gregorian chant, polyphony, and priests properly vested, singing the Mass, and the Church was beautifully appointed, which helped to keep a young boy's attention. If I had grown up with the typical Novus Ordo Mass we encounter today with banal music, a stripped down Church, and self-absorbed celebrants with their politburo on the altar with them, I would have left long ago. It's such a bore.