Monday, May 13, 2019


The National Chismatic Reporter (NCR) is crying crocodile tears over the fact that Pope Francis took them for a joy ride on female deaconesses only to end up in a fatal crash on Friday.

Read all about their anger, rage and angst at their site and experience some guilty pleasures!

CNS-plane c.jpg

Pope Francis pauses as he answers questions from journalists aboard his flight from Skopje, North Macedonia, to Rome May 7. (CNS/Paul Haring)


Dan said...

"We are Catholics. If someone wants to make another church, they are free to do so."

This is a Francis quote.

I am confused.

I always thought that disunity, schisms, heresy, apostasy, etc., caused Our Lord TREMENDOUS PAIN

So is Francis joking about causing Our Lord pain, or is he encouraging it?

Most horrific comment and attitude of any pope EVER!

Anyone care to defend?

Dan said...

btw - someone (Mark Thomas) or anyone, try to tell me that the quote of this "pope," indicating a basically indifferent attitude toward leaving the Church and starting a new one - is the voice of Christ!

Very demonic fellow this Francis.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Dan your mortal sin of hatred blinds you to the genius of this statement especially directed to heterodox nuns and liberals in the Church.

Dan said...

I dont get it. Please explain why it is a good idea for THE Shepherd to encourage the sheep to leave the flock. Thus endangering their souls.

Seriously, I could use an explanation. How could leaving and creating new churches be good?

Dan said...

Let me ask. Is is right for a pope to encourage more Luthers?

The damage that was done was incredible. If Our Lord is pained by such, it IS INCREDIBLY EVIL to encourage division.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Because those pushing the pope to make the church non Catholic like those seeking female ordination think they can stay and malform the Church into something she can’t be. Thus the genius behind the pope’s comment indicates that even a liberal pope can’t change doctrine and neither can these heterodox feminists. So if the want female ordination go form your own church. Btw there is already such a denomination calling itself Catholic and even Pope Francis has excommunicated a priest or two for participating in female ordinations.

TJM said...

If PF makes the National Schismatic Reporter unhappy, then I am very happy! Too bad Paul VI didn't tell Cardinal Suenens to take a hike

Dan said...

Perhaps it would be better for Francis to be clear on doctrine and to clarify the many unclear statements coming from him and the Vatican rather than trying to be "witty."

Dan said...

Fr. You are correct, I likely can be accused of hatred for Francis. However, is it not considered apostasy and heresy to leave the Catholic faith and form some version pleasing to oneself?

Is this "witty" comment not taking these horrific sins seriously? Is this not an example of someone being indifferent to the faith? Is this not encouraging sin?

I could go on with the questions, but you understand.

TJM said...


I am an old fashioned, orthodox Catholic (note, I did not say a good Catholic). Keep in mind that PF will go to his reward at some point, just like the other Church wrecker, Paul VI. The Church has survived far worst than these two pontiffs. I am staying put and I know you will too.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

All mortal sins, especially public delight in these, such as hatred for the pope, or heresy or schism are repugnant to God and can earn for the unrepentant mortal sinner the fires 🔥 of eternal damnation. Be that as it may, the pope is right, you are free to commit these sins.

Dan said...

Cool then. The pope is right and his witty comment acceptable. So I guess if he said: "if anyone wants to commit adultery, or murder, or any other sins, they are free to do so..." it would not be shocking, or a problem at all.

Mark Thomas said...

Archbishop Chaput, 2016 A.D:

Accept Church Teaching or Leave the Church.

(RNS) In a stark prognosis for contemporary Catholicism, a leader of the conservative wing of the U.S. hierarchy has said that “a smaller, lighter church” of fewer but holier believers is preferable to one that promotes inclusion at the expense of traditional orthodoxy.

In a speech delivered Wednesday (Oct. 19) at the University of Notre Dame, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput also suggested that many prominent Catholics are so weak in their faith that they ought to leave the church.

Chaput singled out Democrats such as Vice President Joe Biden and vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine for special criticism, linking them to the concept of a “silent apostasy” coined by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and saying Catholics who do not champion the truth of church teaching are “cowards.”

“Obviously we need to do everything we can to bring tepid Catholics back to active life in the church.

“But we should never be afraid of a smaller, lighter church if her members are also more faithful, more zealous, more missionary and more committed to holiness.

“Losing people who are members of the church in name only is an imaginary loss. It may in fact be more honest for those who leave and healthier for those who stay. We should be focused on commitment, not numbers or institutional throw-weight."


Mark Thomas

Victor said...

"We are Catholics. If someone wants to make another church, they are free to do so."
At first glance that is an unwise statement. Yet it is true, because we are free to sin. Francis could have continued to say "But you will rot in hell for it", and maybe he should have; but in today's world of ecumenism it would not have been pastorally advantageous to have done so.

Dan said...

Reminding us of the sins we are free to commit sounds like the voice of THE Tempter, rather than the voice of THE Shepherd.

rcg said...

What is left put of all of this is that there is a right way to follow. Following these various other paths do not lead to salvation. I bet God knows how to deal with people who are on the wrong path through no fault of their own. Things get a lot more sticky when we find people who have gotten off the right path. Was it due to me? Even if it isn’t did I at least try to get them back on the right path? This last part is what I see missing in these conversations. The Catholic Church is not just an alternative system of ethics.

Some folks should not be allowed communion. Many more should deny themselves communion until they properly examine their conscience and repent. How many priests preach that?

Anonymous said...

The dean of Atlanta's Greek Orthodox Cathedral told me a few years ago that there were deaconesses in the early church, their main roles being to assist with female adult baptisms and bring the Eucharist to the sick...BUT...according to him, they did not assume a liturgical role (as a deacon does at Mass). However, at the same time, he said he was not aware of anything in their canon law which precluded a woman being ordained a deaconess. I think an Orthodox bishop did ordain a deaconess recently, but I forget whom and where.

But the ordination of women priests and bishops is an entirely different matter, and the Orthodox remain mostly opposed to those innovations----all going back to the Eucharist of course, the priest being an image of Christ.

Anonymous said...

What, in the nature of a woman, prevents her from being a true icon of Christ?

Dan said...

Sorry Mark T., but quoting a shepherd of the Church who seems unconcerned over tepid sheep leaving, doesn't really comfort me. I believe the tepidness is directly related to having shepherds like this.... "oh well, lost a few sheep. Sheep that myself and other shepherds weren't really concerned enough over to really try and strengthen their weakness...."

John Nolan said...

Methinks Anonymous has trouble accepting the ordinary and universal Magisterium regarding the impossibility of women's ordination. He wouldn't of course reject it, since this would be heresy.

In modern times there has been a distinction between a non-ordained deaconess and an ordained woman deacon. Protestant sects had deaconesses who performed roles analogous to consecrated women religious in the Catholic Church.

The evidence from the early Church as to whether women deacons were sacramentally ordained is inconclusive. PF's 2016 commission was not expected to unearth dramatic new evidence, so the result was a foregone conclusion.

Anonymous said...

"Methinks Anonymous has trouble accepting the ordinary and universal Magisterium regarding the impossibility of women's ordination."

This statement does not even begin to answer the question I asked, so again: "What, in the nature of a woman, prevents her from being a true icon of Christ?"

rcg said...

Because God chose to be born a male. And He certainly didn't exclude women in the process of His Incarnation by being born of a woman who is profoundly compliant with His will. In fact, His birth could only have happened through her total commitment to God. She is the model for us.

John Nolan said...


The fact that you asked this question in the first place gives cause for the inference. There are many sources which hold that the masculinity of Christ and the Apostles, and the masculinity of the priest are germane to the sacrifice.

Do your own research. It's not for us to point out obvious answers to damn-fool questions, especially since yours appears to be a rhetorical one.

Now grow up and stop trolling.

Anonymous said...

"Because God chose to be born a male."

Yet, again, this does not answer the question, ""What, in the nature of a woman, prevents her from being a true icon of Christ?"

Regarding, "Because God chose to be born a male," does this imply that God could not have chosen to send His only-begotten DAUGHTER as our savior?

Anonymous said...

The entire Old Testament also points to a male messiah. Sure, one can (and people do) argue that this reflects a "patriarchal" society - so it must be reformed. But then, it's not Christianity anymore.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

A@19:14, stop being silly and embarrassing yourself. Your next question has to have your name and title.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, it implies nothing about what God COULD have chosen.

False argument.

rcg said...

At the risk of earning the ire of John Nolan and FrAJM I will point out that Mr Nolan gave away his point in his question: rams were sacrificed. Christ presented Himself as the ultimate and only fitting replacement that could satisfy the level of sin to be addressed by the Sacrifice.

The answer to your *real* question cannot be had in a simple exchange on a blog. But only by extensive study and prayer.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous, it implies nothing about what God COULD have chosen."

That was, precisely, my point.

rcg said...

Then you should thank Mr Nolan for giving it to you.

Anonymous said...

In 1988, the Inter-Orthodox Theological Consultation met in Rhodes (Greece) to study the place of women in the Orthodox Church. To the extent the consultation attracted any attention, it mainly was the reaffirmation of an all-male presbyteriate and episcopate. However, it also formally advocated for the restoration of the order of deaconess: "The apostolic order of the deaconess should be revived. It was never altogether abandoned in the Orthodox Church though it tended to fall into disuse. There is ample evidence from apostolic times, from the patristic, canonical and liturgical tradition, well into the Byzantine period (and even in our own day) that this order was held in high honour...' (From the book "Woman and the Priesthood, 1999, edited by Thomas Hopko, a series of essays about the role of women in the Orthodox Church.)

But even if that office were revived, evidence is lacking that deaconesses performed the functions of a deacon, like reading the Gospel and preaching (though unfortunately at my parish in 30327, deacons almost never preach, but that is for another time). Basically, the Orthodox view is that even if deaconesses return, that is a separate question from women priests. "There is a clear distinction between the diaconate---whether male or female---and the priesthood. What neither female nor male deacons have ever done is to perform the consecration of the Eucharist, to bless the people, or to confer absolution; these are functions that are specifically priestly...The two issues are distinct, for the diaconate is an order in its own right, not simply a 'first step' to priesthood." (page 17 of essay in that book).

johnnyc said...

Anonymous....Think marriage. The Wedding at Cana. The Bridegroom (Jesus) provides the wine. The Eucharistic celebration is the wedding banquet.

I'm guessing that those who think women can be priests also think that homosexuals can marry.

Anonymous said...

Bee here:

Pope Francis said, ""We are Catholics. If someone wants to make another church, they are free to do so."

Oh, but they don't want "another church." They want the Roman Catholic Church. They want the Roman Catholic Church because of her wealth, power, and because she stands as a fortress against evil. And they are trying to make a breach in the walls in order to destroy her from within, just as those who want to take over a worldly kingdom try to breach the walls of the castle where the king resides in order to overthrow him and take over his kingdom.

That is the only reason.

As to Anonymous' at May 13, 2019 at 8:13 PM question: "What, in the nature of a woman, prevents her from being a true icon of Christ?," you ought to be asking God that question, since it was by His decree only males should be priests, in both the Old Testament and the New.

But of course, it may that you don't even believe in the supernatural God and His decrees, and instead believe the order of things has its source in man made decisions and laws from the ancient past, and that those men simply claimed the decrees were from God in a self-serving kind of way. If you think this way then it is impossible for you to accept God's ways as the Church understands them.

I suspect no one who is promoting female ordination has been asking God "why not women priests?" And if they have, they don't believe Him when He tells them.

God bless.

TJM said...


The irony that you, a woman, needs to school a priest in the Divine Law.

Vatican Disaster II was supposed to influence the world for good, instead apostate clerics have allowed the world to influence the Church for ill.

Satan never sleeps, truer now than ever.

rcg said...

TJM just gave me the idea why men must be priest. So at least one man is out of bed Sunday morning.

Anonymous said...

"As to Anonymous' at May 13, 2019 at 8:13 PM question: "What, in the nature of a woman, prevents her from being a true icon of Christ?," you ought to be asking God that question, since it was by His decree only males should be priests, in both the Old Testament and the New."

As I understand it, God has revealed to us all that is necessary for salvation.

We know from Revelation, particularly the Book of Job, that God does not reveal His mind - the "background" to what is necessary for salvation.

So, one is left to wonder what answer a question to God might surface.

The real irony here is that no one, among this uber-knowledgeable group of self-proclaimed "true" Catholics seems to be able to answer the question posed.

Dan said...

It's the menstruating obviously. How's that for an answer?

Also, you seem to imply that because we cannot give a great reason as to why God chose to be born male when He COULD have chosen to be born as female, then we have no good reason to rule out female priests.... however since God COULD have chosen to have been born as an aardvark (seem other blog post) does that mean we should try to justify aardvark priests?

Who knows why God does anything that He chooses to do? If you know, tell me.

Anonymous said...

Aardvarks are not human. (Surprise) A human was needed to redeem humans. It's an apples/oranges thing, trust me.

Bee's the one who said we should question God, not I. She's the one who should be asked.

Dan said...

Wait anonymous, are you saying that there is "evidence" that human is a kind of "icon" of Christ, but that "maleness" and "sonship" has no evidence? And weren't you asking if God COULD do whatever he wanted?

I think you were refusing to see our apples to apples argument.

Do you see it now?

John Nolan said...

Fr McDonald has told Anonymous (the one who asks damn-fool questions) to stop being silly and embarrassing himself, and further questions must have his name and title.

He has not complied, which indicates both discourtesy and dishonesty on his part.

TJM said...

John Nolan,

Well, I think you and I know who "anonymous" is. Rather sad behavior for a priest