Saturday, October 28, 2023


I, as a Catholic, with all Catholics, by the way, believe in the third Person of the Most Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit. We also believe in the two other Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, the Father and the Son. 

Thus, we know that the Holy Spirit can produce surprises when He corrects the Church on her walk toward eternity in heaven. 

Most of us hoped the pope, through the synod proceedings would draw the Church closer to the perfection of heaven to which we all should aspire by correcting heterodox beliefs of some Catholics as well as heteropraxis (wrong living) of some Catholics. 

Who would have thought that the disgraced and perverted (disordered) heterosexual priest, Fr. Marko Rupnick would be the source of the Holy Spirit’s mess making to correct wrong doing and disordered affections and lifestyles! Stunning to say the least.

Why does this pope have such an aversion to calling human behavior of whatever kind, be it heterosexual, homosexual or whatever, disordered? All of us are disordered because of original and actual sins. Naming the disorder, calling it for what it is, is the way the Holy Spirit’s grace softens us to receive that Grace for our forgiveness first and ultimately our healing, but only completely in heaven through a life of repentance and penance while we are on earth. And the earth, by the way, is also disordered and finite just as we are. I hope the pope knows that. 

And all of this Holy Spirit shaming and judging of the Holy See happening the last week of the Synod on Synodality with the world’s press focused on its proceedings and the Holy Spirit revealing the corruption of the Holy See and its highest leadership in enabling the sex abuse scandal. Heads will roll and the Holy Spirit will see to it.

This is Father Raymond de Souza’s great commentary which puts many things into perspective:

Aftershocks of the Latest Father Rupnik Earthquake

COMMENTARY: The whole stomach-churning affair has constituted another major stain on Pope Francis’ record on sex abuse cases.

This is de Souza’s quite telling money byte:

…the speedy response in Rome, after dragging out the case and declining to act for years. Within 36 hours of the news breaking about the decision in Koper, the Holy See announced that Pope Francis was going to act against Father Rupnik. The urgency of the scandal was compounded by the ambiance of the Synod on Synodality; hundreds of cardinals and bishops were present, each of whom knew that they would be liable to lose their office over a debacle as grave as that of the Father Rupnik case. 

It is likely that someone will have to go, and the Slovenian nuncio is a likely candidate. He will be faulted for giving the go ahead to Koper, even if he was accurately reflecting desires at the highest levels in Rome.


TJM said...

Well, here is a young auxiliary bishop who is very brave for pointing the finger where it should be - the Pope. He will likely be removed as bishop.

"So what does the pope actually want? Why does he invite James Martin? Why so many pals in his image and likeness? Why does he choose Cardinal Hollerich as relator for the synod? (Hollerich has once again reasserted that a number of the Church’s positions are scientifically and sociologically ill-founded. No, dear Cardinal, these positions are biblically founded!) Why did he make ample time last week, amidst all the synodal bustle, to meet with Sister Jeannine Gramick who believes the Church’s teaching on ethical issues (of course, it again involves LGTBQ+) needs to be changed? Her organization has been condemned in the past. Why is he clearing space in his schedule during these busy weeks to receive Whoopi Goldberg with every honor? Following her visit, she declared that it was a fantastic one because of the pope’s acceptance of gay relationships and his openness to ordaining women. Was what she said accurate? The Vatican in no way refuted it. By the time she was twenty-five, Goldberg had already aborted seven children and she is still a strong supporter of abortion.

Is that what synodality is: listening to anyone and everyone who has anything at all to say? Is that why the pope is listening to precisely... these people? Without a single rebuttal? Or does he slowly but surely wish to ripen the synod members for these other sounds because he actually endorses the ideas they express? If not, why is he creating so much confusion by not answering a single question in a clear way?

Whatever the case, division within the synod has only increased during the synod. That this is not a fruit of the Holy Spirit should be obvious. That this synod on synodality is a disaster should also be clear by now. The same goes for the one who thought it up."

Mark Thomas said...

Father Raymond J. de Souza said..."On Friday, with the Vatican engaged in intense damage control, the Holy Father reversed himself in the face of a media outcry. He directed that the Rupnik case be reopened at the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), and lifted the statute of limitations to that effect."

However, the Holy See press office declared:

"In September, the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors brought to the Pope's attention that there were serious problems in the handling of the Fr. Marko Rupnik case and lack of outreach to victims."

"Consequently, the Holy Father asked the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith to review the case, and decided to lift the statute of limitations to allow a process to take place."


Pope Francis, in September (2023 A.D.), had tasked the DDF to initiate a "process"/"review" of Father Rupnik's case.

Therefore, I am uncertain as to why Father de Souza stated that it wasn't until "Friday, with the Vatican engaged in intense damage control, the Holy Father...directed that the Rupnik case be reopened at the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), and lifted the statute of limitations to that effect."

I will certainly stand corrected if I have misunderstood Father de Souza's above comment.

Thank you.


Mark Thomas

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

MT??????? Thanks for pointing out the double speak of Pope Francis. It is when he is caught that he repents because of public humiliation, but his repentance is insincere and only for show as it was in September of 2023. Unless you missed the news, this past Wednesday when reporters from around the world were covering the synod, a bishop in Slovenia accepted Rupnick as a priest in good standing reversing what the Jesuits had done, for the sake of positive publicity for them after all their own misdeeds.

That Rupnick was allowed to function as a priest in good standing in Slovenia came from permission from the highest authority in the Holy See and the Catholic Church. You know who that is, correct?

Once the outcry from heterodox and orthodox Catholics came out swiftly, uniting them in a way that the synod did not, it was only then that the pope lifted the statues of limitation on Rupnick, yesterday not in 2023. Nothing was done since September until the pope was once again humiliated by his stupid support for sexual abusers.

Mark Thomas said...

Father McDonald, I will not rush to judgement against Pope Francis. I await the availability of more information in regard to the topic at hand.

To return to the Father de Souza article that you have promoted here:

The narrative is that His Holiness has bowed the past couple of days to the supposed pressure that he has received in regard to Father Rupnik's situation in question.

However, Pope Francis last month tasked the DDF to review Father Rupik's case. Therefore, it does not follow that only now, out of desperation, has Pope Francis acted in regard to Father Rupnik's case.


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Father McDonald said..."This is de Souza’s quite telling money byte:"

"Within 36 hours of the news breaking about the decision in Koper, the Holy See announced that Pope Francis was going to act against Father Rupnik."

Again, the Holy See announced that the process in regard to Father Rupnik had been initiated last month. Therefore, Father de Souza's "money byte" is unsound.


Mark Thomas

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Yes, thanks for confirming the scandal. They reviewed it, confirmed the horrific abuse with disgusting details and the pope green lighted Rupnick to be a priest in good standing in Slovenia where many of the abused nuns live. Don’t defend the pope on this, it is beyond tragic and disgusting!.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Damn Mark! Don’t be infantile and stupid. The Holy See was barraged with shock and anger and the pope only then reversed what he approved know quite well all the disgusting facts way back when it came out!

Mark Thomas said...

Father McDonald, again, I await the emergence of more facts in regard to Pope Francis' treatment of Father Rupnik's case.

Should Father de Souza's comments prove accurate, then I will acknowledge that. Should His Holiness express regret in regard to his treatment of Father Rupnik's case, then I will acknowledge that.

I am interested in the truth.

I also will pray for Pope well as everybody.

Thank you.


Mark Thomas

ByzRus said...

I have serious doubts regarding the quest for truth by some.

Would that research on what the Church teaches be greater than the pursuit of sound bytes and putting undo credence into spin by the Press Office.

See Code 188.4 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law as well as Canon 751 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Certain other conditions apply.

My own feeling, PF via his ideological pursuits, is dancing around the possibility by staying one step ahead of being labeled as such. He's a master of deflection causing distraction when the ship nears the sandbar (e.g. publicly chastising priests for doing what about every priests does when in Rome, shop for what you cannot readily find back home). He's not stupid.

Paul said...

This is all becoming damned ridiculous.

TJM said...



rcg said...

It does seem that he always has two cards in play and different explanations for different audiences.

ByzRus said...


Agree. There's more than one who plays two sets of cards.

None of us.