A WAKE-UP CALL AS THE STORM GATHERS MOMENTUM

 I'm reluctant to print Dr. Ralph Martin's letter and continue the discussion  on the McCarrick case and other situations related to it since I have and I suspect you have reached a saturation point of disgust.

But Dr. Martin offers a prophetic message to the papacy and Magisterium at this juncture. I hope he is being read there!

Pope Benedict knew about the filth (and I would say also the rot) in the Church that has led the Church in the USA to an unprecedented time of crisis that will continue to cause Catholics (clergy and laity both) not only deep concern but also lead many away from the Church and cause those who God is calling to be Catholic to reconsider.

It is up to Rome to act to clear out the rot starting with many who are advising Pope Francis. It is time for Pope Francis to bring moral clarity back to the papacy and the Church and to call Germany and other progressive conferences of bishops back to the "black and white, bread and butter" of Catholic morality and belief. WE NEED TO SUPPORT DOCTORS OF THE LAW AND NOT CASTIGATE THEM!

The Dubia Cardinals need to have answers which will answer questions for the entire Church and those cardinals that have been sounding the alarm need to be taken seriously as well as other orthodox bishops. WE NEED TO HEAR MORE FROM THEM AND OTHERS NOW!

Dear Troubled Catholics – a Letter From Ralph Martin About the Current Crisis

Ralph Martin | July 31, 2018

 Dear Troubled Catholics,

 

I have never seen so many “ordinary Catholics”—who usually never follow or hear about Church news—as deeply troubled as I have seen them in response to the recent revelations about the retired archbishop of Washington, DC.

Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was asked by the pope to resign from his membership in the College of Cardinals and ordered to live in seclusion until a canonical trial can be held to verify the validity of charges of sexual abuse and harassment made against him. After the first brave person came forward (whose accusations were found credible by the Archdiocese of New York Review Board), more and more followed. The climate of fear among many of our clergy—the fear of being punished or marginalized if they report sexual immorality among their fellow clergy or leaders—is starting to break. Cardinal McCarrick is now known as Archbishop McCarrick.

What has been so disturbing to so many people is the fact that there had been numerous warnings to various church officials that he was a homosexual predator, harassing many seminarians, priests, and young boys, for many years, but nothing had ever been done about it, and he was continually promoted. Even after a delegation of priests and lay people went to Rome to warn the Vatican about the situation, he was promoted. Even after a leading Dominican priest wrote a letter to Cardinal O’Malley, nothing was done. Even after lawsuits accusing him of homosexual sexual harassment in two of his previous dioceses had been settled with financial awards, he was still promoted. And not only that, he became a key advisor to Pope Francis and offered advice on whom to appoint as bishops in the United States!

---

One young Catholic mother with two boys who was open to the priesthood for them said to me that she now has grave concerns about ever having one of her sons enter the seminary, given the corruption that has been revealed.

Another said she could no longer see anyone joining the Catholic Church, due to such bad leadership. She lamented about the difficulty this presents for evangelization.

Another said that seven people from her very small, rural parish had left the parish, because sexual sin is never spoken of and there is almost an exclusive emphasis on political issues. She now fears that even more will leave.

Another said that the only way this is ever going to change is if we simply stop giving to the bishops’ national collections and to our own dioceses and parishes’ collections, unless they are led by bishops who are willing to call a spade a spade and govern accordingly. To this day, there are quite a number of “gay friendly” parishes in even “good dioceses,” where those afflicted with homosexual temptation are not encouraged to live chaste lives or offered effective correction, but instead are confirmed in their sexual activity. It seems many bishops are afraid to tackle the local “homosexual lobbies” and choose to turn a blind eye.

---

This past weekend at Mass, the priest giving the sermon was more upset than I’ve ever seen him about the unfolding scandal. The Gospel was about how the weeds and the wheat grow up together and will only finally be separated at the judgment. It was unclear what the priest was actually saying, but we are certainly not called to “enable the weeds.” And shepherds in particular have the obligation to admonish the sinner and remove from ministry those who refuse to preach the truth and who encourage others in wrong doing. Yes, we will always have sin, but as Jesus said,

“whoever causes one of these little ones who believes in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Mt 18:6).

There have been a veritable deluge of articles that have appeared from highly respected lay Catholics and priests saying that “enough is enough,” and we need to stop the cover-ups and get to the bottom of who is implicated in promoting men like this and covering up for them. We do.

In 2002, when the American bishops approved their “charter” that attempted to respond to the many cases of priest pedophilia that had come to light by that time, they conspicuously exempted themselves from their “zero tolerance” policy. Many priests have told me that they felt “thrown under the bus” by the bishops, who conveniently didn’t adopt policies to deal with their own tolerance of immoral behavior, cover-ups that allowed the pedophilia to go on for many years, or in some cases, their own immoral behavior. Another disturbing thing about the 2002 Charter is that—despite pleas to not ignore the fact that this is primarily a homosexual scandal, since most of the victims were adolescent boys rather than true children—the bishops decided not to tackle “the elephant in the room.” Could it be because they knew some of their brother bishops/cardinals were implicated, and they didn’t want to face the mess of cleaning it up? Now this refusal to acknowledge the “homosexual lobby,” as Pope Benedict termed it, is coming home to roost.

But there’s not just a huge homosexual problem in the Church; unfortunately, heterosexual sin and financial malfeasance are common in many places as well. In some countries, a significant percentage of priests are living with concubines or fathering children by vulnerable women and giving scandal to the faithful, who often know about it. This is the case in Uganda, from which I have recently returned, and in many other countries as well. In these situations, the “protection” of the priests and the frequent disregard for their victims—the women and their children—cries out for justice.

And so, once again because of the pressure of lawsuits and the press, the bishops are talking about “developing new policies” that would apply to bishops. As a colleague at Sacred Heart Seminary in Detroit, Michigan, has said: “Isn’t it clear enough from the Gospel that covering up immoral behavior is itself wicked? Why do we need new policies when the teaching of Jesus and the apostles is so clear?” Can the words of the Old Testament prophets and Jesus Himself against false shepherds be any clearer or more devastating? (See Jeremiah 23:1-6; Matthew 23, etc.)

The Archbishop McCarrick case may prove to be the “straw that broke the camel’s back.” It may  make the bureaucratic, carefully worded, evasive statements that have come from our leaders finally address sin and repentance, instead of the mere policies and processes they typically focus on. Could it be—finally—that the revelation of the long-term sexual harassment of seminarians and priests that never stopped Archbishop McCarrick’s rise in the hierarchy will be so totally repugnant that real repentance may actually start to happen? I have never prayed more for the pope and our leaders than I have in the last several years, and we all must continue to do so. More about that later.

Unfortunately, the Archbishop McCarrick case is certainly only the “tip of the iceberg.” The cumulative effect of revelation after revelation of immorality in high places is devastating. First, a number of years ago, a cardinal from Austria was forced to resign over homosexual activity; then, more recently, a cardinal from Scotland resigned over sexual harassment of seminarians and priests; and then the archbishop of Guam underwent a canonical trial in Rome over the sexual abuse of minors; and now cardinals in Chile (one of whom is on the pope’s Council of Cardinals that oversees reform) are under heavy suspicion for covering up homosexual abuse in their country. In fact, the whole bishops’ conference of Chile, acknowledging complicity in not taking seriously reports of a bishop’s cover up of sexual abuse, recently gave their resignations to the pope, and he has so far accepted several of them. The pope himself at first stubbornly backed the appointment of this bishop and dismissed the victims’ pleas as “calumny” and “gossip.” And before we could absorb this news, there was news of an archbishop in Australia getting a prison sentence for covering up abuse on the part of a priest. And just today, as I am writing this, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ordered the release of a grand jury report implicating more than 300 “predator priests” in six of the eight Pennsylvania dioceses involved in the sexual abuse of minors over many years.

Unfortunately, the rot is wide and deep and years of covering up abuse (and the concomitant reluctance to really preach the Gospel and call people to faith and repentance) and its ultimate exposure have injured the faith of millions. How shocking and tragic was it to see tens of thousands of Irish people in the streets of Dublin wildly celebrating that they could now legally kill babies!!!! Just when the Irish bishops needed to speak most strongly on fundamental moral issues, their credibility was destroyed when it was finally exposed that they had covered up abuse for decades. Satan is indeed like that wild boar Scripture talks about that rampages though the vineyard of the Lord because the hedges of protection have been destroyed (Ps 80:12-13). The corruption, ineptitude, and cowardice runs wide and deep, and its effects on the eternal salvation of millions, and the destiny of nations, is devastating.

Most recently, Cardinal Maradiaga of Honduras has seen his auxiliary bishop resign over homosexual and financial impropriety, and forty seminarians in his diocese publish a letter asking him to please root out the homosexual network in his seminary. This cardinal is Pope Francis’ chief advisor, the head of his “Council of Nine” that works closely with the pope in bringing about reform in Rome, and is mentioned as a possible successor to Pope Francis.

But continual reports of ongoing financial and sexual scandals suggest reform doesn’t seem to be happening. Recently, a male prostitute in Italy published the names and photos of sixty priests who frequent his services—with scarcely any comment from the shepherds. And the homosexual orgy in the apartment of a Vatican cardinal, used by his secretary, was met with a “no comment” by the Vatican press office. And then we hear also of a monsignor in the papal nuncio’s office in Washington, D.C., who suddenly leaves the country and is put on trial in the Vatican for trafficking in child pornography and is given a five year prison sentence.

I didn’t plan to discuss this whole situation, but it came up this summer when the thirty priests in my class at the seminary wanted to discuss Pope Francis’ leadership and the McCarrick scandal. We all agreed that Pope Francis has said and done some wonderful things (I teach his Apostolic Exhortation The Joy of the Gospel in one of my classes), but he also has said and done some things that are confusing and seem to have led to a growth of confusion and disunity in the Church. How can German and Polish bishops approach the question of whether divorced and remarried couples can receive Communion without getting an annulment in opposite ways, and the Church still retain an ability to speak to the contemporary culture with one voice? It can’t.  

And how long can Church officials speak about the “positive values” of “irregular relationships” until the average Catholic comes to believe that we no longer believe the words of Jesus that fornicators, adulterers, and those who actively practice homosexuality will not enter the kingdom of God unless they repent? How many still believe that there is really a hell and that, unless we repent from such serious sins before we die, we will go there? Have we ever heard from leading churchmen, even in Rome, in recent years, that adultery, fornication and homosexual relations are not only “irregular,” but gravely sinful? Has the creeping “universalism” (the belief that virtually everyone will be saved) so undermined the holy fear of God and belief in His clear word, which has been transmitted faithfully all these centuries and is found intact in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that people have become “understanding” about persisting in grave sin with no fear of God or of hell?

Has false compassion and presumption on God’s mercy replaced true love, which is based on truth, and the only appropriate response to God’s mercy—faith and repentance?

And what are we to make of the fact that so many of those advising the pope have questionable fidelity to the truth? How can we have confidence in Cardinal Maradiaga as the head of his Council of Cardinals when he is accused of financial impropriety (which he denies); he chose an active homosexual as his auxiliary bishop; and he allowed a homosexual network to grow up in his seminary, dismissing attempts to appeal to him to clean up the mess as unsubstantiated gossip? 

How can we have confidence in the pope’s main theological advisor, a theologian from Argentina who is most known for his book The Art of the Kiss, or the pope’s main Italian theological advisor, who is known for his subtle dissent from the Church’s teaching in the area of sexuality and who tried to insert texts in the synods on the family that pushed the document in a permissive direction? And how can we have confidence in the recently appointed head of the John Paul II Institute on Marriage and the Family—an archbishop who commissioned a mural in his former cathedral in an Italian diocese from a homosexual artist who included homo-erotic themes in the mural, including a portrait of the archbishop in an ambiguous pose?

One godly woman just asked me last night if it was OK for her to be upset with what was happening. I sadly said yes, of course it is.

How can we passively endure such corruption that runs so wide and deep? It is right to make our views known. It is right and necessary. But even more so, it is necessary to pray and offer sacrifices for the Church and her leaders at this time. It is necessary to pray that genuine reform, rooted in real repentance and an embrace of all the truths of the faith, would come out of this awful situation and that the Church, more deeply purified and humbled, may shine forth with the radiance of the face of Christ.

But it is going to be a long way from here to there. Grave damage has been done to the credibility of the Church, and more will leave. Grave damage has been done to many of the flock, and reparation must be made; public repentance is called for. As Pope Benedict XVI wrote when he was a young priest, the Church will have to become smaller and more purified before it can again be a light to the world. The Church is going through a radical purification under the chastising hand of God, but already we can see a remnant of fervent renewal appearing all over the world, which is a sign indeed of hope and the renewal to come.

And so, what can we do as we continue to pray for the pope and our leaders that God may give them the wisdom and courage to deal with the root of the rot and bring about a real renewal of holiness and evangelization in the Church?

»We need to go about our daily lives, trying to live each day in a way pleasing to God, loving Him and loving our neighbor, including the neighbor in our own families. We need to look to ourselves, lest we fall.

»We need to remember that even though we have this treasure in earthen vessels (or as some translations put it, “cracked pots”), the treasure is no less the treasure. Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater! Baby Jesus is the treasure, and He is still as present as ever and still as ready to receive all who come to Him. And the Mass! Every day, He is willing to come to us in such a special way. Let’s attend daily Mass even more frequently, to offer the sacrifice of Jesus’ death and resurrection to God the Father, in the power of the Holy Spirit, for the salvation of souls and the purification of the Church.

»We need to remember that the Catholic Church is indeed founded by Christ and, despite all problems, has within it the fullness of the means of salvation. Where else can we go? Nowhere; this is indeed our Mother and Home, and she needs our love, our prayers, and our persevering in the way of holiness more than ever.

»We need to remember that there are many truly holy and dedicated bishops and priests, and we must pray for them and support them. They need and deserve our support.

»We need to remember that this isn’t the first time such grave problems have beset the Church. In the fourteenth century, St. Catherine of Siena bemoaned the “stench of sin” coming from the papal court and prophesied that even the demons were disgusted by the homosexual activity he had tempted priests into and the cover up by their superiors! (See chapters 124-125 of Catherine of Siena’s The Dialogue.)

That isn’t to say that we don’t need to take seriously and do all we can in response to the grave scandal we are facing in our time. And yet we need to remember that all this is happening under the providence of God, and He has a plan to bring good out of it. It was even prophesied strongly in Mary’s apparitions in Akita, Japan. Jesus is still Lord and will use the current grave problems to bring about good.

And finally, I’m beginning to see why the Lord has impressed on me so strongly in the past year the urgent need to heed the appeals of Our Lady of Fatima. Indeed, as Mary said,

“Pray, pray very much, and make sacrifices for sinners; for many souls go to hell, because there are none to sacrifice themselves and to pray for them.”

Let’s continue to pray and offer sacrifices for the conversion of sinners and as reparation for sin, and let’s pray the rosary daily as Mary requested, for peace in the world and true renewal in the Church.

Your brother in Christ,

Ralph

P.S. Please feel free to share this letter with family, friends and fellow parishioners if you think it would be helpful.

Ralph Martin is president of Renewal Ministries. He also hosts The Choices We Face, a widely viewed weekly Catholic television and radio program distributed throughout the world. Ralph holds a doctorate in theology from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas (Angelicum) in Rome and is a professor and the director of Graduate Theology Programs in the New Evangelization at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in the Archdiocese of Detroit. He was named by Pope Benedict XVI as a Consultor to the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization and was also appointed as a “peritus” to the Synod on the New Evangelization. Ralph is the author of a number of books, the most recent of which are The Urgency of the New Evangelization, The Fulfillment of All Desire, and Will Many Be Saved? He and his wife Anne have six children and sixteen grandchildren and reside in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

THE WAY OUT OF THE MESS THE CHURCH IS EXPERIENCING WAS ENUNCIATED BY POPE BENEDICT XVI IN HIS 2005 CHRISTMAS ADDRESS TO THE CURIA

It would help if Pope Francis, rather than ignoring the papacy of his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, would emphasize what Pope Benedict stated so brilliantly and not fight His Holiness, Benedict XVI:

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI
TO THE ROMAN CURIA
OFFERING THEM HIS CHRISTMAS GREETINGS

Thursday, 22 December 2005

Your Eminences, Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate and in the Presbyterate, Dear Brothers and Sisters,

The last event of this year on which I wish to reflect here is the celebration of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council 40 years ago. This memory prompts the question: What has been the result of the Council? Was it well received? What, in the acceptance of the Council, was good and what was inadequate or mistaken? What still remains to be done? No one can deny that in vast areas of the Church the implementation of the Council has been somewhat difficult, even without wishing to apply to what occurred in these years the description that St Basil, the great Doctor of the Church, made of the Church's situation after the Council of Nicea:  he compares her situation to a naval battle in the darkness of the storm, saying among other things:  "The raucous shouting of those who through disagreement rise up against one another, the incomprehensible chatter, the confused din of uninterrupted clamouring, has now filled almost the whole of the Church, falsifying through excess or failure the right doctrine of the faith..." (De Spiritu Sancto, XXX, 77; PG 32, 213 A; SCh 17 ff., p. 524).

We do not want to apply precisely this dramatic description to the situation of the post-conciliar period, yet something from all that occurred is nevertheless reflected in it. The question arises:  Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?

Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or - as we would say today - on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarrelled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.

On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call "a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture"; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the "hermeneutic of reform", of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts. 

These innovations alone were supposed to represent the true spirit of the Council, and starting from and in conformity with them, it would be possible to move ahead. Precisely because the texts would only imperfectly reflect the true spirit of the Council and its newness, it would be necessary to go courageously beyond the texts and make room for the newness in which the Council's deepest intention would be expressed, even if it were still vague.

In a word:  it would be necessary not to follow the texts of the Council but its spirit. In this way, obviously, a vast margin was left open for the question on how this spirit should subsequently be defined and room was consequently made for every whim. 

The nature of a Council as such is therefore basically misunderstood. In this way, it is considered as a sort of constituent that eliminates an old constitution and creates a new one. However, the Constituent Assembly needs a mandator and then confirmation by the mandator, in other words, the people the constitution must serve. The Fathers had no such mandate and no one had ever given them one; nor could anyone have given them one because the essential constitution of the Church comes from the Lord and was given to us so that we might attain eternal life and, starting from this perspective, be able to illuminate life in time and time itself.

Through the Sacrament they have received, Bishops are stewards of the Lord's gift. They are "stewards of the mysteries of God" (I Cor 4: 1); as such, they must be found to be "faithful" and "wise" (cf. Lk 12: 41-48). This requires them to administer the Lord's gift in the right way, so that it is not left concealed in some hiding place but bears fruit, and the Lord may end by saying to the administrator:  "Since you were dependable in a small matter I will put you in charge of larger affairs" (cf. Mt 25: 14-30; Lk 19: 11-27). 

These Gospel parables express the dynamic of fidelity required in the Lord's service; and through them it becomes clear that, as in a Council, the dynamic and fidelity must converge.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity is countered by the hermeneutic of reform, as it was presented first by Pope John XXIII in his Speech inaugurating the Council on 11 October 1962 and later by Pope Paul VI in his Discourse for the Council's conclusion on 7 December 1965.

Here I shall cite only John XXIII's well-known words, which unequivocally express this hermeneutic when he says that the Council wishes "to transmit the doctrine, pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion". And he continues:  "Our duty is not only to guard this precious treasure, as if we were concerned only with antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our era demands of us...". It is necessary that "adherence to all the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness..." be presented in "faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine, which, however, should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another...", retaining the same meaning and message (The Documents of Vatican II, Walter M. Abbott, S.J., p. 715). 

It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking on this truth and a new and vital relationship with it; it is also clear that new words can only develop if they come from an informed understanding of the truth expressed, and on the other hand, that a reflection on faith also requires that this faith be lived. In this regard, the programme that Pope John XXIII proposed was extremely demanding, indeed, just as the synthesis of fidelity and dynamic is demanding.

However, wherever this interpretation guided the implementation of the Council, new life developed and new fruit ripened. Forty years after the Council, we can show that the positive is far greater and livelier than it appeared to be in the turbulent years around 1968. Today, we see that although the good seed developed slowly, it is nonetheless growing; and our deep gratitude for the work done by the Council is likewise growing....

...It might be said that three circles of questions had formed which then, at the time of the Second Vatican Council, were expecting an answer. First of all, the relationship between faith and modern science had to be redefined. Furthermore, this did not only concern the natural sciences but also historical science for, in a certain school, the historical-critical method claimed to have the last word on the interpretation of the Bible and, demanding total exclusivity for its interpretation of Sacred Scripture, was opposed to important points in the interpretation elaborated by the faith of the Church.

Secondly, it was necessary to give a new definition to the relationship between the Church and the modern State that would make room impartially for citizens of various religions and ideologies, merely assuming responsibility for an orderly and tolerant coexistence among them and for the freedom to practise their own religion.

Thirdly, linked more generally to this was the problem of religious tolerance - a question that required a new definition of the relationship between the Christian faith and the world religions. In particular, before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel.

These are all subjects of great importance - they were the great themes of the second part of the Council - on which it is impossible to reflect more broadly in this context. It is clear that in all these sectors, which all together form a single problem, some kind of discontinuity might emerge. Indeed, a discontinuity had been revealed but in which, after the various distinctions between concrete historical situations and their requirements had been made, the continuity of principles proved not to have been abandoned. It is easy to miss this fact at a first glance.

It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent, motivating decisions from within.

...This dialogue must now be developed with great openmindedness but also with that clear discernment that the world rightly expects of us in this very moment. Thus, today we can look with gratitude at the Second Vatican Council:  if we interpret and implement it guided by a right hermeneutic, it can be and can become increasingly powerful for the ever necessary renewal of the Church.

FINDING ORTHODOX CATHOLIC PEACE AND SERENITY IN A SCANDAL PLAGUED CHURCH INVOLVING BOTH CLERGY AND LAITY

Although my post below isn't specifically on Confession, I do think we need to dismantle "rooms of reconciliation" and return to confessionals that do not allow penitent and priest to see or touch each other--let's get real about what has happened in these so-called rooms of reconciliation! The Sacrament of Penance (Confession) needs to recover the vertical and get rid of the horizontal too just like the Mass does!

I personally believe the pre-Vatican II Church's ethos in the sacramental life, prayer and devotions would have done more to help rank and file Catholics disillusioned by all the scandals that have come to light in the last 50 years.

The post-Vatican II Church tries to glorify itself (herself) in the horizontal way through sacraments, prayer, devotions and architecture (churches in the round where people can see each others' faces and hug each other).

The post-Vatican II Mass emphasizes the priest and the people and a handholding inclusive community that pats itself on the back for this, that and the other. There is even competition among parishes as to who has the best reason to pat itself on the back.

The pre-Vatican II spirituality and humility of the Tridentine Mass made it clear that only God is all Holy, we only share in that holiness by God's grace and unmerited forgiveness.  It emphasized our sinfulness over and over again, from the prayers at the foot of the altar, the double confiteor (and again said or chanted prior to the laity's Holy Communion) as well as the triple "Lord, I am not worthy..." and a reluctance to receive Holy Communion if there was any hint of any kind of impediment, such as breaking the fast.

The Tridentine mentality, ethos, was to face God (of course in a symbolic, sacramental way) together, priest and laity facing the same direction. I was taught by the good Sisters of Saint Joseph of Corondelet (before they became ultra liberal and post-religious life) that we should never turn our head away from the altar and tabernacle prior to Mass and during Mass to look at someone else behind us or speak to them!

Man is sinful; God is Holy and we are unworthy. We knew that and expected nothing less from our brothers and sisters in Christ--we are all unworthy, unworthy, unworthy!

If we still had this ethos, this orientation, this spirituality, I think Catholics would handle the various scandals much better because we would know that Original Sin and actual sins have been, are and will be a disaster for us poor miserable sinners. Only God through His Church and the His Real Presence in all the Sacraments especially the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Cross made present in an unbloody way at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass can save us poor, poor, poor, miserable, miserable, miserable, sinners, sinners, sinners!

At the Mass we know who we truly are in the eyes of God--poor, poor, poor, miserable, miserable, miserable, sinners, sinners, sinners. We see what our sins, what we have done to our Savior crucified before us with some crucifixes above the altar more graphic in the depictions of our suffering Lord than others.

Thus any scandalous pope (and there have been many of them in 2000 years starting with St. Peter, himself) any bishop, any priest, any religious and any laity would not phase us. We might be disappointed in hypocrisy of those who we hold in high esteem (just as a spouse would feel about an adulterous wife/husband) but we knew that is why Jesus founded the Church, to call people back to holiness by Jesus' forgiveness of Original Sin and actual sin, both mortal and venial.

I really think the pre-Vatican II Church emphasis on the individual and his relationship with God expressed through the Church but in a vertical way rather than in a horizontal way would have helped us through this crisis much better than our weakened post-Vatican II Church, spirituality, liturgical expression and ethos toward the hand-holding, Kumbaya community patting itself on the back for this, that and the other and avoiding naming sin for what it is and what it does to the glorious, holy hand holding community!

ANOTHER DAMNABLE COVERUP BY BISHOPS AND CARDINAL OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH—A SERIOUS INQUISITION IS NEEDED NOW IN HONDURAS AS IN CHILE!

Have these bishops been living in a cave????????? What is Cardinal O’Mally going to say about this? And Edward Penten has been here before when he caught Cardinal Kasper in a major lie!  All these bishops should be treated by Pope Francis as His Holiness treated the Chilean bishops!

Honduran Bishops’ Conference Replies to Accusations of a Homosexual Network at Major Seminary

The statement, which asserts that the seminary follows the norms and morals of the Catholic Church, criticizes the Register’s reporting on the seminary for causing “pain and scandal.” The Register, however, stands by the story.

Edward Pentin

The bishops' conference of Honduras has expressed “regret” that leaked information about a crisis of homosexuality in Tegucigalpa’s major seminary has given it a bad reputation.

In a statement issued July 29, it also denies any institutionalized promotion of practices that are contrary to the morality and norms of the Church.

The bishops were responding to a July 25 Register article in which it was reported that nearly 50 seminarians had written a letter to bishops complaining of a homosexual network in Tegucigalpa’s major seminary, and which they said is protected by its rector.
The Archdiocese of Tegucigalpa is headed by Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, the coordinator of the C9 Group of cardinals advising Pope Francis on Church and Curia reform.
The Register’s article drew on the contents of the seminarians’ letter, the existence of which was confirmed by a Honduran bishop. The seminarians wrote that they were encouraged by their spiritual advisers to write the letter and give it to the bishops as a plea that the homosexual activity among seminarians be stopped and that the bishops adopt stronger admittance practices for choosing seminarians.

The Register article quoted directly from one of the seminarians who had signed the letter, and referenced both a copy of a suicide note from a seminarian involved in a homosexual relationship with another seminarian, and graphic homosexual texts verified to have been exchanged between seminarians.

Also contacted for the article were the offices of Cardinal Maradiaga, the archbishop of Tegucigalpa, the Honduran bishops’ conference and each of the country’s bishops. None of the bishops had replied to the Register’s queries at the time this article was published.

The bishops said they “regretted” the information in the article, adding what was reported “causes pain and scandal in those who supposedly it wants to defend.”

The bishops added: “With all certainty and truth, we affirm that there does not exist, has not existed, nor should exist in the seminary an atmosphere such as the one presented in the news report at NCR [the Register] which gives the impression that institutionally there is the promotion and sustaining of practices opposed to the norms and morals of the Church under the complacent watch of the bishops.”

But the statement did not refer to or deny the contents of the seminarians’ letter, nor any of the other substantiated facts in the article.

The Register stands by its reporting.

Elsewhere in their statement, the bishops said they are praying that priests increase their “selfless dedication to the service of the Gospel” so that “free, mature and fearless” vocations arise.

They also asked “present and future seminarians” to “grow in confidence, authenticity and transparency with their bishops and formators,” and view “honestly in their communities and parishes the lights and shadows of the seminary.”

The bishops also requested that all parishioners increase their prayers for the major seminary and avoid all kinds of speculation that ignores the respect for the dignity of bishops, seminarians, formators and all who seek to carry out God’s plan.

Bishops and seminarians are already engaged in a constructive dialogue, the statement added, and have enlisted the help of a bishop emeritus on the continent who has experience in the field of priestly formation.

THE ONE BILLIONTH REASON FOR AD ORIENTEM

I written this before, but the spirit of Vatican II has exacerbated the narcissism of the clergy and laity of the Church to reach the highest levels of Holy Mother Church.

I think one of the foundational culprits for this narcissism on steroids is Mass facing the people and the ad libs and creativity of priests and yes some laity as well as making the priest and his face front and center exuding as much saccharine piety as possible to make him look holy, or at least engaged!

It turns the priest into an actor on a stage.

But what is a church in New Jersey to do when Cardinaless McCarrick is featured in one of its stained glass windows concelebrating a papal Mass in New Jersey with now Pope St. John Paul II?

If this Mass had been depicted in an ad orientem way, no problem, no one would know who any of the three priests are, but alas, we have to know and see their faces. SAD! But maybe they can reverse the image by turning it around?????

But in this ad orientem Mass, who cares who the celebrant is. It could be any pope, other bishop or priest--it doesn't matter who the priest is as long as the High Priest, Jesus Christ, is there.

SHOULDN'T HIS RED HAT ROLL TOO?

This article was written in 2015!!!!!!

HETERODOX CARDINAL EMBROILED IN CHILD ABUSE COVER-UP SCANDAL IS POPE’S SPECIAL APPOINTEE TO FAMILY SYNOD

September 16, 2015

Content warning: This article includes explicit content; we felt it necessary to include this content to highlight the full extent of the betrayal of the children who were exposed to this material in Catholic schools during Cardinal Danneel’s period as Archbishop of Mechlen-Brussels.

Voice of the Family reported yesterday on the special appointments made by Pope Francis to the Ordinary Synod on the Family to be held in Rome this October. A significant number of the appointed prelates openly reject the teachings of the Catholic Church on questions relating to sexual ethics and the family.

The appointment most likely to cause scandal however must be that of Godfried Cardinal Danneels, Archbishop Emeritus of Mechlen-Brussels. Here are just some of the many questions that those concerned with the protection of children and the family will be asking in the light of Pope Francis’s invitation to Cardinal Danneels to attend a synod supposedly called to find solutions to the problems facing the family.

Did Cardinal Danneels protect clergy accused of child abuse? 

Elizabeth Yore, an international child rights attorney who has provided legal and technical assistance to families of victims and the Belgian government in child abuse and child murder cases, provided Voice of the Family with the following report:

“On April 8, 2010, the newly retired Cardinal Danneels received some visitors at his home. They were the relatives of the Bishop of Bruges, Roger Vangheluwe, Danneels’ close friend. At this meeting, the nephew of Vangheluwe described a long and sordid 13 year molestation by his uncle, the Bishop of Bruges. Cardinal Daneels advised the nephew not to go public with the sexual abuse. During the meeting, Danneels advised the young man not to “make a lot of noise” about the abuse he endured from his uncle bishop because Vangheluwe was scheduled to retire in a year anyway. “It would be better that you wait,” advised Danneels, while also urging the young man to forgive his uncle.

“The conversation was tape recorded by the nephew and subsequently released to the press. Cardinal Danneels, the former head of Belgium’s Roman Catholic Church for 3 decades, could be heard on tape urging this sexual abuse victim to stay quiet and not disclose the abuse until after the bishop who repeatedly molested him over a span of 13 years could retire. After the release of the recording, Danneels did not dispute the authenticity of the conversation. A media firestorm was unleashed in Belgium, a country still reeling over institutional cover ups of child sex abuse.

“Bishop Vangheluwe admitted to the sexual abuse of his nephew and stepped down from his post shortly after the April 8 meeting between his nephew and Danneels. Because of the statute of limitations law, the Bishop of Bruges was never charged with the crime. However, the plot continues to thicken.

“The daily De Standaard newspaper reported that two former Belgian priests, Fathers Rik Deville and Norbert Bethune had personally informed Cardinal Danneels about Bishop Vangheluwe’s child sexual abuse several times between the mid-1990s and early 2000s. Father Deville told the Associated Press that he told Cardinal Danneels about a number of sexual-abuse cases. “The cardinal sometimes got angry and said it was not my job, that I should not get involved,” Deville said.

“The Belgian Police conducted a surprise raid on the Cardinal’s residence and office looking for documents relating to clergy abuse and questioned the Cardinal for 10 hours. Although the Cardinal was never charged, the Catholic Church’s own investigation commission issued a 200 page report on 10 September 2010.

“According to the report, the commission heard allegations from 488 complainants, concerning incidents that took place between 1950 and 1990. The report contained testimony from 124 people. Two-thirds of the complainants were men, now aged in their 50s and 60s. As head of the commission, Dr. Peter Adriaenssens, a prominent and respected psychiatrist, disclosed that Cardinal Godfried Danneels name surfaced in 50 cases, not as an abuser, but as someone who knew of the sexual child abuse by the clergy.”

ANOTHER HEAD ROLLS, BUT THE CYNIC IN ME WONDERS IF SEEKING GOOD PUBLICITY IS THE CAUSE AND A CONTINUED NARCISSISM WHICH IS AT THE ROOT OF THE POST VATICAN II CATASTROPHE

Australian archbishop convicted of sex abuse cover-up resigns

ROME - In his second major move on sex abuse in just three days, Pope Francis has accepted the resignation of Australian Archbishop Philip Wilson of Adelaide following a conviction earlier this month of failure to report allegations of child sexual abuse.

The Vatican announced Wilson’s resignation July 30,  just three days after Francis made a historic move in accepting the resignation of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick from the College of Cardinals after accusations arose that he sexually abused a 16-year-old altar boy.

But this in another Crux article gives me hope! Let's make this Texas Bishop a Cardinal and the pope:

The most extensive response to date, however, was issued by Bishop Michael Olson of Fort Worth, Texas, who on Saturday issued a two-page pastoral letter, wherein he used the McCarrick allegations to address the situation within his own diocese.

“We see in the scandalous crimes and sins alleged to have been committed by now former Cardinal McCarrick, the violation of that trust and the grave damage caused to the lives and health of his purported victims,” he wrote.

“Justice also requires that all of those in Church leadership who knew of the former cardinal’s alleged crimes and sexual misconduct and did nothing be held accountable for their refusal to act thereby enabling others to be hurt,” he continued.

He went on to reaffirm the Church’s pledge of zero tolerance against sexual abuse within his own diocese against both minors and vulnerable adults, “by its clergy, staff, and volunteers, including me as bishop.”

TRUTH FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM'S THE GUARDIAN

Opinion 

Pope Francis

Pope Francis has utterly failed to tackle the church’s abuse scandal

Catherine Pepinster

Finally the mainstream press, even in England, is admitting the truth:

Many critics also claim that celibacy is the cause of abuse in the Catholic church. But other institutions from the Church of England to the BBC and the Football Association have reeled from abuse scandals and have no such requirement. What the scandal does definitively show is that many who have advocated chasteness have shown contempt for it themselves.

The commentary also says this:

There is a recent photo of Pope Francis doing the rounds on social media that shows him walking alone, without security people or a private secretary, across a Vatican courtyard. In the early days of his pontificate, it would have been seen as Francis breaking through the stuffy conventions of the Vatican: being his own man. Five years on, it is instead viewed as symbolic of Francis’s loneliness. Here is a man struggling to find allies or support from the Catholic faithful in his stalled efforts to reform the church and failing attempts to tackle the abuse crisis.

That crisis now threatens to engulf his papacy and do lasting damage to Francis’s own reputation.

READ THE REST THERE BY PRESSING HERE.

PROGRESSIVES, AKA, THE HETERODOX, SIMPLY DON'T GET IT: THEY ARE THE CAUSE OF THE SEXUAL IMMORALITY IN THE CHURCH TO INCLUDE HIGH AND LOW CLERGY AS WELL AS THE LAITY

Mortal sin abounds in the Catholic Church as well as mortal sinners. There is nothing new under the sun in this regard.

True pathology that leads Catholic clergy and laity to be serial abusers may well remove one of the criteria for what is considered a mortal sin--full consent of the will in a grave matter.

However, what about the enablers who should have known better, but did not act to stop a serial abuser?  Bishops and lower clergy as well as laity who turned a blind eye or worse yet forgave the sins of serial abusers without the appropriate penance such as the removal from ministry, reporting to the civil authorities and transparency on what had happened, may well be the mortal sinners having fulfilled all the criteria of what constitutes a mortal sin.

But make no mistake about it--it is the new morality (moral theology) of the post-Vatican II, spirit of Vatican II Church that has exacerbated the scandal of clergy and laity who commit mortal sins because the new moral theology of Vatican II enables sinners to commit sins and not feel guilty if they have made their decision/discernment to commit any sin after a thorough decision/discernment of personal conscience. Conscience in this context trumps everything else to include the authoritative moral teachings of Christ and His Church.

I was taught this new morality in the 1970's seminary I attended. Let's say a woman was pregnant and  didn't feel she could carry the child to term. What should this Catholic woman do to arrive at a decision of conscience that could open the door to an abortion and to do so in good conscience? This could be applied to the use of artificial contraception by married couples which would include the man too. It can be applied to decisions of conscience of those who have same sex attractions. It applies to almost every issue of morality and immorality.

This is how a Catholic following the new morality makes a decision/discernment of conscience, personal conscience:

1. The person prays about what they should do--let's use the artificial contraception issue here. Does the couple want to follow Church teaching to the law (Humanae Vitae) or are there extenuating circumstances, (situational ethics) which need to be considered, such as cost of more children, psychological burdens of more children, health, etc. Of course knowing what the Church teaches is important in this prayerful discernment/decision of conscience.

2. Then the couple seeks counsel from family members and close friends they respect and listens to their advice and takes it into prayerful consideration.

3. Thirdly, the couple consults with a member of the clergy, a religious sister or other pastoral worker and seeks their counsel but choosing someone who doesn't see just "black and white" but the various 50 shades of gray, so to speak.

4. Then the couple makes their prayerful decision of conscience and if there are situational ethics or good reasons to use artificial birth control, choose an abortion, continue to live in sexual sin, then they can do so in good conscience because they arrived at a decision of conscience by following the new moral theology's recipe. Conscience must always be respected in this new moral theology.

Why do I recall this for you? Because this flawed method of making a decision of conscience has led Catholic clergy who are normal in their sexual orientation to break their vows/promises and to do so in good conscience. The same with married couples who break their vows and decide it is quite okay to receive Holy Communion in good conscience even though they live and act in an adulterous way.

It has led Catholic clergy to include bishops who are disordered in their sexuality and have disordered affections to follow through on their sinful inclinations because they are making a decision of conscience to have sex or  some kind of sexual activity which they truly believe is consensual (even though of course it isn't truly). It has assisted practicing Catholic laity to do the same, BTW.

And those clergy who are truly pathological in their sexual appetites and emotional needs,  we have seen  (as though in a field hospital)  what has happened and how those in Catholic authority have treated them with such compassion and mercy and a desire to cure them through psychological means and spiritual renewal and then place them back in a situation where they could continue their serial abuse.

Pope Francis' "cautious " opening to allow Catholics in adultery and other sexual mortal sins to receive Holy Communion is nothing new, it is the spirit of Vatican II's method of making a moral decision/discernment and is the source of corruption that we see in so many Catholics to include cardinals who make a moral decision to commit and live in a state of mortal sin because they have followed a recipe of moral discernment and a decision of conscience.

As for the homosexual lobby in the Catholic Church and the theology of winks and nods for any kind of illicit sexual relationships (in the moral and legal realms) the spirit of Vatican II has it method of madness to form a new world and a new paradigm of morality in that new world.

I can remember hearing Cardinaless McCarrick say many years back that he would not necessarily be in favor of same sex marriage but he clearly endorsed calling it "civil unions." I found his answer so peculiar coming from a Cardinal but it all makes sense now--he sees nothing wrong with homosexual sex (sexuality) and endorses Catholics to enter "civil unions" to find civil benefits in their mortal sins. It was and is outrageous but there were no corrections of this now cardinaless archbishop by other high rank cardinals and bishops as I recall. 

Shades of gray trump clear black and white moral teachings of the Church!

A PROTESTANT MINISTER'S TAKE ON DECLINING CHURCH ATTENDANCE

Like Catholicism, Protestantism has experienced great change in beliefs, morality and styles of worship to include music or Muzak.

I would suggest that the ensuing identity crisis, especially expressed in worship or liturgy must be added to the plethora of reasons for the decline and fall of Christianity.

This is a commentary in Sunday's Augusta Chronicle on this decline is by a Protestant minister who lives in a suburb of Augusta:

It isn’t a death, but a resurrection

By John Sebby Guest Columnist

 

Over the last few years, I watched our weekly church attendance slowly diminish.

We are not alone. Many churches across the country are experiencing a serious decline in attendance as our older faithful members die off.

Every church sees normal attrition as mature members move to glory and other members just move on. Since our church is a few miles outside the gate of a major military base, we have always experienced members who get transferred or deployed. In the past, we’ve always had new folks come in to take their place.

A few years ago, our worship leader was moved out of state when a new young military family started attending who picked up the worship team leadership without missing a beat. Now the couple leading our worship, the Army is transferring them to Korea.

Over just the last year we have lost half of our regular members. A young couple gets a great job offer out of state, an elderly active member retires and moves to be close to their kids, regular military transfers and then our pastor retires and moves — and that’s just in the last couple of months.

Thousands of churches close permanently every year. As thousands of new churches are planted, the net gain for churches is a negative. I drive by a large empty lifeless church building every day and work a block away from a beautiful cathedral that is now a civic center (Sacred Heart Catholic Church). A vivid reminder of just two churches that closed their doors permanently.

I think back to those who witnessed the crucifixion of Jesus. Many of those who watched Him die on the cross had also seen Jesus healing the sick, giving eyesight to the blind, curing the lame and feeding thousands with a few fish and loaves, and viewed His triumphant entry into Jerusalem only a few days before.

For the disciples, their whole world hung lifeless on a rough wooden cross.

They weren’t watching their church die; they were witnesses to the antecedent of the greatest event since the creation of the universe, the resurrection the Messiah. The risen Savior of all mankind.

It wasn’t what they were expecting, even though Jesus spelled it out for them, but His conquering death is what had to happen.

I realized I’m not watching my church die, I’m experiencing a resurrection. This is just the hard part.

Good News

Just as trimming back our rose bushes makes for a stronger, healthier plant with more blooms, I believe it’s a good thing our church has been cut back.

Our remaining membership has a passion for the mission, not the building. Some former members would have been opposed to any changes. They would have fought the renaming of the church to the death, either theirs or the church’s. Our remaining membership is open to merging, to changes, or a new name. Not to keep the building, but His mission and ministry, alive.

Our church is blessed in so many ways.

• We are a debt-free ministry. We have no mortgages or obligations, just regular utilities and maintenance. Even with the drop in weekly offerings, we have enough revenues to make ends meet and send monthly gifts to ministries we support.

• We are fortunate to have two church leaders step up into the pulpit; although we pay a small stipend to the preacher, we know if tithes fall short we will pay our missions first. If we ever lose sight of our ministry, we may as well close our doors.

• We have a caring church membership. So much so we advertise Free Hugs Sunday at 11:00 a.m.

• We have a diverse congregation. The church’s leadership is 50% white and 50% black, which I believe expands our outreach.

• We also have a plan. After some major repairs we are cash poor, but land rich. Our church sits on 32 acres, of which we have 22 acres up for sale in a growing area. Once we sell the property we will set aside enough for two years of salary for either a full-time minister or two part-time positions, either a pastor, music minister and or youth pastor.

We are open to any direction that has the vision to grow the Kingdom of God.

More Good News

Examining U.S. church attendance statistics since our nation’s founding, Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion found the percentage of Americans attending church, relative to overall population, is more than four times larger today than it was in 1776. Plus, the number of church attendees has risen each and every decade right up until today.

Whether we merge with another small struggling church, get incorporated by a growing church without a building, hire someone with the right vision for our ministry to gain momentum, or close the doors and give the church building and property to a Christian ministry, we will serve a risen Savior.

Me, I’m no longer watching my church die. I’m eagerly anticipating how God will resurrect and restore us.

The writer is an elder at Wildwood Christian Church in Hephzibah.

DID WHAT BLESSED POPE PAUL VI DESIRE FOR THE REFORM OF THE SACRED LITURGY ACTUALLY HAPPEN OR DID DEFORMATION ACCELERATE TO A MAGNITUDE NEVER KNOWN IN THE LATIN RITE?

This is what Blessed Pope Paul VI told Italian bishops in 1964 before Bugnini actually concocted a Liturgy that would all but undo what Blessed Paul VI envisioned in this speech. My comments imbedded in text in RED.

The liturgical reform provides us with an excellent opportunity in this regard: it calls us back to the theological view of human destiny that the action of grace, and thus of the life of the sacraments and prayer, has primacy. The liturgical reform opens up to us a way to reeducate our people in their religion, to purify and revitalize their forms of worship and devotion, to restore dignity, beauty, simplicity, and good taste to our religious ceremonies. (What was in bad taste, one can only wonder and make subjective jumps to conclusion, like Laitin? Ad Orientem? Vestments? Birrettas? And is the liturgy really about education in "their religion"? What about inspiration?) Is this the reformed liturgy's far superior good taste:

 

0000

There is no branch of the Curia that serves as the ‘fashion police,’ but maybe there should be. 

Without such inward and outward renewal there can be little hope for any widespread survival of religious living in today’s changed conditions. We take it on ourself to make but two pertinent recommendations. The first is that you take the greatest pains over the sanctifying of days of precept, devoting all your energies to the end that the celebration of the Sunday and holyday Mass with the word of God and the participation of the people will be an occasion of the most intense involvement for all. (This leads to the on-going canard about what participation is, actual or active, interior or exterior, either/and or both? But I think there is a heresy in the pope's sentiments--that somehow that without what we do, meaning the inward and outward renewal of the liturgy that there is little hope for any widespread survival of religious living..." What the???? And now in 2018 how has this worked out? In many places in Europe only 5 % of Catholics attend this renewal of the Mass and in the USA we are faring for the time being only a little bit better!)

The second is that you promote sacred song, the religious, congregational singing of the people. Remember, if the faithful sing they do not leave the Church; if they do not leave the Church, they keep the faith and live as Christians. (Okay, in 2018 what can we say about the miserable eclectic state of music in the Church? What is meant by sacred song, hymns? Or the Mass itself? And we have trying to bribe, cajole and otherwise humiliate Catholics into singing at Mass or during the Mass and to what success has this kept Catholics from leaving the Church????? Has the pope's prophecy been self-defeating from the start????????)

(Address to Italian bishops, April 14, 1964)

SOME RAMDOM THOUGHTS ON THE LACK OF THE USE OF THE THEOLOGICAL TERM "MORTAL SIN" AS IT CONCERNS THE FORMER CARDINAL MCCARRICK

I don't know how progressive, and let's just call him McCarrick was. But I do know that he was left of center especially on moral issues but who knows what else.

So my question is, which is worse, a cardinal abuser of minors and seminarians and young priests under his authority and pastoral care who nonetheless upholds authentic Catholic teaching and is very orthodox or the cardinal abuser who abuses the actual moral and doctrinal teachings of the Church, watering these down and undermining them along with abuse of minors and vulnerable adult men?

I ask, you answer.

But I have to say that I am appalled by the lack of the use of the term "mortal sin" and how inimical any sin, but especially mortal sin is to God.

We are moved more by legal terms like crime, murder, theft, abuse and so on than we are by two simple words, mortal sin, which in its variety of manifestations is an abomination to God.

We know that for a mortal sin to be a mortal sin, the person has to know that a particular act is seriously wrong or immoral, in other words it is grave "matter". The person must then commit the sin with full consent of the will and usually with much forethought and actual planning.

To simply this, a mortal sin is 1) grave matter; 2) the sinner knows that it is wrong and 3) the person commits the sin with full consent of the will.

I presume everything that McCarrick did in the sexual realm fulfilled what is truly a an abomination before God and thus endangered the eternal salvation of his immortal soul.

I will give him the benifit of the doubt that he confessed these abominable mortal sins. But penance in this life and in the next life will be needed, be it actual criminal prosecution and imprisonment or some kind of canonical punishment like the loss of the red hat and laicization. Of course an even greater punishment would be a canonical trial to determine if his ordination as a deacon, then as a priest and then as a bishop was valid or not, an "annulment" the Sacrament of Holy Orders--it is possible but I don't know if it has ever been used in modern Church history.

Many would say that an annulment of Holy Orders, meaning the man was never validity ordained because of a grave impediment raises other questions---his sacraments, in particular ordinations of others, confessions and so on.

But I do believe there is a doctrinal solution to that, that the Church supplies what is lacking in these unanticipated situations.

What do you think about an actual canonical trial to annul the Sacrament of Holy Orders of someone who could not enter into a valid ordination because of certain moral, psychological and criminal impediments? 

BOMBSHELL AND I SUSPECT MORE TO COME!

Pope accepts resignation of McCarrick from the College of Cardinals

• Christopher White and Inés San Martín
  Jul 28, 2018
  VATICAN CORRESPONDENT

“Yesterday evening the Holy Father received the letter in which Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Archbishop Emeritus of Washington (U.S.A.), presented his resignation as a member of the College of Cardinals,” said a statement released on Saturday by the Vatican’s press office.

The statement continued to say that Francis accepted McCarrick’s resignation from the cardinalate and “has ordered his suspension from the exercise of any public ministry, together with the obligation to remain in a house yet to be indicated to him, for a life of prayer and penance until the accusations made against him are examined in a regular canonical trial.”

AS I AM ON VACATION I HAVE LOST TRACK OF DAYS OF THE WEEK AS WELL AS THE DATE OF THE DAY

This past Monday, July 23 would have been my father's 108th birthday. This of course means if the answer is, "He died on December 25, 1987," the question is, "What day did my father die?"

Of course if you do the math, my dad was born on July 23, 1910.

Happy 108th daddy! I doubt that this Canadian from a small family farm in Judique, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ever thought that he would go to war for the USA, end up in Italy, marry an Italian women and have three crazy Italian children to match his wife. Nor did he ever think he would die in Augusta, Georgia and be buried there.

Life has its twists and turns to say the least!

And this Ariel view from the bomb's chamber of an American fighter plane shows my mother's apartment building in Livorno, Italy taking a direct hit. During air raids, residents were asked to go to the building's basement for shelter. Everyone in the basement was killed and the apartment building imploded into the basement. Since I am posting this, I can tell you my mom and her parents and other siblings were not home that day but in a suburb of Livorno, Ardenza!