Jesuit Rev. Patrick Conroy Denies Christ

St. Ignatius. Ask yourself in whose name he prayed......

Shocking affirmation of the newly appointed chaplain of the United States Congress; unsurprisingly, a Jesuit.

Rev. Patrick Conroy is on record saying:

I never pray in the name of Jesus — except when I’m doing something Catholic — saying Mass, for example.

This would look like a serious case of schizophrenia, if it wasn’t just a normal case of being a Jesuit. A Jesuit like the chap tolerating homo masses in Manhattan, or like the chaps leading universities with links to Planned Parenthood, or like the chap denying the existence of Hell.

Interviewed for the liberal Huffington Post and – being a Jesuit – wanting to accommodate everyone and the devil, our hero of the day basically says that he prays in the name of Jesus only when he really must because of his profession but otherwise, hey, he is far too inclusive for narrow-minded acts like……… praying in the name of Jesus.

Someone of his confreres should explain to him the origin of his order’s name. If anyone still remembers it, or was taught it in the first place.

So we have a Jesuit appointed to a prestigious and exposed position, saying that Jesus for him is confined to the realm of strict professional duty. When he prays alone, or when he talks to others, he will simply ignore Jesus and pray – who knows – some other non specified, politically correct, inclusive, huffington-post-approved deity instead.

What this Jesuit (who might or might not be a Christian, but I doubt it) is basically doing, is:

1) denying Jesus in a way which, he thinks, wouldn’t automatically cost him his habit; he might be, unfortunately, right on his assumption, though if the Jesuits were still Christians I think the matter would look entirely different.

2) making of Jesus an embarrassment that he is ready to push out of the way whenever halfway practicable; and

3) making a clear statement of Assisi-I-style religious syncretism, in which Jesus is nothing more than a badge to wear on certain occasions, a particular aspect of one way to pray; basically, an option.

Of course, one must hope that the usual clarification will now hit the computer screens, explaining to us what a horrible misunderstanding this is and how “white” has clearly being misunderstood as “white” when it is clear that it means “black” instead. Only, no one – not even one who has probably long begun to forget what Christianity is, as I bet most Jesuit are doing – could have possibly conceived such an utterance without having a very clear idea of what the implications are and without asking for the text to be modified or, failing that, issuing a clarification together with the interview.

This has not happened; which means that Rev. Conroy is either blissfully unaware of what he has said, or doesn’t care a straw.

Yep, he must be a Jesuit.

Mundabor

Posted on May 20, 2011, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. Dear Mundabor, whenever I think I’ve passed the stage of ever being shocked by anything again, you manage to convince me that we haven’t hit bottom yet! 😦

    • Sorry to give such sorrow, Mimi 😉

      I am much angered by such episodes, but it helps me to think that the Church is indefectible, and these idiots all too transient… 😉

      M

  2. You are doing a fine job exposing this kind of rubbish. Bravo, and keep ’em coming.

    God bless

  3. The Jesuits really know how to make my blood boil sometimes. How unhappy he must be to live a life of poverty and celibacy when not doing it in the name of Jesus. He must feel unbelieveably alone and trapped. All of these CINO heterodox priests must feel that way. They have lied to themselves and to God.

    • Irenaeus,

      at this point I doubt that these people live a life of celibacy, at least if they are tempted. In the end, when one begins to lie to oneself about Jesus, he is ready to lie to oneself about everything else.

      M

  4. I am not 100% certain but I believe this man is talking about his job as the chaplain to the US C ongress, where mentioning the name of Our Lord would be akin to one waving garlic in front of a vampire. And, of course, this is why he was made a chaplain to the Congress: because of his cowardice, his obsequiosness, his total lack of true Catholic charity, etc. Indeed he fits in perfectly with the Masonic ethos that characterizes the US government. So, no surprises there.

    Anyone who would be chaplain to the poofs, idiots, murderes of the innocent, cowards and ward-heelers who make up the US Congress is ipso facto a Catholic in name only.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: