Daily Archives: July 3, 2011
The blog of EF Pastor Emeritus reports about the “Pastor intiative”, a delirious heretical initiative of Austrian priests and deacons thinking that they can have their way because they are many. Those of you who can read German can check here that the points repeated by E F faithfully reflect (albeit in the third person plural) the points of the “Pastor Initiative”.
For your convenience – and hoping not to ruin your dinner – I’ll copy and paste them here:
1. In every liturgy they will include a petition for church reform.
2. They will not deny Communion to faithful of good will, especially remarried people, members of other Christian churches, and in some cases those who have officially left the Catholic Church.
3. As much as possible they will avoid celebrating multiple times on Sundays and feastdays, and avoid scheduling circuit rider priests unknown to the community. A locally-planned Liturgy of the Word is preferable.
4. They will use the term “Priestless Eucharistic Celebration” for a Liturgy of the Word with distribution of Communion. This is how the Sunday Mass obligation is fulfilled when priests are in short supply.
5. They will ignore the prohibition of preaching by competently trained laity, including female religion teachers. In difficult times, the Word of God must be proclaimed.
6. They will advocate that every parish has a presiding leader – man or woman, married or unmarried, full-time or part time. Rather than consolidating parishes, they call for a new image of the priest.
7. They will take every opportunity to speak up publicly for the admission of women and married people to the priesthood. These would be welcome colleagues in ministry.
It would be difficult – but not entirely amusing – to try to rank these points in order of heretical content, or stupidity. It is also clear that even a very bad Pope, let alone a good one, should see in around twenty-seven seconds the destructive potential of this and the necessity of swiftly suffocating the revolt in the bud inviting the men to immediate retractation or dismissing them from the clerical state. I want to hope – desperately so – that if the bishops don’t act, Rome will.
Still, I do have some questions:
1. How can it be that a letter from a perfect stranger is sufficient to suspend a priest (Father Corapi, and many others) from his priestly functions, but the written and public self-denunciation of a priest as a heretic – and one who not only openly rebels to the rules of the Church, but even openly invites other priests to do the same – is not?
2. If 313 priests an deacons are not enough to punish them and set an example, when will the right moment be? When they have become 1000? 2000? 3000?
3. If there is no courage to act when the rebellious priests/deacons are 313, what should let us think that this courage will be found when these priests are a multiple of that?
4. How can it be that the Austrian bishops (provided that they do not, in fact, collude with the rebels) do not see that to let such an open call to revolt unpunished can only achieve the effect of encouraging others to participate to the rebellion?
5. How can a bishop, in his conscience, tolerate that such a priest remains in his function as priest of the Catholic church? How can he tolerate such a scandal? How can he leave such a priest at his place, in full standing, knowing that he is both in open revolt and clearly heretical? The scarcity of priests is fully irrelevant here as it is clearly better to have no priest that an heretic inviting priests and faithful to rebellion.
Again: if one didn’t know how inefficient and weak bishops can be, collusion would be the only reasonable hypothesis for such scandalous failure to act (see below).
6. Why is the Vatican doing nothing? When do they think it will be the moment to act? Are 313 priests/deacons in the same little country not enough? If not, what is enough? A revolt of Arian proportion all over the German-speaking world? Or perhaps it is better to wait that France explodes, too? What about Canada?
Now don’t think that there has being no reaction at all. Oh no. There has been the usual verbal alleged “sharp” reaction with Bishop Kapellari making very clear to them, with a sharp blabla, that he sharply disagrees. You don’t say? Really? Are you sure you are not being too harsh here, Your Grace? By the way, the last link would seem to indicate that of the 313, 250 are priests. A lot of people with Freundinnen there, for sure.
And as we talk about about bishops, make no mistake: they are the main culprits as a revolt of such massive proportions could never have been even conceived if the bishops had worked properly in the past years. The revolt of the grassroots (Austria is a relatively minor country, and 313 priests/deacons would be an awful lot in every country) is a clear indication of the complete failure at the episcopal level: failure to instruct, failure to warn, and failure to punish.
Unless of course the bishops are colluded; which would explain a thing or two.
This scandal is rapidly reaching Dutch proportions. The Dutch schism is probably the darkest page of the already, let us say, not entirely luminous pontificate of Pope Paul VI. When I read the pages about the schism on Iota Unum I remember thinking “thank God, this madness could never happen today and if it did, the punishment would be swift and exemplary”.
I don’t know anymore about swift. We’ll see about exemplary.
As every blogger does, I scout other blogs, news aggregators and press agencies to inform myself about what happens in the Catholic world and to decide what issues might be the subject of my next blog post. Some days are more eventful, others less and others still are positively boring.
What I have seen in the last days, though, is something of which I can’t remember the equal in this almost one year of blogging. The news of the so-called “same-sex marriage” has taken such a large place in the news panorama as to justify the opinion that this might become one of the biggest themes – if not the biggest one – of the 2012 US presidential race.
Mind, this is not the media storm raging one day and promptly substituted by other news the following one. The flow of angry reactions has been unabated for one week now; criticism has emerged from liberal outlets like the Boston Globe, and there are growing signs that the US episcopacy is going not to let this go.
In short, the times when homosexuals (we must stop calling them “gay”; we really do; would you call zoophiles “smart”?) could claim whatever “right” they wanted and the general population remained silent and embarrassed for fear of being considered “backward” and “oppressive” are rapidly coming to an end, the Christian ranks now slowly beginning to form.
When this happens, it will be the sure death of the homo agenda. What is generally not well perceived is that many societal issues are the pet of a tiny minority, imposed on the majority only because the latter is not upset enough to react against the imposition. It is like having a bad neighbour that is a nuisance only once in a while, and certainly not enough to start an all out fall out. But when the neighbour crosses some invisible line – or the homo agenda attacks the very foundation of Christian society; nay, of every society! – then the full mobilisation becomes, in time, unavoidable.
Or you can make a comparison with Pearl Harbour. The Japanese attacked the United States on the assumption that the country, satiated and corrupted, would have preferred to pay the price of peace rather than the one of war. But when the United States showed that this would not be the case, Japan’s war was already lost, the remaining 44 months being merely the time necessary to despatch the now already inevitable execution of Japan as a military power. Too big was the difference in military strenght, industrial capacity, technological potential. It was like a game of “Risk” by which one contestant can take an additional full handful of armies at every round. Already on the 8th December 1941, there was only one possible outcome.
The same happens in our days. Homosexuals comprise between 0.5% and 1.5% of the population. It is fair to say that they are, from the political point of view, less than a fringe group; they are, in fact, almost irrelevant. Their only hope is that they can make their issue the pet of some political group (liberals, say) and profit from the inertia of the population to get their agenda through. They are like Japan hoping that the United States don’t choose outright war.
If we look at the broader picture, we see that the combined forces of both the perverts and their assumed “intellectual” allies are vastly overwhelmed by the Christian base of the country, and that the pro-homo stance is by far not unanimous among the leftists. So much so, that even in time of prolonged media subservience to the homo agenda, and tepid resistance from the Church, they have lost all the 31 popular votes held on the matter, even in states like California! Let me stress this again: this is without the matter having become a dominant political issue, and without the Church having declared a holy war on this.
The decision in New York has, I think, changed the situation on the ground. New York State’s legislation is on its way to become the homos’ Pearl Harbour.
When the Christian giant awakens, it will take time and effort to get rid of their agenda, as it took time and effort to the United States to obliterate Japan as a military threat. But in one case as in the other, there is only one possible outcome.