28 August 2018

The usual gangs of suspects?

The current unease in the worldwide Church Militant is not confined to any single tendenz. The Australian Archbishop Coleridge spoke for many when he said that, while PF's letter on clerical child abuse was good, action was needed. So-called liberals (Tina Beattie) and so-called conservatives (Bishop Egan) have expressed a desire for lay involvement in the solution of a problem which has, disastrously, impinged horribly upon the laity. Clergy invited to perticipate in any contemplated initiatives could profitably be married clergy drawn from the sui iuris Oriental Churches and the Ordinariates.

The Holy See has a dismal record in this area. One thinks of the support given to a multiple abuser during the Legionaries of Christ fiasco under S John Paul II; and the multiple mistakes made under PF's watch. The Curia is under a cloud, suspected of itself having a strong, perhaps dominant, homosexual element. The Episcopate's record has been lamentable or worse ... Successors of the Apostles, indeed.

Bishop Egan's suggestion of a Lay Congress followed by an Extraordinary Synpod is a good one. At the moment, we are anticipating an Ordinary Synod which, according to rumour and expectation, is being fixed up so that a married presbyterate can be brought into being in Latin America ... a move which seems to receive rather more support from Germans than it does from Latin Americans. Whispers abound that a 'gentler' elaboration of the Church's teaching about homosexuality may be promoted. We shall doubtless behold all the usual phenomena which accompany a PF synod, including bullying and ruthless manipulation, in order to secure the results which PF and his cronies desire. Perhaps the pages of the Catechism will be further amended so as to include more of what PF picturesquely calls caca.

Meanwhile, somebody is fiddling while Rome ... quinimmo much of the Catholic World ... is burning. Do I need to discuss with you the re-arrangement of the deckchairs on the Titanic?

Everybody outside a charmed Inner Circle can see that the clerical sexual abuse scandal is what actually demands decisive and immediate action. The worms in the bowels of the dogs in the street know it. Vatican II, like Lateran V, dealt with insignificant questions while totally unaware of the real problems which were beginning to show themselves. Is it really essential for us to make the same mistakes all over again?

In a sane Church, the planned synod would be put on hold, and the pressing crisis would be faced. There might be surprising practical agreements between liberals and traditionalists.

However, one new problem is arising, or, at least, moving into prominence. The PF faction in the Church hopes to detach the question of abuse from the matter of homosexuality, to define the problem as 'clericalism', and to use this presupposition to belabour traditional concepts of priesthood. The Traditional faction believes that most of the problem is one of ephebophile clergy who are homosexual.

We have heard little from Africa. How much experience do the Churches of that continent have of paedophilia, ephebophilia, or homosexuality? If the fundamental answer to that question were to be anything like "Not nearly as much as the First World does", might it not be a good thing if the next Pope, after the removal of the current blustering but ineffective occupant of the Roman See, were to charge a high-powered Commission of African experts in appropriate fields to survey the failed Churches of the Enlightenment countries, so as to produce an analysis which could form the basis of renewal?

That's what I would do! The Commission could be idiomatically called 'the Revenge', short for 'Africa's Revenge upon Walter Kasper'.


Mick Jagger Gathers No Mosque said...

Dear Father. Smashing post.

Many (most?) trads think that Vatican Two was a problem-begging Council that was unnecessary but many (most?) trads are unaware that the great Roman, Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, and Ernesto Cardinal Ruffini of Palermo,both recognised and advocated for the Council because, as Ottaviani observed, ..the need to clarify and define several doctrinal points, given the heap of errors that are becoming widespread in philosophical and theological. moral and social norms and this was in 1949 after he and Ruffini has petitioned Pope Pius XII to call a council (He refused the idea) and it was the two of them who visited Pope Saint John in his cell during the conclave:

Ottaviani averred He had spoken about it to me from the moment of his election. Or, to be more precise, it was I who visited him in his little room at the conclave on the eve of the election. Among other things I told him, "Your Eminence, it is necessary to think about a council." Cardinal Ruffini. who was present at the conversation, was of the same mind.

Ottavianu's expertise, experience, knowledge, and wisdom was poured into the documents of preparation for the council but, of course, the profound preparation was voted down by the conciliar revolutionaries.

"The Second Vatican Council (an unwritten story)" by Professor Roberto de Mattei.

A Daughter of Mary said...

Yes, Africa is an interesting place, with many cultures. I can't quote who or where but I remember a Churchman from Africa speaking about homosexuality. He said in essence - that's not our culture. It does appear that the rash of homosexuals in the West can be put down to culture. We have been taught to do what feels good above all. And I guess that perverted kind of activity fits the bill.

The great divorce (pardon the pun) between homosexuality and 'abuse' has been granted. It's about the children, the victims, the abuse of trust, the coverup. Nothing about homosexual promiscuity and grooming, or that it's an abomination before God.

I believe Pope Francis has just recently stated that we must rid the Church of homosexual clergy. How can we do that when we have told homosexuals time and time again that God wants them to be happy? How can they be happy unless they take pleasure in doing what God made them to do? Francis' soul may be redeemable, but his mind seems to have become filled with contradiction and illogic.

It's not about the sex. It's about the loss of the Catholic Faith. Apostasy is Francis problem, not any coverup.

John Vasc said...

PF would have us all believe the problem is 'clericalism' - i.e. that celibacy + the priesthood forces men to be homosexuals, as they cannot be chaste (both of which, and the implied causal link between them, will come as surprising news to many of the laity). And how much better to have a little lay conclave deciding where the candlesticks should go, where the EMs should deposit their handbags while giving out communion, when the rainbow vestments are appropriate, etc.
As the brilliant Roberto de Mattei points out on Rarate: ' «Le cléricalisme, voilà l’ennemi!». “Behold the enemy - clericalism,” The famous phrase pronounced on May 4th 1876 in the French Chamber of Deputies by Léon Gambetta (1838-1882), leading exponent of The Grand Orient of France, could easily have been made Pope Francis.'

Woody said...

Anyone remember Amoris Laetitia, or the Dubai, or the filial appeal? What are the odds that the Vigano memorial will suffer the same fate if PF just keeps saying nothing?

Fred W. said...

and from the bureaus of clarification and doctrinal development:
VATICAN CITY, August 28, 2018, (LifeSiteNews) – The Vatican has deleted from its official records Pope Francis’ recent advice that parents should get psychiatric help for children who demonstrate homosexual tendencies.
“The Vatican later removed his phrase from its official account, saying he had not meant to suggest that homosexuality was a mental illness,” according to Agence France Presse (AFP).
A Vatican spokeswoman told AFP the Pope’s words had been scrubbed while trying to not “change the thoughts of the Holy Father.”
CNA version:
"Second. There have always been homosexuals, people with homosexual tendencies. Always. Sociologists say, I don’t know if it’s true, that in times of epochal changes, some social, ethical phenomena increase; one of them would be this. This is an opinion of some sociologists. Your question is clear: what would I say to a father who sees that his son or daughter has that tendency? I would say first to pray, pray! Don’t condemn. Dialogue, understand, make space for son and the daughter. Make space so they can express themselves.
Then, at what age does this restlessness of the child express itself? It’s important. One thing is when it shows itself in a child. There are many things to do with psychiatry, to see how things are. Another thing is when it manifests itself after 20 years of age…"
Vatican version:
"There have always been homosexuals and persons with homosexual tendencies. Always. The sociologists say, but I don’t know if it’s true, that at times of epochal change certain social and ethical phenomena increase, and that this would be one of them. This is the opinion of some sociologists. Your question is clear: what would I say to a father who sees his son or daughter has that tendency. I would tell him first of all to pray. Pray. Don’t condemn, [but] dialogue, understand, make room for his son or daughter. Make room for them to say what they have to say. Then too, at what age does this concern of the child become evident? This is important. It is one thing when it shows up in childhood when there are so many things that one can do to see how the matter stands; it is another when it is shows up at twenty years of age or so. "

... just what would be "this other thing" ?

Second - on abortion:
"The problem of abortion is not religious. We are not against abortion for religion, no! It’s a human problem and it should be studied anthropologically. To study abortion, beginning with the religious fact is to skip over thought. The problem of abortion should be studied anthropologically. There is always the anthropological problem of the ethics of eliminating a human being to resolve a problem. But this is already to enter into the discussion. I just want to underscore this: I will never allow that the discussion on abortion begins on the religious fact. No, it’s an anthropological problem, it’s a human problem. This is my thinking."

Will there soon be a "pope Francis" award in Anthropolgy ?
I'm waiting for the Sacrament of Reconciliation to be phased out next, although maybe we could replace the priest with a psychiatrist. Naw, too expensive. Just hang a box for spare change outside the confessional, enter, confess, and hear a tape recorded absolution with "Pick One" - or none of the above - options for penance. Is there a Guiness record for how many people can fit in a standard confessional ? And we'll be able to do away with those community penance services - everyone's conscience is right for them anyway.

Meanwhile on the West coast of the USA, the good folks in San Jose - following USCCB guidelines - are providing their bishop with a $2,5 million dollar retirement home.
I'm also waiting for the government run church is China to finally be offcially recognized by the Vatican.
There's just so much to look forward to these days ! Hagen Lio !

Mick Jagger Gathers No Mosque said...

Dear Father. ABS wrote about the preparations preceding V2 and he thought these links would be useful



Jim C. said...

The clerical celibacy bit seems to be arising again in all of this. The 2011 2nd report of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice claims that celibacy did not cause this mess. Furthermore, the report states that this is not specifically a homosexual "preferential" abuser phenomenon, but a "situational abuser" phenomenon [please don't shoot the messanger; I merely report it herein!]. I am not sure what is really meant by situational abuse. Read the report for yourself.

Here is the layman's article on the report which also links to the report itself. A big mess indeed!

The Psychology Today article:


The John Jay College of Criminal Justice 2nd report of 2011


Mark said...

"There might be surprising practical agreements between liberals and traditionalists."

I respectfully doubt that. Libchurchers (That's what I call liberals. I will NOT call them Christians.) aren't happy until they replace the orthodox Christian faith and orthodox Christian leaders with their own NON-Christian apostasies and apostates. That has been the history of most large Protestant denominations and it is how Pope Francis and allies are operating. And if the church is decimated by such predations, well, the libchurchers really don't care. Their aim is to trample orthodoxy under their feet.

In my mind, that precludes "practical agreements between liberals and traditionalists."

Woody said...

Dear ABS, very interesting material. What name or names were you then using?

Arthur Gallagher said...

I have noticed that numerous bishops, including Bp. Lopes, and several other ordinaries, have refused to cover for Pope Francis, and have been speaking good sense.

We need to abandon the paradigm of avoiding scandal, and respecting authority.

The homosexuals are deeply entrenched, tenacious and duplicitous. They must be treated harshly.

That includes treating Pope Francis according to his actions, not his rank.

There is no point in chasing the anti-pope thesis, or embracing sedevacantism, or questioning if Benedict is still Pope.

Yet the Papacy is a monarchy, not a dictatorship.

Unless he mends his ways, or is universally repudiated, Pope Francis should be treated as Pope, and told to his face what people think of his bad behavior.

Nicolas Bellord said...

The Pope says the abuse problem is one of clericalism. This is nonsense. The desire to commit sodomy is a matter of perverted sexual lust. Clericalism in the sense of abuse of authority is merely a means to an end i.e. to enable sodomy by using his position of authority. If a man wants to murder his wife he may pick up a kitchen knife to do so. His crime is murder not the possession of knives in the kitchen.

Nicolas Bellord said...

just another thought on clericalism. If what was wrong in these events was clericalism - in the sense of abuse of authority then is Pope Francis saying that where there is no clericalism then sodomy is okay? If two clerics engage in sodomy is it only wrong if one has authority over the other?