"5) Given the doctrinal issues underlying the deplorable behavior in question, certain lines of response have been proposed:

a) the Pastors of the Church need clearly to promote the correct moral teaching of the Church and publicly to reprimand individuals who spread dissent and groups which advance ambiguous approaches to pastoral care; "

http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=25881

Wow! The Cardinals put in first place the very fulcrum of the question! Our most beloved Pope made them see clearly what the problem really is! And there are people who think it is time for him to resign :-)

The media gave voice to liberals who were laughing from cheek to cheek, saying that "their agenda would be at least heard, and that their position was stenghtened by the recent events". The closeness to the Devil really makes one blind...

Veni Creator Spiritus! Mentes tuorum visita!

Hallelujah!

Thank you Lord, once more you show clearly your presence in your Church, and confirms us in our Faith in Thee!!!

Thank you thank you thank you...

John, Eugene, sorry for not answering your comments in the other threads, I was at the same time with no time and very sad and depressed about the many very very sad things that are going on (America, Russia, Israel)...

Iube Domine Benedicere.

-- Atila (atila@choose.com.br), April 24, 2002

Answers

Liberal "catholics" must thank God too. In other times, they would have at least been excommunicated. They must thank God that His Church has become very very understanding in these last few centuries... :-)

-- Atila (atila@choose.com.br), April 24, 2002.

Maybe I am just euphoric, but it seems to me that we must register this day as a historic date. I feel that we are beginning a turning point in Church History. One in which bishops and clergy will begin to hear what John Paul The Great has been saying again and again from day one when he acended to Peter´s throne, and they have so far pretended not to hear, out of humane respect. He hath given his life for the Church, fruit is coming.

I ask you again to read the McCloskey´s article I recommended some days ago, about what the Church will look like in 30 years.

Introibo ad altare Dei Ad Deum qui laetificat iuventutem meam!

-- Atila (atila@choose.com.br), April 24, 2002.

Praise God! Hallelujah! Glory to God! Let the revival begin!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), April 24, 2002.

Gail, I rejoice with you, who has just arrived to our Church.

But I think You cannot even understand what an old sod like me may be feeling. That God may be so merciful to us, despite our sins and gross betrayals.

Jeffrey, be sure to be heard in those visitations mentioned in the ewtn article I quoted and linked to! :-)

Miserere mei, Domine, secundum magnam misericordiam tuam Et secundum multitudine miserationem tuorum dele iniquitatem meam!

-- Atila (atila@choose.com.br), April 24, 2002.

"6) We propose that the Bishops of the United States set aside a day for prayer and penance throughout the Church in the United States, in order to implore reconciliation and the renewal of ecclesial life. "

Just let me know of it, so that I can join!

Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domini Qui fecit Coelum et terram!

-- Atila (atila@choose.com.br), April 24, 2002.

I think the best so far to come out of the interviews I heard on CNN was admission of the need of greater involvement of the laity. The old men need to be taken down a bit in the area of humility and begin to move the church toward a democracy.

The church is not a stagnant creation, it is a living and breathing entity and along with the rest of the world... evolving. That was already pointed out in Vatican ll. The church must continue to change and evolve. This crisis is a tremendous opportunity for the beginning of dialogue in many areas...women priests, married priests, laity involvement, etc., etc..

I believe we are the beginning of a new church.

-- Joan (godessss@mindspring.com), April 24, 2002.

Pope St. Pius X in his amazing encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis:

The Modernist as Reformer

38. It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, some idea may be gained of the reforming mania which possesses them: in all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. Reform of philosophy, especially in the seminaries: the scholastic philosophy is to be relegated to the history of philosophy among obsolete systems, and the young men are to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. Reform of theology; rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be for the future written and taught only according to their modern methods and principles. Dogmas and their evolution are to be harmonised with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been duly reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, the number of external devotions is to be reduced, or at least steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. Ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic parts. Its spirit with the public conscience, which is not wholly for democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy, and even to the laity, and authority should be decentralised. The Roman Congregations, and especially the index and the Holy Office, are to be reformed. The ecclesiastical authority must change its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political and social organization, it must adapt itself to those which exist in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, both in the estimation in which they must be held and in the exercise of them. The clergy are asked to return to their ancient lowliness and poverty, and in their ideas and action to be guided by the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, echoing the teaching of their Protestant masters, would like the suppression of ecclesiastical celibacy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed according to their principles?

Joan, you are a true Modernist. I am curious, why are you so vehemently opposed to the Catholic Church?

-- Brian (sacerdod@hotpop.com), April 24, 2002.

Joan, unfortunately (for you), it seems you have not understood the very first thing the Cardinals stated. I repeat it here for you just in case you skipped it:

"the Pastors of the Church need clearly to promote the correct moral teaching of the Church and publicly to *reprimand individuals* who spread dissent and groups which advance ambiguous approaches to pastoral care;" (emphasis mine)

Well, they are refering exactly to people like you. Those who share your ideas and continue to hold teaching positions inside the Church, confusing people and spreading error, will finally be silenced, something that I am afraid should have been done many many years ago. If it was not done, it is because the Church is far more democratic than you claim. The pope, respecting the subsidiariety principle, has until now, let american bishops be far too lenient with heretics like you.

A new time is begining, yes. In that I agree with you. But for diferent reasons. People like you will no more be permited to teach in seminaries and catholic schools and universities. Enough with heretics using the Church´s pulpit to spread devillish absurds. As I have said, Joan, you must thank God for today´s Church being so undestanding. If it were six centuries ago, you would have been burned at the stake with the positions you hold.

There is nothing wrong in lay people holding positions in the church, as long as they are CATHOLIC, something that cannot be said of you.

May God have mercy of you.

-- Atila (atila@choose.com.br), April 24, 2002.

Atila,

They'll hear from me, and I won't be the only one! We're sick of dissent!

-- Jeffrey Zimmerman (jeffreyz@seminarianthoughts.com), April 25, 2002.

Joan writes:

"I think the best so far to come out of the interviews I heard on CNN was admission of the need of greater involvement of the laity. The old men need to be taken down a bit in the area of humility and begin to move the church toward a democracy."

Who would be surprised by this opinion from a non-Catholic. I still don't see why you could care about Christianity when you have such little respect for Jesus and the Bible.

"I believe we are the beginning of a new church."

Correction Joan, you are in a new church. It is called "Wicca-Joanism." It's headed by the high-priestess Joan, of the anti-nounites.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 25, 2002.

The secular media is not interested in understanding at all. They are only interested in the money that the news creates and also to control the Church. They will slant any news in any fashion just to make money. The Boston Globe has been doing that for many years now. As long as it makes money for them they will print it.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 25, 2002.

Fred,

I agree that there is a profit motive that attacks the integrity of many newspapers. But, more importantly, the newspapers themselves don't fight or hide the fact that they support a particular political slant. The "news" reports that are published are often thinly veiled op-ed pieces sprinkled with selective facts.

The mere fact that cited facts are true is not a proof that other critical facts haven't been hidden. When we read the Soviet Union's Pravda news, how many people in the US believe their news? I'm told that Pravda means "Truth"! Selective-truth reporting was a favorite technique of the Soviets. Whether a government publishes a newpaper or a rich citizen publishes a newspaper, there is never a guarantee of objectivity.

My two unbiased cents, :-)

Mateo el verdadero

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 25, 2002.

Mateo

I have seen Margery Egan (Spelling?) from the Boston Globe on CNN who claims to be Catholic and she has come across to me as a very controlling type of woman and wants to control the Boston Churches and take full control away from Cardinal Law. And she calls herself a Catholic? She seems to want to also change the roles of Priests and have full layperson control. That would in my way of thinking be like controlling Christ Jesus with an iron fist from women. Personally I don't like the woman speaks and behaves. That is what I have seen. Political control.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 25, 2002.

"She seems to want to also change the roles of Priests and have full layperson control."

Fred,

This is all part of the Modernist agenda. I am telling you, and those that haven't read it, you need to read Pascendi Dominici Gregis by St. Pope Pius X, it is all there in black and white.

Did you know that during the 60's and 70's a lot of communists and Masons entered with the sole intent of becoming priests, in order to take it down from the inside? In fact, if you were to read Pope Leo XIII's encyclical, Humanum Genus (On Freemasonry) you would see, in his prophetic wisdom, the society we have today. St. Maximillian Kolbe, when he was alive, attributed much of the problems to Freemasonry. Call me nuts and delusional if you will, but, again, it is all there in black and white.

Let the persecutions and martydom begin, white AND red.

-- Brian (sacerdos@hotpop.com), April 25, 2002.

Brian

Yes, I have read that letter on the freemasonry. On Maximillian Kolbe. I did not understand you clearly. Did he contest the Masons? I know the Masons tried in many devious ways to break the Church and still do to this day. Cardinal Law has a letter out there condemning the masons as well because of the Canon was misinterpreted by them in the past years. He stopped them cold in Massachusetts. As a member of the Knight of Columbus, I have watched all that is written on the Masons for some time too. There is a very disturbing rumor on Pope John XXIII being published out there too and I have no idea if it is valid or not.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 25, 2002.

Brian

St M Kolbe was a staunch fighter to protect both Jew and Catholic from the lies and clutches of Masons and Communists as well. WOW.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 25, 2002.

Fred,

To clear a few things up. Leo XIII in his encyclical both warned and condemned the errors of Freemasonry. St. Maximillian Kolbe attributed much of the problems within the Church and without to Freemasonry and their agenda.

When I responded to your original post, I was attributing the news reporter you mentioned to the Modernist movement, and recommended you read the encyclical, if you have not alrady done so, by St. Pope Pius X on Modernism.

Hope that clears a few things up

-- Brian (sacerdos@hotpop.com), April 25, 2002.

Brian, why would people call you nuts and delusional? People believe what they want to believe, and if a thought makes them uncomfortable or makes them feel that will be made light of, they won't believe it. I call that real 'ignorance' and real 'fear', unlike lame use of those words that the opposition throws around.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), April 25, 2002.

Emerald,

You would actually be surprised at what I have been called, and continue to be called. I learn a lot of new words that way. As a good priest once told me, no one likes a barking dog :)

"Don't say, "That person bothers me." Think: "That person sanctifies me." (Bl. Escriva The Way; 174)

-- Brian (sacerdos@hotpop.com), April 25, 2002.

"Brian, why would people call you nuts and delusional? People believe what they want to believe, and if a thought makes them uncomfortable or makes them feel that will be made light of, they won't believe it. I call that real 'ignorance' and real 'fear', unlike lame use of those words that the opposition throws around.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), April 25, 2002."

Because they are against thinking, they don't want people to question God word because they don't think people have the right. And this leads tour EVIL, Pain, Torcher and suffering.

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 25, 2002.

I didn't word it very well; sorry... I really meant to refer to how one would say that the priests could have actually been planted long ago by those who would attempt to damage the Church from the inside outward. Why, that would be conspiracy oriented thinking, right? lol. I meant that the type of criticism you would get generally comes from your allies who don't want to be burdened by considering such possibilities... I mean geez, think of the planning and day by day management of such a project in order to pull it off successfully. And if it is true, how many other areas of our daily existence could be made up of such? See, that's a thought burden most don't want to touch, so they walk away from it. They want documented evidence, yet they wouldn't even consider it if you shoved the documentation in their face.

-- Emerald (emerald1@home.com), April 25, 2002.

"They want documented evidence, yet they wouldn't even consider it if you shoved the documentation in their face."

You mean sort of like the encyclicals by St. Pope Pius X, Leo XIII, and even John Paul II? Ahh, but you forget, that documentation is antiquated and outdated, or in JPII's case, relative to my own "morality." Remember, nothing existed prior to Vatican II, for you see, had that been the case, then we might have to admit to our sinful ways, false justifications of those sins, and Papal authority. ;)

-- Brian (sacerdos@hotpop.com), April 25, 2002.

Brian,

Your post is a great summary of the top excuses used to discredit and trivialize clear Church teachings! It's funny how people can convince themselves that they (in their short lives) know so much more than a 2000 year old institution guided by the Holy Spirit.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 26, 2002.