https://catholicexchange.com/st-catherine-siena-reverence-due-priests/ "Reading The Dialogue helped me to realize how important it is to pause in these times of temptation and resist any impulse to speak badly of a priest." A few excerpts of dialogues: The reverence you pay to [priests] is not actually paid to them but to me, in virtue of the blood I have entrusted to their ministry. If this were not so, you should pay them as much reverence as to anyone else, and no more. It is this ministry of theirs that dictates that you should reverence them and come to them, not for what they are in themselves but for the power I have entrusted to them, if you would receive the sacraments of the Church…. So the reverence belongs not to the ministers, but to me and to this glorious blood made one thing with me because of the union of divinity with humanity. And just as the reverence is done to me, so also is the irreverence, for I have already told you that you must not reverence them for themselves, but for the authority I have entrusted to them. Therefore you must not sin against them, because if you do, you are really sinning not against them but against me. This I have forbidden, and I have said that it is my will that no one should touch them. For this reason no one has excuse to say, “I am doing no harm, nor am I rebelling against holy Church. I am simply acting against the sins of evil pastors.” Such persons are deluded, blinded as they are by their own selfishness…. It is me they assault, just as it was me they reverenced. To me redounds every assault they make on my ministers: derision, slander, disgrace, abuse. Whatever is done to them I count as done to me…. By not paying me reverence in the persons of my ministers, they have lost respect for the latter and persecuted them because of the many sins and faults they saw in them. If in truth the reverence they had for them had been for my sake, they would not have cut it off on account of any sin in them. For no sin can lessen the power of this sacrament, and therefore their reverence should not lessen either. When it does, it is against me they sin. (116) You should hold [these sinful ministers] out to me with tears and great desire, so that I in my goodness may clothe them with the garment of charity… Indeed, I have appointed them and given them to you to be angels on earth…as I have told you. When they are less than that, you ought to pray for them. But you are not to judge them. Leave the judging to me, and I, because of your prayers and my own desire, will be merciful to them. (120) The more you offer me sorrowful and loving desires for them, the more you will prove your love for me. For the service neither you nor my other servants can do for me you ought to do for them instead. Then I will let myself be constrained by the longing and tears and prayers of my servants, and will be merciful to my bride by reforming her with good and holy shepherds. (129)
This is powerful Andree. A good reminder. I wonder if it should extend to Pope and Cardinals and Bishops.
I remember, though, that the Church has been infiltrated, which must mean that some priests are infiltrators. Yes, we must reverence the authority Jesus has entrusted to His priests. And pray for them. But there are some priests whose actions are heretical and how can we avoid pointing out the heresy?
Popes, Cardinals and Bishops were priests first, and since they are tasked with caring for their priest "sons", they would likely benefit from heartfelt prayers. It's possible to point out error without judging someone's heart. It's up to them whether or not to accept that correction in the end. Mother St. Theresa once said that "God has His own way of working in the hearts of men, and we cannot know how close He is to each one."
For this reason no one has excuse to say, “I am doing no harm, nor am I rebelling against holy Church. I am simply acting against the sins of evil pastors.” Such persons are deluded, blinded as they are by their own selfishness…. It is me they assault, just as it was me they reverenced. To me redounds every assault they make on my ministers: derision, slander, disgrace, abuse. Whatever is done to them I count as done to me…. _____________________ The Pope has been given far more authority by Christ than other priests so the sin of detraction and calumny is even greater. It is scandalous that some prominent members of this forum post detraction and calumny against him...Calling him a Mason with no hard proof! The Catechism of The Catholic Church teaches us that the greater the public office one holds, the greater the sin of detraction and calumny is when leveled against them. Yet accusations and judgements that forum members are not qualified to make are routinely thrown around. Before accusing anyone of heresy, or masonry, much less a cardinal or Pope, people better realize they will have to answer to Christ himself for every word spoken....and if the accuser is wrong....answer to Christ as if we accused Christ himself of heresy and masonry.
I have seen a photo of the Pope when he was a priest giving the Masonic hand inside the shirt. (Photoshopped?) Freemasonry by its nature is secretive. I don’t think we necessarily accuse Christ when we are able to see the handwriting on the wall in the sinful changes that are being done to the 2000 year Tradition of Catholicism. We already know that there has been Masonic infiltration. I do respect the Holy Office of the Pope. And I can see your point, NSD. But I don’t accept it in its entirety. Yes, for sure, we are called to prayer.
You admit it may be photoshopped. Yet you chose to post about it anyway??? And if we had an ancient document that accused Christ of a sin...that could be fake...Do you think it would be ok to post it and say ...It might be true?
What a fantastic reminder!! Boy, do I see where I have been guilty. Praise God for this clearer understanding.
We live in days when the waters of the priesthood have been horrifically muddied via freemasonry, outright heresy and scandal. Also, instant availability of disturbing news via the internet is a constant drain on our sensibilities. We must be very careful. Still, the scenes of pachamamas and the like are scandalous and evil. Prayer and fasting must take precedence over mere lamenting and/or condemnation. How long, O Lord?!
One time a Cardinal rebuked St Catherine for not speaking to him with respect; to which Saint Catherine replied, 'When your reverence acts as someone deserving respect I will record you such respect as you deserve'.
I don't have any illusions that St Catherine would hesitate saying strong words to any priest, even the Pope. Here is an example of her doing just that... "You are in charge of the garden of the holy Church. So [first of all] uproot from that garden the stinking weeds filled of impurity and avarice, and bloated with pride (I mean the evil pastors and administrators who poison and corrupt the garden). ... Use your authority, you who are in charge of us! Uproot these weeds and throw them out where they will have nothing to administer! Tell them to tend to administering themselves by a good holy life. Plant fragrant flowers in this garden for us, pastors and administrators who will be true servants of Jesus Christ crucified, who will seek only God’s honor..." ________________________ What I object to is accusations about priests and Bishops (even the Pope) when they are founded on speculation, and not directed to the priest, but about a priest (Bishop or Pope) when they are not here to defend themselves, and are speculative. Blog entries or articles have been posted here recently speculating that the Pope is a Mason. There better be more evidence then a suspect photo for evidence, or it is sinful to do so....(this type of "photo evidence" of masonry) was also used to accuse St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict of masonry. It is scandalous. It is wrong.
From the video, Father says at minute 30 that a freemason was in charge of reforming the liturgy: Cardinal Bugnini, and Cardinal Sebastian Baggio, prefect of the congregation of bishops, in charge of selecting bishops from 1972-1984 was also a freemason.
Very interesting video. Well worth watching as it explains a lot. Here's a question - who was the last Pope who was really in charge of the Church?
Well even Moses wasn't good enough for the people in the desert, most of who rebelled against him too. But God dealt with those people. In a bible course I took recently, it was pointed out that when even Aaron and Myriam "murmured against Moses", God put leprosy on Myriam as punishment and not on Aaron because Aaron was consecrated to God. As the only unconsecrated one, Myriam had to bear the burden of the visible punishment for them both. Aaron belonged to God and would be dealt with by God later on. But consecrated to God means put aside for Him so that He alone deals with those consecrated. Several months ago, I had an experience at mass. I was in a bad state regarding the clergy and had trouble concentrating. The readings were all about end times, and one reading was from the book of revelation and basically it was describing current events. Well the priest, who is usually good in his homilies, gave a sermon that just boggled my mind because it insinuated that Medjuorje was false and any Catholics who go there a lot or hang onto the messages were not truly in the faith.... I was in shock and during consecration my thoughts veered off into dangerous territory I think because I remember praying "well if he doesn't love you Lord, I do". And I immediately got the message: "you cannot love Me if you don't love Me in My priest". It was a stern reproach, and it knocked me right out of my bad thoughts and I immediately repented and offered the mass for the priest instead. I know not to judge but didn't realise where my thoughts had gone in that moment, and so it was a blessing to be reproached. I am sharing this because it is dangerous to criticise priests, a serious offense to God. I love the words in the bible, "murmuring against Moses" - it sounds like raising rumors. God hates it. God chose Moses and aaron even though humanly speaking, they may not have appeared like good choices for us, but who are we? As for infiltrations, those happened from the very beginning when Judas joined the twelve and Jesus welcomed him. I saw the books of Valtorta opposed again in another thread, which is a great pity because one of the reason Jesus gives for giving us that tremendous revelation is because of Judas. In the visions of the gospel, we see just how much Jesus and His Mother in particular suffered because of Judas, how much they prayed for him and how He handled him. Jesus knew there would always be Judases in His Church and He told one of the apostles once that Judas was a cross that they had to learn to carry properly.
Yes. This means it was a Free Mason who basically organised the 1960's Mass and a Free Mason who arranged who would and who would not be a Bishop for 14 years. Gulp. I believe this priest. Well at least I believe he is telling the truth as he knows it. Anyway it explains loads and loads and loads.
I refer to Canon Laws .208-231 (i.e.24 canons) which explicitly states the rights and duties of all Christ’s faithful and lay members of Christ’s faithful. Which state that the Faithful not only have right but a duty to speak out and be heard when they see wrong doing. The days of put up and shut up are over. The main way child abusing clergy got away with it was that the Laity and other Clergy were instructed by the abusers and their panderers that they had a duty to show reverence to the child abusers and keep silent. Which they did. http://www.canonlawsocietyofindia.org/research/the-rights-and-obligations-of-the-laity/
If we have not only a right but a duty, according to Church Law when we discover a priest or Bishop abusing a child, to speak out, do we not also have the same duty when we see the clergy engaging in heresy, or in homosexual predation, or in liturgical abuse and so on? How and in what way is being silent about such things helpful? I can see how being silent might be very, very helpful to the abuser, I am not so sure how it might be helpful to the poor abused? I believe here that St Catherine of Sienna was talking of idle gossip or vacuous slander against the clergy, not by aiding and abetting their wrong doing by pretending nothing is happening. A kind of Holy, 'Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil ', three monkeys deal. This is why after Mass at Church I do not linger about to gossip with other people but head on off home after prayer. I don't believe hanging about to gossip for long periods can ever lead to much good. I notice in my own Church people lingering about for up to 2 hour talking. Much talk leads to much sin.
