Isn't it unspeakably sad that our first thought is that they will ignore it. " move on. Nothing to see here." That speaks volumes of where we are at in the Church.
This is just so so sad. As I said in another post quoting scripture " what you speak in the dark will be heard in the light. What you whisper in your inner chamber will be shouted from the rooftops."
I told you any adult who works with teens on a book called Heal me with your mouth the art of kissing is a pervert. I dont care who it is that person is not to be trusted no matter the excuses they make about catechesis etc
I almost posted something on the other thread about this guy about how the two quotes from that other book of his seem to indicate that Cardinal Fernandez views sexuality as something turned inwards for one's own pleasure but I refrained because the quotes *could* be construed otherwise. Despite the more graphic bits in this newly discovered book I think this quote illustrates this (in a way that can't be interpreted otherwise). The following quote isn't explicit but is very telling (google translate): "We therefore see that pleasure is also something religious, because "it is a gift from God". Therefore, those who are able to enjoy the presence of God can more easily be aware of God's love and therefore open themselves to loving others. Those who cannot enjoy the pleasures of life, because they do not love and accept themselves, will hardly be able to love others generously." - Victor Cardinal Fernandez.
I would rather that Cardinal Fernandez not be our next Pope, but it bothers me that people in the Church are so desperate to stop him that they would sink to the levels of the gutter press to achieve their goal. Who, if anyone, is lifted up by this mud raking? Five minutes of gotcha and destroying a man's reputation for what? To gain a political type win in Christ's Church. The book was written years ago, probably when he was a young priest struggling with celibacy. He was foolish to publish the book. There's no good reason to drag it up now. Would any of us like our past sins and what they said about our character dragged up now and published for the whole world to discuss the kind of sinners we are? Every saint had a past. The aim of the Church is to bring every sinner to sainthood. This is not the method Christ told us to use. I see no reason why the Cardinal should resign because of this, and I'm very disappointed in the Lepanto Institute.
He wrote it for an audience. That is the purpose of a book. So how is it mud raking when he is the obvious author?
I would agree if there were any sign of him having repented. He also repeatedly brings up homosexuality and implies that it's ontological. He also speaks of gender distinctions disappearing at climax, something which he equates to being the closest to heaven that humans can be on earth. The implication is that gender is lost in heaven. If anything this provides a great deal of insight into how he currently thinks.
If only he were willing to be an orthodox guardian of the faith as a way of making amends for the mistakes of the past...
Lifesite's piece: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/b...tm_source=featured-news&utm_campaign=catholic Looks like the cover of the book is a painting of Cupid and Psyche.
Warning: I have not read was this. I will not read it. It’s sacrilegious and an occasion of sin for many. But for others with a stronger will, the 3 most egregious chapters are available here: https://www.complicitclergy.com/wp-...ndez-la-pasion-mistica-caps-7-8-9-english.pdf Patrick Coffin has coined Cardinal Tucho as the “Fifty Shades of Gay” author.
You bring up a good point. It appears that some in opposition to the current Papacy, though operating from a love for the Church, are slipping into a pattern of muck-raking. Will it achieve its end in having Fernandez resign? It may very well do so. I sadly don't believe this will shift the current trajectory in the Church's struggle. St. Louis DeMontfort also uses battle language in promoting his Consecration to Jesus through Mary. But the central point of the battle is in one's own heart, and her Army triumphs through the pursuit of holiness and humility. This is the path by which the Bride of Christ ultimately triumphs: fasting, humility, prayer, and repentance.
To reduce opposition to this infuriating situation to “muckraking” and “gutter press” is insulting and itself infuriating. Sorry, pious platitudes playtime is over, folks.
I think on reflection you have a good point here. I read your post and thought about and asked myself the question, would I have gone looking for this book in order to make a point about the Cardinal? The answer is I would not. My conscience just would not let me. Having said this, the thing is done, right or wrong and we have this evidence placed in front of us. He is the person who is in charge of keeping everyone in the Church on the straight and narrow. I acknowledge the fact that this happened many, many years ago. All the same if he was my Parish Priest say , rather than a Cardinal ,well all I can say is I would loose Faith in him and hope he would resign. It would be a question of trust. That would be just if he were a Parish Priest. But for someone of his very considerable eminence, yes. resignation would be the honourable course. Like I say, its a matter of trust. High positions require the very highest levels of trust. I don't see this trust forth coming now. I think an honourable man would see this and do the right thing and just go. But I'm not holding my breath.
I read all of these 3 chapters this morning. I disagree with Patrick Coffin and find it an absolute shame how people are running with this. I have never purposely watched pornography in my life, I don't watch movies or anything at all that has sexual content. But I read this because I wanted to really see for myself what he was trying to say. What I saw is that he is, in my opinion, more explicit than he needs to be, a bit too comfortable with it, but probably genuine in his confused understanding of how physical intimacy reflects spiritual intimacy with God. I saw nothing that led me to believe that he is evil, trying to corrupt people. It made me wince a lot, and I thoroughly disagreed with several of his connections or conclusions, but I think he truly believes what he was trying to teach. He needs prayers. I wish the demonizing would stop. If you (general you) can't read the material with a charitable lens and have already condemned the man in your heart, then you probably just shouldn't talk about or spread this scandal. I pray God will put things right in His Church soon, because this is such a dreadful time we're going through.
He’s an active homosexual. Everything he writes must be read in this light. In which case your point is simply naive. This is demonic homosexual propaganda. Period. Notice when he refers to the sexual act, he doesn’t equate it with a married husband and wife. Implicit in his assertions in this filth are that his claims in his book about orgasm reflecting mystical realities applies, in his opinion, to ALL gentital contact, not just the Catholic concept of the monogamous marital embrace. Please folks, wake up. You’re being played. This is purely demonic.
Perhaps. I'm just utterly sickened by the level of condemnation--and yes, I guess muck-raking is the best term for it--going on in the supposed "best" Catholic circles. We're so good and holy and correct, I guess, that we spend the vast majority of our time online accusing our Church leaders and exposing everything we can about them. It hurts the simple and childlike and "truly" best Catholics among us. It hurts our own souls. It simply spreads further darkness and confusion, and sows seeds of doubt and despair. And no, it's not just the fault of the "bad guys." Because faithful Catholics can speak up for what is true and beautiful without being absolutely obsessed with convincing the world our leaders are not just wrong, but evil incarnate. We can counter darkness with light, falsehood with truth, and hand-wringing with prayer and the re-building of vibrant Christian community and culture. I think I need to take a break from this forum for a while. ETA: And yes, I've done it too, which is part of why I need to take a break here.
I can see both sides here. St Paul says certain things should not even be mentioned among believers, and yet there is justification for revealing just how bad things have got. The fox is truly in the hen house and feasting on souls. I did wonder whether Fernandez ever had St John Paul II's Theology of the Body in mind. This development was formulated between 1979 and 1984 via a series of talks at weekly Papal audiences. I admit I read some of 'those' chapters and thought they looked like a grotesque parody. I probably should have avoided looking. 'Curiosity' was always regarded as sinful. Incidentally, Life Site News is running with this. Archbishop Vigano has made a short (for once!) and in my view apt statement.
