Unfortunately the pope has repeated the words of Marx verbatim, so I don't expect a rebuke any time soon.
You mean the soon to be a collectors' item Cathchism? The new catechism will echo every statement made by Cardinals Marx, Kasper and Schonborn on marriage, cohabitation and homosexuality and anybody querying it will do so under threat of excommunication for lack of mercy. We are being softened up for Church blessings of homosexual unions that won't be called marriage. Most likely, we are being softened up for a change in all the "hard" teaching of the Church surrounding marriage and procreation, one step at a time. The blessings might not be made official under this Pope, but he has made it very easy for his successor and I would be very surprised if the successor hasn't already been selected. The Holy Spirit is using strange methods lately. I hope that African Cardinal isn't relying on financial assistance from German or central Church funds for projects in his country. Anyone who still believes that statements by the Pope's favourite Cardinals followed closely by Papal affirmation by way of off-the-cuff responses to impromptu questions from journalists are purely coincidental and not pre-planned is welcome to buy my lakefront property in the Sahara desert. God help us.
Sorry to bring in Vassula again here (ok, I'm not sorry...) but I have to point out to Brian that Cardinal Napier is quite a supporter of Vassula: Cardinal Napier. Meeting with Vassula In May controversial ’messenger of God’ Vassula Ryden visited Durban where she spoke to a number of groups. Because some of the following questions were being asked about her – whether her ’revelations’ are regarded as genuine; whether she is orthodox in her writings; and what her standing is with the Catholic Church - I invited her to the Chancery for a conversation over lunch. Our conversation made it clear that her calling to be a mouth-piece whom Jesus Christ is using took place in extraordinary circumstances. But what is even more challenging is her relationship with the Catholic Church. In 1995 the Holy See made it known that it had serious doubts about the authenticity of the revelations published by Vassula. In 2004 in response to a request by Vassula the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made a thorough investigation. Cardinal Ratzinger then Prefect of the Congregation stated in a letter that Vassula had answered satisfactorily the questions put to her. However the matter was confused anew by Cardinal Levada’s 2007 statement which reaffirms the 1995 notification but totally ignores the 2004 statement. It was therefore with keen interest that I awaited the opportunity to engage her in conversation. What struck me from the start and what remains a lasting impression is her total openness - especially when asked to explain what happened to her or why it should have happened to her at all. She is just as puzzled why she should have been chosen since she had completely lapsed from the practice of her Greek orthodox faith. Another matter of interest is her relationship with the Holy See. She enjoys cordial relations with many of the top officials at the Vatican who are anything but negative towards her. It is therefore reasonable to state categorically that as far as the Church is concerned Vassula poses no threat to the Catholic Faith whatsoever. Indeed the messages which are communicated through her are consistent with the Church’s own call to repentance and a return to the basics of the faith - in particular the basic prayers such as the Rosary and other devotions once so common in Catholic family and parish spiritual life. Wilfrid Fox Napier, O.F.M., Cardinal, Archbishop
Yes, the Catholic Church should apologize to gays. But not for the reason you think. http://josephsciambra.com/ June 28, 2016 (Joseph Sciambra) -- When I was a conflicted and scared boy growing up within the confusing confines of the post-Conciliar Church of the 1970s, I needed someone, anyone, to teach me and to tell me that Jesus wanted to be more than just my friend, that He wanted to be my Savior – that He wanted to save me from myself. I knew, even from a young age, that something was going incredibly wrong within me – I was terrified and I needed help. However, the Jesus they offered was a mere historical figure; a guy who meant well, but who was dead and distant; he was the hippie-Christ from “Godspell” in a Superman shirt – with the Bible as a superhero comic-strip. When I was teenager, quickly swerving towards homosexuality, a few noticed, but did nothing to help. At school, a sort of pandemic relativism was extolled as an individual rule of life: custom-made for every human person on earth. The detached Jesus from my youth cared little about our daily drudgery or our personal proclivities. On the verge of accepting my homosexuality, I was told by a Catholic priest that I needn’t worry as every homosexual is born gay; he sent me on my way with a socially responsible warning about the dangers of unsafe sex. In the near devastation of AIDS, and my own worsening realization that gay wasn’t what I hoped it would be – the sole Catholic presence in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood was the hotly affirmative parish of Most Holy Redeemer. Although the priests who were stationed there kindly buried the lifeless and wasted bodies of our friends, in an age when few were willing to do so, they confused a compassion for the sick and the dead with a total renunciation of any semblance to Catholic teaching about homosexuality. They wanted to be our friends, not our Fathers. Perhaps it was only for a few passing moments, after a losing another friend or once again waking up in the early-afternoon and realizing I just filled the toilet bowl with blood, I decided to walk away from gay, but a priest I turned to for advice tried to soothe my concerns and bolster my current lack of faith in the gay gene by assuring me that I was where I belonged and in gay is where I should stay. And, I did just that. Years later, the blood was overflowing onto the bathroom floor and I could no longer deny that my stubborn allegiance to the gay dream was turning into an endless nightmare that I would eventually never awake from. For some reason, that I cannot fathom, I again turned to the religion of my childhood. I prayed that things had changed, because now – no one would convince me that there was any reason for staying in gay; but, I wanted help. Only, very little had changed. I arrived on the doorstep of the Catholic Church, a broken and bruised man – yet, I was told again that I was gay. Nevertheless, I somehow persevered and the Lord Jesus Christ delivered unto me – not one, but three courageous priests. For the most part, these men had been difficult to find; as, they were primarily the semi-dismissed and even persecuted priests that were almost summarily rejected by both their dioceses and their prospective religious orders. But, I instinctively knew that they were good men of stout heart and dauntless spirit. And, they guided me – and were Fathers to a lost and lonely man who was still a lost and lonely boy. Years later, I thought back to the many friends I had known and lost: the earnest and always searching ex-Catholic who acknowledged the radical waves of volatility in the gay lifestyle, but stayed because he repeatedly read Fr. John J. McNeill’s book “The Church and the Homosexual;” the inexplicable Sunday-Mass going “gay” Catholic who remained steadfastly gay and looking for mister-right at his church-approved LGBT ministry group-meetings in the Oakland Diocese; or the cautious and conservative Midwesterner who heeded the advice from the pastor at the local San Francisco Catholic church and settled down with one guy. Today, all of them are dead. Should the Catholic Church apologize to gays? To these men, who lost their lives because they were duped and deceived by confused and conflicted priests – The Church should apologize to them. But what good would it do now? Dear Pope Francis: apologize for bad catechesis, for bad pastoral programs, for bad priests, and for the apathetic Bishops who do nothing to correct them. As for the long dead who passed from this life, far too young, because no one ever bothered to tell them the Truth – no amount of apologizing will ever bring them back. In addition, the Church should apologize for prolongedly tolerating the likes of: Fr. John J. McNeill, who said that the: “Homosexual orientation has no necessary connection with sin, sickness, or failure; rather it is a gift from God to be accepted and lived out with gratitude…Human beings do not choose their sexual orientation; they discover it as something given;” also Sister Jeannine Gramick, who was forbidden by the Church to publicly minister to homosexuals after a nearly 20 yearlong inquiry, only – the renegade Sister moved from one religious order to another (her current home – the Sisters of Loretto, have been under the shadow of a 2008 Vatican investigation that is still ongoing) while she continues to give lectures and even debate and meet with various US prelates to discuss her views; lastly, the Church should also apologize for priests like Fr. James Martin S.J. who repeatedly stresses that homosexuals are “born that way.” He has also gone out of his way to make Catholicism extremely attractive to those in the “gay” lifestyle who may be looking towards the Church for answers: “Officially at least, the gay Catholic seems set up to lead a lonely, loveless, secretive life,” Martin said. To US Catholics, the Church should also apologize for the travesty that is the USCCB document “Always Our Children.” Issued in 1997, the text is still shocking for its gross generalizations and unwillingness to even briefly grasp the intrinsic desperation and depravity found in the modern “gay” lifestyle; in addition, the document also openly condemns those with same-sex attraction to a lifelong imprisonment within homosexuality: “…it seems appropriate to understand sexual orientation (heterosexual or homosexual) as a deep-seated dimension of one’s personality and to recognize its relative stability in a person…Generally, homosexual orientation is experienced as a given, not as something freely chosen.” In retrospect this is less surprising as the three main consultants for “Always Our Children” were the self-outed priests James Schexnayder, Robert Nugent, and Peter Liuzzi; Schexnayder is from the Diocese of Oakland and founded the dissident gay advocacy group the Catholic Association for Lesbian and Gay Ministry; when “Always Our Children” was being prepared, Nugent was also being investigated as part of the same review that was looking into the ministry of Jeannine Gramick – like his cohort Sister Gramick, he was similarly “silenced” in 1999; Liuzzi was for many years the head of the LA Archdiocese Ministry, he who once stated: “…the church believes that homosexuality is an inherent trait.” The idea of homosexuality as something “given” (by whom?) not “chosen” is directly drawn from McNeill; how a philosophy from a man who wrote the following could make its way into a document from the Catholic Church boggles the mind: “If all one is capable of is a solitary act of masturbation, then that masturbatory act, undertaken with gratitude to God for the gift of sexual pleasure, is good sex. Even better sex occurs when two wounded humans reach out to each other to share mutual sexual pleasure in a ‘one night stand’.” To this day, in his presentations entitled “Safe Catholic Schools: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Challenges,” Schexnayder continues to peddle the “born gay” theory to Catholic school administrators and educators (see below). These men, like the hapless priests who tried to “counsel” me, wanted to keep “gay” men and women “gay.” Through their pastoral ministries – they confirmed homosexuality in all those with same-sex attraction that they came in contact with. They did it to me – and to countless others.
God bless the Africans . I may retire to there rather than Spain. I can see myself out in the Veldt with lions. Dancing up to Communion like Mr Cool. I have not forgotten what Our Lady said at Fatima , 'In Portugal the Dogma of the Faith will be preserved'. Perhaps I should be learning Portugese rather than Spanish.I see now what she meant. If I hear a priest in Ireland saying what Cardinal Marx said I will be tempted to swing for him.
The article I questioned was sandwiched between two other articles that I believed were not parodies or jokes regarding the direction of the church. I may be wrong........ maybe the first article posted about Cardinal Marx is just a joke and he never really said the......"Church must apologise to gay people, pope’s adviser declares Cardinal Reinhard Marx: ‘We’ve done a lot to marginalise homosexuals’ " And maybe the post following the parody post was also a joke.......regarding the Dutch priest jubilant after giving Pope Francis his book of pro-gay homilies. I am unsure whether we should take this seriously or whether we should all have a good laugh about this as well! With the post in question, I went to the link provided and there was no disclaimer stating that this was indeed a parody but it did have a date and the date was prior to September 2015 so I duduced it was a joke/parody. However I wonder whether every unassuming catholic/christian/searcher/person who stumbles upon the MoG site and reads the said article, understands that this was just a parody! especially as it is displayed between 2 articles that are apparently not parodies? Don't get me wrong; I think it is great that the sophisticated Catholics of the world can have a good laugh at what is happening with Our Church at the moment. Good on their understanding of every demonic twist and turn, that some other ordinary Catholics can't ever begin to understand. I suppose, I identify with the distressed ordinary Catholics of the world who are not privileged to know all the current intrigues of the hierarchy? that seem to continue unabated. I have family members and other close catholic friends that have absolutely no idea that Our Holy Father is accused of being uncatholic or of changing catholic doctrine! I feel like I have privileged information and I don’t know what to do with it........... other than pray, fast and offer my sufferings to the Lord . What do you do with this privileged information Dolores?
I am puzzled this link gives date give a date of :Fri Jun 24, 2016 - 1:55 pm EST https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinio...ving-pope-francis-his-book-of-pro-gay-homilie I don't think this is privileged, it seems in the public domain. I wish it were a joke or parody. I suspect that particular picture shows the priest showing the Pope the book at an earlier public, rather than private audience. It looks like they are in St Peter's Square.
Let's hope so. I don't think it takes a degree in rocket science for even poorly catechized Catholics to appreciate good satire. As far as what to do? Most Catholics are just expected to be Faithful to the teachings of the Church as it's been handed down to them, and not be silent when it's willfully misrepresented in their circle of influence.
I read this last night. I always enjoy Jimmy Aiken's perspective on things. Pope Francis on Apologizing to Gays (And More): 6 things to know and share Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/pope-francis-on-apologizing-to-gays-and-more-6-things-to-know-and-share/#ixzz4CyjxBYoN 6) What did Pope Francis say regarding Catholics apologizing to homosexuals? Let’s first deal with the subject itself: Have Christians ever committed offenses against homosexual people? Yes. Christians, like everyone else, are sinners. Should we apologize when we’ve done something wrong? In an appropriate time and way, yes. This is not a controversial point. Therefore, should Christians apologize for faults committed against homosexual people? In an appropriate time and way, yes, just like you’d apologize for wrongs done to anyone. That doesn’t mean groveling. It doesn’t mean being a doormat. It doesn’t mean apologizing for things that weren’t wrongs. It doesn’t mean letting a person off the hook for things they’ve done wrong. And it doesn’t mean weakening the Church’s teaching. Now put yourself in the position of the pope: You’re talking to the world media, knowing whatever you say is going to get distilled through the distorting lens the media uses for everything. Are you really going to say, “No, I don’t think Christians should apologize to homosexuals?” Your critics can come back with the obvious fact that Christians are sinners and have committed faults regarding homosexuals in the past (including lynchings). Taking a “no apology” stance would produce a media firestorm that would push homosexuals even farther from the Church and do damage to the prospects of reaching them with the gospel. On the other hand, taking a groveling, “Yes, we’ve done everything wrong. We’re walking evil incarnate” approach is not going to help them—or anyone else—either. So, as pope, you’re likely to seek a middle ground—finding a way to acknowledge the proper role of apologizing for past faults without denying Church teaching or blowing this one issue out of proportion. And that’s what the pope did. He began by orienting his remarks with respect to what he has said previously and what the Catechism says: I will repeat what I said on my first trip. I repeat what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: that they must not be discriminated against, that they must be respected and accompanied pastorally. . . . And we must accompany them well...this is what the catechism says, a clear catechism. Pope Francis’s repeated references to the Catechism indicate his remarks are to be understood in light of what it says regarding homosexuality (see CCC 2357-2359). He may not repeat everything the Catechism states in his off-the-cuff answer, but he is taking the Catechism as his orienting point for the issue. He also noted that the homosexual community can be the subject of criticism: One can condemn, but not for theological reasons, but for reasons of political behavior...Certain manifestations are a bit too offensive for others, no? In view of his orienting his remarks from the Catechism, when he says homosexuals are not to be condemned for theological reasons, he apparently means that Catholic theology doesn’t condemn a person simply because he has homosexual tendencies. His willingness to acknowledge grounds for criticizing the actions of some homosexuals for offensive behavior in the social-political sphere is noteworthy. Also noteworthy is his repetition, with slight modification, of one of his most famous remarks on the subject: The problem is a person that has a condition, that has good will and who seeks God, who are we to judge? As before, the “who (am I/are we) to judge” remark assumes that the person in question has good will and is seeking God—not displaying ill will and ignoring God while seeking to justify homosexual actions. While not repudiating Cardinal Marx’s suggestion that Catholics should apologize to homosexuals for past faults, Pope Francis sought to frame the thought in a larger context: I think that the Church must not only ask forgiveness – like that “Marxist Cardinal” said (laughs) – must not only ask forgiveness to the gay person who is offended. But she must ask forgiveness to the poor too, to women who are exploited, to children who are exploited for labor. She must ask forgiveness for having blessed so many weapons. The Church must ask forgiveness for not behaving many times – when I say the Church, I mean Christians! The Church is holy, we are sinners! He didn’t say anything further regarding homosexuals but instead reflected on how the Church contains both wheat and weeds, as in Jesus’ parable (Matt. 13:24-30). Thus, when asked about Cardinal Marx’s statement, Pope Francis: sought to reiterate what he had previously said, sought to reiterate what the Catechism says, gave the proposal a nominal endorsement, and then took the focus off the question of homosexuals.
Yes, one has come to expect a positive spin on everything this pope says and does from the professional mainstream Catholic journalists out there. They know which side their bread is buttered.
Likewise Brian the other side always has to go to the negative spin. It is important that both sides of the argument are displayed so people can come to their own conclusions on things.
I always enjoy Jimmy Aiken. And I completely agree with him. BUT at the same time I can admit that the Pope speaks off the cuff all too often and leaves things in a way that are vague and can be taken out of context.
I don't disagree Dean. I can't even imagine what it must be like for him to even begin to answer these questions. I too am one that wishes he would not give these interviews and speak off the cuff but he does so we are left with trying to understand where he is coming from and what he is saying. You can take the above explanation from Jimmy which makes complete simple sense to me or you can read from the otherside of the argument that says this is a greater diabolical agenda. To each his/her own but I still feel that both sides of the arguments should be read. Right now we get way too much of the diabolical agenda side of things. I do not know which is the right answer in all of this. No one does but God and no one knows the why's but God but if we tend to just read more heavily on one side then one's own ideas can be swayed to the side that they are reading the most. It is basic politics.
This is such an excellent read as well from Mark Mallett published a year ago and now once again on his blog: http://www.markmallett.com/blog/that-pope-francis-a-short-story/ an exert from the story: “Brothers—and that’s what you truly are to me—you’ve heard me say that we are entering into a Great Storm. We see it all around us. Part of this Storm is not only the judgment of the world, but first and foremost, of the Church herself. The Catechism states that ‘she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection.’ [15]cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 677 What does that look like? Well, what did Jesus look like in those final hours? He was a scandal to his followers! His appearance was beyond recognition. He seemed utterly helpless, weak, defeated. So it will be with the Church. She will appear lost, her grandeur gone, her influence dissolved, her beauty and truth all but destroyed. She will be crucified, as it were, to this “new world order” emerging, this beast… this new Communism. “What I’m saying is that we don’t have to understand everything that’s happening with the Pope, in fact, we cannot. As Fr. Adam used to say to me, “The Pope’s not your problem.” It’s true. Jesus declared Peter, this man of flesh and blood, to be the rock of the Church. And for 2000 years, despite some of the scoundrels we’ve had at the helm of the Barque of Peter, not one pope has ever changed the deposit of faith and morals that comprises Sacred Tradition. Not one, Bill. Why? Because it is Jesus, not the Pope, who is building His Church. [16]cf. Jesus, the Wise Builder It is Jesus who has made the Pope that visible and perpetual sign of unity and faith. It is Jesus who has made him rock. As Our Lord said, “It is the Spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail.” [17]cf. John 6:36 Bill silently nodded as Fr. continued. “The Proverb comes to mind: Trust in the Lord with all your heart, on your own intelligence do not rely; in all your ways be mindful of him, and he will make straight your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes, fear the Lord and turn away from evil. (Prov 3:5-7) “For all the suspicion, [18]cf. The Spirit of Suspicion speculation, and conspiracies flying around the Pope these days, what is it doing except creating anxiety and division? There is only one thing necessary: to be at the feet of Jesus, to be faithful. “I think of St. John at the Last Supper. When Jesus said that one of them would betray Him, the Apostles began to murmur and whisper and try to solve who it was. But not St. John. He simply kept his head upon the breast of Christ, listening to His divine, constant, and reassuring heartbeats. Do you think it is a coincidence, then, that St. John was the only Apostle to stand beneath the Cross during that bitter Passion? If we are going to get through this Storm, through the Passion of the Church, then we have to stop whispering, speculating, fretting and worrying about things beyond our understanding and begin to simply rest in the Heart of Christ instead of relying on our own intelligence. It’s called faith, brothers. We must begin to walk by this night of faith, not sight. Then, yes, the Lord will make straight our paths; then we will sail safely to the other side of the Harbour.” Gently hitting his fist on the table he cast a glance that would freeze a lion. “Because, gentlemen, the Pope may be the Captain of the Barque of Peter, but Christ is its Admiral. Jesus may be asleep in the hull of the Ship, or so it seems, but He is the Keeper of the Storm. He is our Leader, Our Great Shepherd, and the one who will guide us through the Valley of the Shadow of Death. You can take that to the bank.”
I have defended the Pope and said that I did not want to be involved in any persecution of him which is still true BUT I do believe that he needs to prepare his statements better. He does create confusion and for his own sake I wish that he could be more clear. I read something somewhere today and I got the feeling that some people may get very confused on this topic and feel that he is giving a pass to the pedophilia that has occurred in the church. I know that these are two separate things but others may not read it like that. I got this weird feeling that this may come back to haunt him in a way that we can't even imagine.
I'm not being nasty, but he really does need to drop the off the cuff remarks on the planes to the reporters.
You know I really love Mark Mallett particualry for his unimpeachable orthodoxy, his deep learning, his prudence, oh I could go on and on and on. I would pretty well write him a blank cheque on all he says and writes. Very much like Our Lady at the Wedding Feast of Cana who said to the servants, 'Do as He tells you'. But one thing the Holy Spirit has taught me on my own Spiritual Journey is that when you think you have everything nailed down and comfortable He is going to throw you a sucker punch that will floor you. He certainly did this with the present confusion in the Church. I have spent so much time in prayer and thought agonising over all this, but some time back , through prayer and I believe the guidance of the good Lord to take a certain path. There were two paths in front of me through the dark forest of uncertainty and confusion. One path was very straight and attractive. I could do what pretty well all the entire mainstream Catholic media and establishment are doing. I could close down any real discussion and concern over what is going down in the Church, both on the forum and in my heart. This was very attractive and comfortable. These discussions have caused a lot of grief and I had a real concern it might even have ended this forum. So this is the second path I looked at . It was twisty and uphill and dimly marked, full of thorns and mud. I could see it would take a lot of true grit and gumption to take it and cause me a lot of grief and worry and pain. But you know this gave me pause for thought. For you know anytime in my life I have been confronted by two paths like this, it has always been the Path of the Cross that has been the right one to take. So I prayed and I prayed and I prayed and yes I took the twisted path, badly marked and uncertain. That was quite some time ago. But now as I move forward along that path, I find that path has become a lot lighter, the mists of gloom have cleared and I find myself on higher mountains, the trees of the deep forest clearing away. So, yes, this was the right path and my heart and soul are at peace. I will sound the Shofar and will continue to sound the Shofar. People may not like it. Many people will turn away from me because of it, but I'm going to blow that old trumpet till all the air in my lungs is gone. I am quite relaxed and at peace about it now. The Shofar keeps getting sounded..and if I am the only one left on the forum I will keep on sounding it till my last breath. Ezekiel 33:6 But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes someone's life, that person's life will be taken because of their sin, but I will hold the watchman accountable for their blood.'
I am glad you took the twisted path Padraig. At this point in time as we sit here today with all the information one can read and know from all corners of the web and what gets shared here on the forum we are still left with the question, "what is the truth"? None of us know the answer to this and only history will decide. So we are left with our own thoughts and discernment on these matters and hopefully have the help of the Lord to understand it if 1. He wants us too and 2. If it matters that we do understand it. For me it does not matter all that much because as I said the other day, I am jumping in the boat with the Lord and looking to cling to him as St. John did at the last supper. This is not easy but essential. At the same time though I still search and read and look to discern because it is the analytical nature of who I am. I read most of what gets posted here on one side of the debate and I also try to read the other side and once in awhile try to add things like today as I come across them. People suffer from an awful hard battle of pride and the desire to be right. It is a hard cross to bear to attempt to be open minded and able to admit that we are not right. You see this all major debates: Protestants vs Catholics, Liberals vs Conservatives, and no difference in this current discussion here between the state of the church and the pope. Sadly, in many cases, this need to be right takes ugly turns into the field of bigotry where true hatred of the persons who oppose their view. We must strive to not let our thoughts and opinions turn to this form of hatred for another. Especially not in this wonderful living room of Our Mother. So many liberals truly hate conservatives and vice versa. So many Protestants hate Catholics. Let's not allow Catholics to hate other Catholics who may have a difference of opinion on this debate. Read, post and discern but never hate.
Andy, I think that you need to start writing for the Pope. Maybe that this is the message that he is so desperately trying to convey, Love Don't Hate, but he gets caught up in his own words all of the time. He doesn't think about what the headlines will be. He could say half of what you have said at a press conference but all the news will convey is the stuff that we have been hearing. I am praying for the Pope. Edited: And instead of saying "who am I to judge", maybe he should just remind us that we are all sinners and that we all need God's mercy. Maybe that is what he is trying to convey with this line but again it gets twisted.
