Michael Brown on authentic reform within the Church....

Michael Brown over at Spirit Daily has an excllent article on authentic reform within the Church.  He writes, "As our Church gets a new bearing, we have two strong directives in recent days. One was given by Pope Francis during his remarkable visit to Brazil, where in an impromptu meeting at the Cathedral of San Sebastian, and then elsewhere, he said, 'What is it that I expect as a consequence of World Youth Day? I want a mess. We knew that in Rio there would be great disorder, but I want trouble in the dioceses! . . . I want to see the Church get closer to the people. I want to get rid of clericalism, the mundane, this closing ourselves off within ourselves, in our parishes, schools, or structures. Because these need to get out! We cannot keep ourselves shut up in parishes, in our communities, when so many people are waiting for the Gospel! It's not enough simply to open the door in welcome, but we must go out through that door to seek and meet the people.'

It was a fascinating, sobering, and at the same time electrifying call to change the way dioceses function at their most basic level -- calling them to dismantle the bureaucratic barriers, the focus on secular structure and social stature. Clericalism is used to denote the divisions between ordained clergy and laymen in a closed-in world. Here is his true message to our bishops, to our pastors, to us all: don't become entwined with the worldly. Live the Gospel message (not the Gospel of the local eleven o'clock news). It was a very necessary admonition in a Church where aloofness in the clergy has caused it to be seen as distant, ceremonial, and in need of less starch. (A diocese does itself no favor when it resembles a school board.) The Pope called on the flock to make its concerns known, 'even at the expense of confrontation with their bishops and priests.' It was a call to shake things up -- but in a right, respectful way, to let local hierarchy know of the needs, to send the Church into every 'nook and cranny.' But always: there must be respect. There must be obedience. Bishops and pastors must be approached with new persistence and vigor but with no less respect, for their hands are consecrated; their mission is anointed. We are not to focus on their personalities, which are human ones. Instead, a direct but prayerful approach to any diocese where clericalism prevails is what the Pope requests -- a prayerful and yet energetic one, that we may all be involved in the process of reform."

 In her own day, St. Catherine of Sienna found much corruption within the Holy Church. Homosexuality and many other deeply rooted problems were found among the clergy and Our Lord spoke to this Doctor of the Church about these problems (pride, loss of sacred identity, loss of faith, worldliness, and sensuality). These conversations were laid out in St. Catherine's book entitled "Dialogue," and most especially in that portion of the book labelled "The Mystical Body of Holy Church."


While St. Catherine cautions her readers not to engage in blanket condemnations aimed at the clergy in general (using scandals as an excuse to denigrate priests in general), and refers to such people as "irreverent persecutors" of the clergy, still, she was told by Our Lord that those who will not receive correction and those who will not give it are like the limbs of a body beginning to rot.

How quickly some forget this.  In the Diocese of Worcester, constructive criticism is rejected outright.  So much so that I am not even allowed to APPLY for the diocesan priesthood because I refuse to place community above truth.  See here:

http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2012/05/you-dont-have-vocation-in-worcester.html

Very often haughtiness is a factor in the rejection of constructive criticism. The haughty person (or the group which believes itself to be "above any criticism" - sometimes even a local church) will, in the words of Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, "find it intolerable to feel dependent on other persons, to serve others, to subordinate himself to an alien will, and above all, to suffer ever so slight a humiliation. He is unable to admit before others of having been in the wrong, even if he knows it in his heart; much less could he prevail on himself to ask anybody's forgiveness. He is stricken with a crabbed anxiousness about preserving his dignity..."

Haughtiness gets in the way of authentic reform.  This is true for individuals, organizations and even nations.

Read More

Pope Francis and the restoration of the moral credibility of the hierarchy and the priesthood

In an article which may be found here, Father Roger Landry of the Fall River (Massachusetts) Diocese notes, "One of the most urgent reforms facing him [Pope Francis] is the restoration of the moral credibility of the hierarchy, and especially of the priesthood...The scandals of clerical sex abuse and tales of Vatican corruption have not only severely undermined the Church’s moral authority, but given the impression that living by the Church’s teachings forms freaks and moral monsters rather than saints. In his first couple of weeks as Pope, as well as his fourteen years in Buenos Aires, Francis has been charting out the trajectory of priestly reshaping. We can focus on seven aspects of this needed renewal. The first is with regard to priestly simplicity. Diocesan priests do not take a vow of poverty, but commit themselves to a simple lifestyle. In many places, this principle is given lip service, as members of the clergy drive fancy cars, frequent the finest restaurants and live in exquisite digs. Cardinal Bergoglio’s example of living in a small apartment rather than an episcopal palace, taking public transportation rather than a car with a driver and cooking for himself cannot help but lead priests to a sincere examination about the sincerity of their own spiritual poverty."

Well said.

Jesus disciples are called to carry their cross and follow Him (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Lk 9:23). Above all, Christians are called to love as Jesus does (Jn 13: 34-35). But the cross is not popular with those who are advancing the "new religion" which will serve the New Order. The cross has never been popular with those who belong to the company of the world or the Devil. Today, countless young people (and old) have given themselves over to promiscuous sexual unions. In the mad pursuit of wealth, power, fame, and various hedonistic pleasures (euphemistically referred to as "choice" or "alternative lifestyles"), many poor souls have given themselves over to the Devil. Many who call themselves "Christian" are really living pagan lives.  And their "pastors," often living disordered lives themselves, say nothing.  Many of these have succumbed to materialism and hedonism. and find themselves unable to condemn sins which they have embraced.


This is, of course, nothing new. But the sexual degeneration in so-called Christian nations today is the most abominable in history. So much so that a young girl in the Ukraine is reported to have been told by Our Lady that: "The present times are worse than at the time of Noah. Then the world was scourged by a deluge of water: now the world is going to be scourge by a deluge of fire." (First apparition to Anna at Seredne, December 20, 1954). St. Louis de Montfort explains that:

"'My dear brothers and sisters, there are two companies that appear before you each day: the followers of Christ and the followers of the world.

Our dear Saviour's company is on the right, climbing up a narrow road, made all the narrower by the world's immorality. Our Master leads the way, barefooted, crowned with thorns, covered with blood, and laden with a heavy cross. Those who follow him, though most valiant, are only a handful, either because his quiet voice is not heard amid the tumult of the world, or because people lack the courage to follow him in his poverty, sufferings, humiliations and other crosses which his servants must carry all the days of their life.

On the left hand is the company of the world or of the devil. This is far more numerous, more imposing and more illustrious, at least in appearance. Most of the fashionable people run to join it, all crowded together, although the road is wide and is continually being made wider than ever by the crowds that pour along it like a torrent. It is strewn with flowers, bordered with all kinds of amusements and attractions, and paved with gold and silver.

On the right, the little groups which follow Jesus speak about sorrow and penance, prayer and indifference to worldly things. They continually encourage one another saying, "Now is the time to suffer and to mourn, to pray and do penance, to live in retirement and poverty, to humble and mortify ourselves; for those who do not possess the spirit of Christ, which is the spirit of the cross, do not belong to him. Those who belong to Christ have crucified all self-indulgent passions and desires. We must be true images of Christ or be eternally lost."

"Have confidence," they say to each other. If God is on our side, within us and before us, who can be against us? He who is within us is stronger than the one who is in the world. The servant is not greater than his master. This slight and temporary distress we suffer will bring us a tremendous and everlasting glory. The number of those who will be saved is not as great as some people imagine. It is only the brave and the daring who take heaven by storm, where only those are crowned who strive to live according to the law of the Gospel and not according to the maxims of the world. Let us fight with all our strength, let us run with all speed, that we may attain our goal and win the crown.

Such are some of the heavenly counsels with which the Friends of the Cross inspire each other.

Those who follow the world, on the contrary, urge each other to continue in their evil ways without scruple, calling to one another day after day, "Let us eat and drink, sing and dance, and enjoy ourselves. God is good; he has not made us to damn us. He does not forbid us to amuse ourselves. We shall not be damned for so little. We are not to be scrupulous. 'No, you will not die'."

Dear brothers and sisters, remember that our loving Saviour has his eyes on you at this moment, and he says to each one of you individually, "See how almost everyone deserts me on the royal road of the Cross. Pagans in their blindness ridicule my Cross as foolishness; obstinate Jews are repelled by it as by an object of horror; heretics pull it down and break it to pieces as something contemptible.

"Even my own people - and I say this with tears in my eyes and grief in my heart - my own children whom I have brought up and instructed in my ways, my members whom I have quickened with my own Spirit, have turned their backs on me and forsaken me by becoming enemies of my Cross. 'Will you also go away?' Will you also desert me by running away from my Cross like the worldlings, who thus become so many antichrists? Will you also follow the world; despise the poverty of my Cross in order to seek after wealth; shun the sufferings of my Cross to look for enjoyment; avoid the humiliations of my Cross in order to chase after the honours of the world? 'There are many who pretend they are friends of mine and protest that they love me, but in their hearts they hate me. I have many friends of my table, but very few of my Cross.' (Imit. II, 11, 1)."

At this loving appeal of Jesus, let us rise above our human nature; let us not be seduced by our senses, as Eve was; but keep our eyes fixed on Jesus crucified, who leads us in our faith and brings it to perfection (Heb 12.2). Let us keep ourselves apart from the evil practices of the world; let us show our love for Jesus in the best way, that is, through all kinds of crosses. Reflect well on these remarkable words of our Saviour, "If anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself, and take up his cross and follow me" (Mt 16.24; Lk 9.23)." (St. Louis de Montfort, Letter to the Friends of the Cross, 7-12).

Are we truly friends of the Cross and therefore friends of Christ? Or is ours a counterfeit love? 

Read More

Elizabeth Scalia believes that Pope Benedict XVI is wrong about homosexuality being incompatible with the priesthood

Pope Benedict XVI has stated it clearly: homosexuality is incompatible with the priesthood.  But Elizabeth Scalia, a writer/blogger for First Things and The Anchoress on Patheos, disagrees.  In a blog post which may be found here, Ms. Scalia cites Joshua Gonnerman, "If Christians have any interest in reaching out to the gay community, if we have any hope to speak a message which can touch their hearts as well, we absolutely must be willing to live as their family. Behind his blundering obscenity, behind his facile attempts to explain Scripture away, behind the blatant hypocrisy of his behavior toward those who disagree with him, what Dan Savage means to tell us is, 'The church has far too often, and for the most wrong-headed reasons, failed to be family to gay people." And then she writes:

I completely agree. And I really believe that the way to begin to do that is for our bishops and the curia to stop turning a blind eye to a simple truth, that numbered among our priests are faithful, celibate, joyful priests who are homosexual. As I wrote [previously]...

I wonder if [the Church's] bishops and religious leaders will, for example, have to acknowledge with loving support the numerous celibate homosexual priests who, throughout history and still today, serve her faithfully, courageously, and with great joy. Such an acknowledgment could go a long way repairing that disconnect that keeps everyone talking about tolerance while walking away from it.

It would speak to the value of the human person as he is created; it would reinforce the church’s own teaching that the homosexual inclination is not in-and-of-itself sinful; in a sex-saturated culture where 'gay' has become in some minds synonymous with 'promiscuous' [gee, I wonder where that notion came from?] and both heterosexual and homosexual couples see no particular value in chastity, it would present the radical counter-narrative.

Most importantly, such an acknowledgment would be call of olly-olly-oxen free for the church herself. Battered by the revelations of the past decade, poorly served by past psychological studies suggesting that child abusers could be 'cured' and therefore distrustful of more recent findings that homosexuals are no more inclined to pedophilia than heterosexuals*, the church has reflexively pulled the curtains over a number of her priests, and in doing so, she has hidden the idea of  'acceptable otherness' from a flock that is sorely in need to see some of it.

I love our priests, and honor them, but it’s hard to argue that an unfaithful straight priest is better than a faithful gay one. I would rather see a homosexually-inclined happy, celibate priest be able to live in honesty about who he is, than learn about a hetero priest living a lie. A faithful priest is a faithful priest. A happy, joy-filled priest serves the body of Christ in a powerful way.

Allow me to anticipate the argument that the priesthood cannot be open to people the Eastern religions call 'imbalanced' and our church calls 'disordered.' Find me a priest who doesn’t have some sort of disorder, whether it’s an eating disorder, or an attention-seeking disorder, or a disorder of social ineptness, a hearing disorder, or even a learning disorder. Our priests are human, imperfect, faulty and sometimes broken, just like the rest of us.."


What Ms. Scalia refuses to acknowledge is that before entering into any state of life, a divine vocation is necessary. This because without such a vocation, it is difficult if not impossible to fulfil the obligations which pertain to that state and to obtain salvation. This is particularly true for the ministerial priesthood or any other ecclesiastical state. After all, it was Our Lord Who said: "He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber" (John 10:1).


Consequently, the man who takes holy orders without a call from God is convicted of theft in taking by force a dignity which God has not called him to and does not desire to bestow upon him. This is the teaching of Saint Paul: "Neither doth any man take the honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify Himself that He might be made a high priest; but he that said unto Him: Thou art My Son; this day I have begotten Thee." (Hebrews 5:4,5).

It matters not then how learned or prudent or holy a man may be. No man may place himself into the holy sanctuary unless he is first called and introduced to the same by Almighty God. Jesus Our Lord was certainly the most learned and holy among all men, full of grace and truth (John 1:14), the Son of Man in Whom were (and are) hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). And yet, Jesus required a divine call to assume the dignity of the priesthood. This is the teaching of the Council of Trent; that the Church regards the man who assumes the priesthood without a vocation not as a minister but as a robber: "Decernit sancta Synodus eos qui ea (ministeria) propria temeritate sibi sumunt, omnes, non Ecclesiae ministros, sed fures et latrones per ostium non ingressos habendos esse" (Session 23, cap. 4).

Those who seize the priesthood without a vocation may labor and toil exhaustively. But their labors will profit them very little before God. In fact, the very works which would be considered of much merit when performed by others will deserve chastisement for such souls. Because such men are not in conformity with the divine will, not having a vocation to the state of life which they have usurped, the Lord Jesus will not accept their toils: "I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand" (Malachi 1:10).

Not only will God refuse the gifts of their hand, He will punish the works of the minister who has entered the sanctuary without being called; without a vocation: "What stranger soever cometh to it (the Tabernacle) shall be slain." (Numbers 1:51). Bearing all of this in mind, please read the following which first appeared in The Wanderer [I submitted it back in 2001] and may be found at the Faithfulvoice.com website:


"On October 1, 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published an instruction entitled, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Pastoral Service for Homosexual Persons, signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II. In this Instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger writes, 'It is necessary to point out that the particular inclination of a homosexual person, though not a sin in itself, nevertheless constitutes a more or less strong tendency to an intrinsically evil behavior from the moral standpoint. For this reason, the very inclination should be considered as objectively disordered.' (No. 3).


This would appear to be especially significant since Canon 1040 of the Code of Canon Law states that: 'Persons who are affected by a perpetual impediment, which is called an irregularity, or a simple impediment, are prevented from receiving orders.' Now, irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto). It seems clear to me that a homosexual inclination, which Cardinal Ratzinger has referred to as 'objectively disordered,' constitutes an irregularity ex defectu.

In fact, when asked by a Bishop if it is licit to confer priestly ordination to men with manifest homosexual tendencies, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments replied with a letter signed by Jorge Cardinal Medina Estevez which stated that, 'Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.'"

Ms. Scalia should exercise some humility and submit her mind and will to the teaching authority of the Church.  I recommend that she reflect very carefully on what Lumen Gentium No. 25 of the Second Vatican Council has to say in this regard.


*  See here.

Read More

Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas: My vocation began with Bishop Timothy J. Harrington

We've seen how Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas, newly ordained for the Diocese of Worcester, has had high praise for Father Joseph Coonan.  For him, Father Coonan was a "great influence" who "nourished" his vocation.  Fr. Slavinskas has also said that his vocation began with Bishop Timothy J. Harrington.  One can only hope that he doesn't share the late Bishop's attitude toward dissent from the Church's authoritative teaching.  For Bishop Timothy J. Harrington did tolerate dissent while he served as Bishop of Worcester.

In a letter to Catholic apologist Richard Blanchard dated March 25, 1986, Bishop Harrington, responding to a petition signed by Mr. Blanchard and members of his orthodox Catholic group TACM (The Active Church Militant) which requested that Sister Anna Marie Kane, S.S.J. be asked to resign from the Office for Women, Bishop Harrington responded:


"Dear Mr. Blanchard,

The petition, signed by twenty-seven individuals, requesting that Sister Anna Marie Kane, S.S.J. be asked to resign as soon as possible from the Office for Women of this Diocese has arrived.

This response is to inform you, and through you, the other twenty-six signators, that I shall not accede to your request.

In September, 1984, I appointed Sister Anna Marie Kane to her position as Vicar for Religious and Director of the Office for Women.  At that time, I also invited her to be a member of my administrative cabinet.  Sister has fulfilled her responsibilities with competence and sensitivity.

I ask you and the other petitioners to ponder your witness to the sacredness of the human person, as you threaten to denounce a person publicly, if your will is not done.."

A copy of this letter was cycled to Sister Anna Marie Kane. 

Bishop Harrington was concerned with "the sacredness of the human person"?  Really?  Then how could he honestly say that Sister Anna Marie Kane had been fulfilling her responsibilities with "competence and sensitivity" when she had stated publicly that, "Abortion is a delicate and complex reality. We must continue our struggle of respecting other's choices even if we don't agree with them."

Sacredness of the human person?  Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life) would refute the ethical relativism behind the radical view "that in a modern and pluralistic society people should be allowed complete freedom to dispose of their own lives as well as of the lives of the unborn.." (Evangelium Vitae, No. 68).

Sister Kane was also a member of the executive board of the National Assembly of Women Religious and S.I.G.M.A. - Sisters in Gay Ministry Associated.  Both the N.A.R.W. and S.I.G.M.A. were radical feminist groups which supported advocacy of the homosexual and lesbian lifestyle, abortion and contraception.  Sister Kane was also supportive of women's ordination.

Richard Blanchard and the other petitioners  were not threatening Sister Anna Marie Kane.  Nor were they insisting that their will be done.  They were asking for her resignation because she was opposing the will of Christ Jesus as made known by His Church through the teaching office of the Magisterium.  In his Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII said that, "...God has given to His Church a living Teaching Authority to elucidate and explain what is contained in the deposit of faith only obscurely and implicitly.  This deposit of faith our Divine Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the Teaching Authority of the Church."

This is why Richard Blanchard and others were asking for Sister Kane's resignation.  They were not insisting that their will be done.  They were objecting to the fact that Sister Kane had taken this attitude with regard to Church teaching; that she was insisting that her will be done.

Bishop Harrington was not only dissent-friendly.  He was routinely sarcastic toward those who had the audacity to question his toleration of dissent and his refusal to use his authority to uphold Catholic teaching, especially in the area of sexual morality.

If Bishop Harrington was the inspiration for Jonathan Slavinskas' vocation, we must keep Fr. Slavinskas in our prayers.

Read More

You don't have a vocation in the Worcester Diocese unless you place community above truth?

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand reminds us, in his essay entitled "Is Unity among the Faithful the Highest Value?," that, "There is another great danger which goes together with the distortion of love of neighbor: the danger of putting community above truth, and of implicitly making peace the highest value.  Unfortunately this tendency to regard community as more important than truth is very widespread in the holy Church today.

The first great error which we find here is the separation of community from truth.  All genuine community among men presupposes that they encounter one another in a certain realm of goods.  The solidarity which comes from worshipping the same idol and working for it, or from working together for something false or evil, does not deserve the name of community.  Such a pseudo-community is a definite evil, and possesses a disvalue.  The value which community possesses as such is here poisoned by the disvalue of that which brings people together, of that in whose name they are united.  Surely unity, community has a value of its own.  The unity of man is something of value not only because it the opposite of strife and struggle; it also has a value which is absent as long as individual men are indeed at peace, but not united in community...Community based upon error or something evil not only has no value, it has a definite disvalue.  A pseudo-community built on some evil idol is something much worse than many individual, unrelated men who are in error or do evil.  It is not only that it is worse for many to fall into error or heresy than for one to do so; it is not a question merely of a quantitative increase.  No, it is the very unity of those who encounter one another in untruth and evil which gives birth to a pure disvalue and heightens the evil.

The value of true community, the concordia,  becomes in a pseudo-community a definite disvalue.  Thus it is utterly impossible to separate community from truth, and to make community the most important thing.  Community is dependent in both its nature and value on the truth on which it is built....The value of the truth and of the true Faith is thus undeniably greater than that of community...Indeed, the value of standing in the truth, and confessing the true God, is even greater than that of the marvelous community of the mystical body of Christ.  For it is in the true Faith and in real love of God that community with Him is constituted, and this is clearly the most important thing, and that from which all other community is dependent in its nature and value...overemphasis on community, on unity among men, this tendency to put unity above the truth and orthodoxy, is a consequence of the disastrous this-worldliness which is analogous to emphasizing love of neighbor at the expense of love of God.."

It would certainly appear that the Worcester Diocese has succumbed over the years to this tragic tendency to place unity above the truth.  The company man who is willing to "go along" with sin and error "for the sake of friendship" is most welcome in this distorted notion of "community."  But the man who puts the truth first is pushed to the margins and ostracized.  For example, I stand fully with the Church's magisterial teaching.  I defend the same.  On numerous occasions I have expressed my desire to pursue a vocation to the priesthood.  But my queries have been ignored.  But Mr. Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas has been welcomed with open arms.  The difference?  Deacon Slavinskas has had praise for the late Bishop Timothy J. Harrington (who was dissent-friendly) and for Fr. Joseph Coonan, a priest who was mired in scandal and who was placed on leave in 2002 when accusations were made against him.  Specifically, Fr. Coonan was accused of physically abusing as many as fifteen men as well as his own mother and sister.

Regarding Bishop Timothy J. Harrington, Catholic apologist Richard Blanchard wrote him an open letter in his "Just the Facts" newsletter some years ago.  In this open letter, Richard Blanchard wrote (in part):

"When the Holy Father's legate, Archbishop Pio Laghi, handed you the crosier he confirmed your three-fold ministry as head shepherd of the Worcester diocese.  You became the officially authorized Prophet, Priest, and King to the people of God....These are powers of God's making that you freely accepted to serve the people of God.  To exercise these duties in all their integrity you must be one with the Chief Shepherd, the Holy Father.  You have sworn allegiance to the Holy Father in a formal way before Bishop Flanagan and the appropriate documents were sent to Rome...

We are now in the seventh year of shepherding.  How does your sworn oath of allegiance stand?  Over the years dissenters have been allowed access to the diocesan newspaper of which you are the publisher.  Dissenters have free play in the Office of Vicar of Religious, the Diocesan Commission for Women, and the Department of Religious Education.  Dissenters have spread their lies about abortion, contraception, women priests, and the legitimacy to dissent against the Supreme Authority in the Church, the Holy Father....The Holy Father has asked that all bishops give proof of their pastoral ability and leadership by withholding all support from individuals or groups who, in the name of progress, justice, or compassion, or for any other reason, promote the ordination of women to the priesthood.  Yet you fully support your own Diocesan Commission for Women that has constantly promoted the cause for women's ordination.....You were given the names of arch-dissidents who freely go about their work of undermining the Faith in your diocese.  The list included Sister Anna Marie Kane, S.S.J., who is pro-choice and pro-women's ordination, Dr. Vincent Ford, Dr. Alice affey, Dr. Bernard Cooke, Dr. David O'Brien, all professors at Holy Cross, who dissent against Church teaching.  How does your sworn allegiance stand up to this?"

Because I have been asking the same questions since the early 1990s, because I too oppose such dissent, I am not welcome.  You see, I refuse to place community above truth.  I refuse to march in lockstep with those who oppose the mind of Christ.  I refuse to condone the sexual abuse of children or homosexual behavior or to portray such evils as "harmless fun and sex games."

The Third Reich placed unity over truth.  The Communists did the same.  So too did Jim Jones' "People's Temple" which soon enough became the People's Tomb.

Related reading here.

Read More

Deacon Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas: "Father Joseph Coonan was a great influence and helped nourish my vocation"

Deacon Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas, one of four deacons to be ordained for the Worcester Diocese on June 2nd at Saint Paul Cathedral, is featured in an article by Tanya Connor in this week's "Catholic" Free Press.  Deacon Slavinskas says that his vocation journey began with Bishop Timothy J. Harrington, who was known for being very dissent-friendly.  I wrote Bishop Harrington many times over the years about various issues, most especially the column of dissident priest Father Richard P. McBrien which appeared in the diocesan newspaper with his approval.  Bishop Harrington assured me in one letter that he didn't find anything wrong with Fr. McBrien's column.  This came as no surprise at the time.

In the same article, Deacon Slavinskas is quoted as having said that, "Father (Joseph) Coonan, of course, was such a great influence, and helped nourish my vocation." (CFP, May 25, 2012 edition, p. 7). 

It is troubling to hear that Fr. Joseph Coonan was "a great influence" on Deacon Slavinskas.  I say this because some fifteen men came forward to share very similar stories about abuse, many involving Joseph Coonan's fondness for watching boys urinate, defecate or masturbate.  According to an article in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette (August 9, 2002 edition), two Oxford natives came forward with details of alleged sexual misconduct against Fr. Coonan, who was then serving at St. John's Church in Worcester.  Both men said that Fr. Coonan had delved into sexual perversion and had urged them to urinate or defecate in his presence.  See here.  Fr. Coonan was also accused (twice) of assaulting his mother and sister while intoxicated.  See here.

My prayers are with Deacon Slavinskas.  Especially given some of the influences on his vocation.  I urge you to keep him in your prayers as well.  In his first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul writes, "Do not be led astray: 'Bad company corrupts good morals'." (1 Cor 15: 33). 

Related reading here.

Read More

A web page at the website for the Archdiocese of Boston which is most revealing

Pope John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio, says that, "Christian revelation recognizes two specific ways of realizing the vocation of the human person in its entirety, to love: marriage and virginity or celibacy. Either one is, in its own proper form, an actuation of the most profound truth of man, of his being created in the image of God.'"

The Archdiocese of Boston, at the vocation page of its website, recognizes the vocation to the priesthood, the vocation to religious life, and the vocation to marriage. Nothing about the single vocation.  See here.  This is most significant.  The implication is that single people do not have a vocation or a purpose; that we are unnecessary.

Father Pat Umberger has noted that, "Being single. For some of us it is the way we live our Vocation. For others it is a temporary state. For some it brings much joy. For others sadness and a feeling of incompleteness. Not all single folks are called to a Vocation of priesthood or consecrated life. Single people come in all age ranges, from the 20's through old age. Single people have needs and goals. We don't always fit into the society we live in. Sometimes there is a perception that we cannot be happy or fulfilled while we are single. We can buy into that perception. The Church can be quite helpful to us. Sometimes it can hinder us as well. It is true that much is said about married life, children, teenagers and other groups within the Church, but not much about single people. The Church can unconsciously discriminate against single people by sponsoring mostly "couples only" events, inviting "families" to bring up the gifts, or seeing singles as the pool from which to draw helpers to complete tasks nobody else wants to do."



Cardinal Sean O'Malley has given much lip service to inclusion.  Indeed he has decided that Catholic schools in his Archdiocese can partner with homosexual parents who refuse to live in accordance with Catholic moral teaching.  Apparently it's only Catholics faithful to the Magisterium and single people who aren't entirely welcome.

Read More

"Value comes not from what a person 'has'...as much as from what a person 'is'"

In his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici, No. 37, Pope John Paul II reminded us that, "To rediscover and make others rediscover the inviolable dignity of every human person makes up an essential task, in a certain sense, the central and unifying task of the service which the Church, and the lay faithful in her, are called to render to the human family. Among all other earthly beings, only a man or a woman is a 'person', a conscious and free being and, precisely for this reason, the 'center and summit' of all that exists on the earth.

The dignity of the person is the most precious possession of an individual. As a result, the value of one person transcends all the material world. The words of Jesus, 'For what does it profit a man, to gain the whole world and to forfeit his life?' (Mk 8:36) contain an enlightening and stirring statement about the individual: value comes not from what a person 'has' even if the person possessed the whole world!-as much as from what a person 'is': the goods of the world do not count as much as the good of the person, the good which is the person individually.

The dignity of the person is manifested in all its radiance when the person's origin and destiny are considered: created by God in his image and likeness as well as redeemed by the most precious blood of Christ, the person is called to be a 'child in the Son' and a living temple of the Spirit, destined for the eternal life of blessed communion with God. For this reason every violation of the personal dignity of the human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offence against the Creator of the individual.

In virtue of a personal dignity the human being is always a value as an individual, and as such demands being considered and treated as a person and never, on the contrary, considered and treated as an object to be used, or as a means, or as a thing.

The dignity of the person constitutes the foundation of the equality of all people among themselves. As a result all forms of discrimination are totally unacceptable, especially those forms which unfortunately continue to divide and degrade the human family, from those based on race or economics to those social and cultural, from political to geographic, etc. Each discrimination constitutes an absolutely intolerable injustice, not so much for the tensions and the conflicts that can be generated in the social sphere, as much as for the dishonour inflicted on the dignity of the person: not only to the dignity of the individual who is the victim of the injustice, but still more to the one who commits the injustice."

Vatican II, in its Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity (Apostolicam Actuositatem), has this to say: "The laity derive the right and duty to the apostolate from their union with Christ the head; incorporated into Christ's Mystical Body through Baptism and strengthened by the power of the Holy Spirit through Confirmation, they are assigned to the apostolate by the Lord himself." (No. 3).  And in No. 4, this same document explains that, "This plan for the spiritual life of the laity should take its particular character from their married or family state or their single or widowed state.."

What is the point I'm trying to make?  That single people, like those whose vocation is to marriage, are also called to the apostolate.  But one wouldn't know this when one examines the way in which single people are often treated in the Church.  Father Pat Umberger has noted that, "Being single. For some of us it is the way we live our Vocation. For others it is a temporary state. For some it brings much joy. For others sadness and a feeling of incompleteness. Not all single folks are called to a Vocation of priesthood or consecrated life. Single people come in all age ranges, from the 20's through old age. Single people have needs and goals. We don't always fit into the society we live in. Sometimes there is a perception that we cannot be happy or fulfilled while we are single. We can buy into that perception. The Church can be quite helpful to us. Sometimes it can hinder us as well.  It is true that much is said about married life, children, teenagers and other groups within the Church, but not much about single people. The Church can unconsciously discriminate against single people by sponsoring mostly "couples only" events, inviting "families" to bring up the gifts, or seeing singles as the pool from which to draw helpers to complete tasks nobody else wants to do."

I have personally experienced this through the years.  Only recently I joined another parish, immediately registered, and noted both on the registration form and to the parish secretary, that I would like to volunteer at the parish.  I never did hear from anyone.  This is not the first time I have experienced such animus. Single people are often viewed as being somehow "inadequate," even within the Church.  We are often seen as being somehow peculiar because we live celibate lives and concern ourselves primarily with building up the Kingdom of God here on earth. We are often excluded and written off at the parish level as if the Lord Jesus couldn't possibly find any use for us. This attitude is far from Catholic.  Pope Benedict XVI said recently that, "The Lord has a plan for each of us; he calls each one of us by name. Our task is to learn how to listen, to perceive his call, to be courageous and faithful in following him and, when all is said and done, to be found trustworthy servants who have used well the gifts given us."

And if we are discouraged from participating in the life of the Church by those entrusted with leadership positions in the Church; if we are discriminated against because we do not measure up to their idea of "value," those who excluded us will have to render an account to the Lord Jesus and to explain why they scattered when they should have been gathering.

Will they be accounted as profitable servants?

Read More