Recent Posts

Most Used Categories

Category: Current Events

You are Here :
Current Events, Perspective

A Voice Crying Out

I was going to write a piece on the continuing evil of abortion in the United States and across the world. However, the debate generated by the Episcopal Church’s now outright support and financing of abortion and the commentary thereon does a better job than I could.

I previously highlighted the Pontificator’s stance on the issue.

Now, Gawain de Leeuw has replied to Al Kimel (the Pontificator) on the issue. Mr. Kimel has responded in kind and most excellently.

One general comment about Mr. de Leeuw’s posts —“ notice he calls the ECUSA the EcUSA, i.e., a church —“ small ‘c’. That, is a very powerful statement.

Mr. de Leeuw begins:

Al Kimel writes: “A Christian community that supports the unconditional legal right to abortion has ceased to be Christian; it has ceased to be Church. A Church that is not willing to stand against the evil of abortion cannot be the Church that Jesus Christ founded. The lampstand has been taken away.”

This author agrees as previously noted. Mr. de Leeuw goes on:

It’s pretty powerful rhetoric, and reveals the monolithic, totalitarian impulse within Roman Catholicism. It first removes legitimacy from its opponents. It renders the opposing church “evil” which permits the obvious: death.

In one sentence he does the same thing he claims Mr. Kimel does. He does so by resorting to threadbare reformation rhetoric about the Roman Church. How unfortunate for him. He is not marching with Luther, Calvin, or Henry VIII, for if he were he would be condemned just as heartily. To wit:

John Calvin (1509-64). “The fetus, though enclosed in the womb of its mother, is already a human being and it is a most monstrous crime to rob it of the life which it has not yet begun to enjoy. If it seems more horrible to kill a man in his own house than in a field, because a man’s house is his place of most secure refuge, it ought surely to be deemed more atrocious to destroy a fetus in the womb before it has come to light” (Commentarius in Exodum, 21,22)

Martin Luther (1483-1546). “Even if all the world were to combine forces, they could not bring about the conception of a single child in any woman’s womb nor cause it to be born; that is wholly the work of God.” (Luther’s Works, VII, 21)

He goes on:

In the end, Al wants ECUSA destroyed – what else can one do with such evil homophilic babykillers like ourselves?

While I cannot imply Mr. Kimel’s motives or goals, I can acknowledge my feelings on the idea and they come from this Sunday’s Gospel:

—This is the time of fulfillment.
The kingdom of God is at hand.
Repent, and believe in the gospel.—

Mr. de Leeuw says:

And of course, this is part of Roman history. And it is justified, because we kill fetuses upon the altar of religious pluralism. Such extremism makes me quite glad that I am in the liberal, reformed end of the church. I do not need to worry about his damning me. I sleep well at night.

He starts again with rhetoric. Mr. Kimel has touched a nerve. I do not think Mr. Kimel personally damned him. However, the failure to worry over the fate of one’s everlasting soul is simply a failure to have any fear of God.

Mr. de Leeuw continues:

Although it seems that the issue is about babies, it is more properly about the church’s relationship to the state; and secondly about the church’s relationship to its own body.

Yes, it is about babies. Because you agree with the government’s sin you believe that no one has a right to stand against it? Abortion is wrong, evil, sinful, and murder —“ this is fact. Is the Church’s stand dependant on the state? Is a relationship required?

The choice to sin is the choice for evil over God. We can take a historical tour of governments that have actively promoted evil, but I’ll save everyone the time and energy right now.

And, sure, you can stand and work for the government. You can believe in the infallibility of the government and you can support it whole heartedly. Just call yourself a secular humanist, not a Christian.

Can Christians accept a government that permits people, of different religions, to have abortions? Or shall it provide a law that says, for example, Christians cannot have abortions, but atheists can – kind of like a Christian Sharia?

I say no on both accounts. Christians cannot accept such a law nor may they uphold it. Now notice, he says ‘government’. He would like to imply that real Christians are damning the United States. He fails to remember that any human power is from God and that right is right by God’s law.

As Christians we cannot permit evil and must stand against it. We must stand against evil on behalf of Christians and non Christians alike. Mr. de Leeuw, did Jesus Christ redeem the world? Is Jesus Christ God? Is Jesus Christ our arbiter and judge? Does this apply to all of mankind, regardless of what people think?

It may be that in the choice between a woman’s life and a child’s life, the Episcopal Church has decided to admit the law of the land – the choice that most of its baptized members agree. His claim, however, is that ECUSA is not a Christian church. Well that’s his opinion, and not Gods, but by the nature of their acts, it would not be the view of most Catholics, who would agree with most of the teaching of Episcopal churches.

Why do our parents tell us those funny little sayings that turn out true? It appears that Mr. de Leeuw never heard the one about everyone jumping off a bridge/cliff/building.

Also, please spare us the rhetoric about the ‘teaching of the Episcopal churches.’ What teaching? Where is it standardized? I can go from church to church, state to state, country to country and get a different message every time, right down to core beliefs about baptism (non-use of the Trinitarian formula). Basically Episcopal teachings are made up by whomever is there at the moment, high church, low church, and apparently, no Church.

Also, most Catholics of any persuasion would balk if they understood the phony priesthood and the rest of the phony sacraments of the Episcopal church. If you explained your views on the sacraments honestly you would have to tell them – no it is not the ‘Body of Christ’ —“ its just bread in the Episcopal Church. It is only a symbol, not reality – which again says a lot.

As the title of my post implies, powerful rhetoric is needed. Proclamation is needed. Make straight the way of the Lord, that is, the Lord’s way.

“They will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name’s sake. This will be your opportunity to bear witness. … You will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and relatives and friends, and some of you they will put to death. You will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But not a hair of your head will perish. By your endurance you will gain your lives.

Let’s pray that as Christians we can stand together and bear witness in the face of all evil.

Current Events, Media, Perspective

Holy Fools —“ OK, Nuts —“ out

I was reading the postings at Orthodixie in regard to Vassula. For those not familiar, Vassula Ryden allegedly has conversations with Jesus which she reports on.

She came to the fore recently when the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles uninvited her and a Christian Unity conference to be held in their Cathedral. This from a diocese that prides itself on ugly architecture, never meeting a militant homosexual they didn’t like, and whatever other blatantly liberal inventions they can dream up.

Since there is a dearth of comments on my blog, I decided to comment on her. You see, her adherents love to browse around the Internet looking for comments about her. They then prolifically comment on the comments.

I figured, wow, I can get bunches of comments just by talking about this woman.

The name Vassula reminds me of bibbidi-bobbidi-boo, the ‘magical’ song from Disney’s Cinderella.

My name’s Vassula, I speak with Jesus, bibbidi-bobbidi-boo!

From her website comes the following —quote— featured prominently:

“My Vassula, My Word is like a lamp to give light and shine so that every soul may see Me, feel Me and return to Me, see? I wish to remove this darkness which lies heavily in this world. I am giving you My lamp so that you place It on a lampstand and not under your beds.” (Jesus – August 28, 1989)

Vassula is very good at paraphrasing scripture and applying it to her messianic delusions. She can also quote lyrics from the Who (read the plot line – you’ll laugh).

I’m glad Jesus gave her this message, but unfortunately for her it is not exclusive. It is the same message he gives to everyone. While you are indeed special in His eyes, you do not have exclusive revelation. In addition please remember that you are responsible to God when you lead others into sin.

I would highly recommend that you choose the Church you would like to join, whether Roman Catholic or Orthodox, and hie yourself over to your local parish weekly. By the way, wear a veil, sit in back, and listen to God’s Word from those charged with bringing it to you.

Another interesting aside falls well into the lies and misdirection column: Vassula’s website claims the endorsement of the Pope, albeit when he was the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. You can read the convoluted logic at her website yourself. Basically it is a letter from Card. Ratzinger giving a heads-up to local ordinaries, and in a polite way, telling them to watch out.

The commenting may now begin…

Current Events, Media, Perspective

The EC-USA and Why the Book of Daniel Works (for them)

I previously commented on the TV series the Book of Daniel. I was able to watch the show thanks to my wife who caught it on the DVR.

The show is neither theologically or morally sound, but is does come off as the perfect farce. I found it very funny, and was most impressed by the fact that the farce of the show is perfectly in line with the farce of the church it represents, the Episcopal Church (EC-USA).

Over the weekend I read how the EC-USA supports abortion. I said to myself —“ this is interesting, how could this be true? I was going to comment on it, but upon doing some research, found that this support for murder has been a consistent policy of the EC-USA. I figured, why comment? Gene Robinson is merely the head of a very large serpent.

I need not comment further. The Pontificator covers it very well in the article: Living in the Darkness: Episcopalians and the Ethics of Abortion.

Current Events

A sad day

The modernist culture of death prevails again, but I fear evil not, for I know that Christ has overcome evil and has opened the gates of heaven to all who choose Him.

Fr. Martin Fox at Bonfire-of-the-Vanities makes a good point about states’ rights. However, regardless of man made rights, the right to kill another must be seen in light of the natural law, the deposit of faith, and God’s commands. Surely it must be restricted to self defense (only when proportionate) and national defense (again, when proportionate).

Our rejoicing in our own power over life and death, whether that of the unborn, the elderly, sick, and incapacitated, or ourselves will turn to tears when we finally see the blood on our own hands.

California executes oldest condemned inmate
Convicted murderer Allen, 76, was blind, nearly deaf and in a wheelchair

SAN FRANCISCO – California executed its oldest condemned inmate early Tuesday for arranging a triple murder 25 years ago to silence witnesses in another killing.

Clarence Ray Allen was pronounced dead by lethal injection at 12:38 a.m. at San Quentin State Prison, less than an hour after his 76th birthday ended at midnight.

Allen —” who was legally blind, nearly deaf and in a wheelchair —” was the second-oldest put to death nationally —” since the Supreme Court allowed capital punishment to resume in 1976.

…

Allen’s heart stopped in September, but doctors revived him and returned him to San Quentin Prison’s death row.

Oh, see, we done good… Now for part 2:

Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Suicide Law
By GINA HOLLAND

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked the Bush administration’s attempt to punish doctors who help terminally ill patients die, protecting Oregon’s one-of-a-kind assisted-suicide law.

It was the first loss for Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined the court’s most conservative members – Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas – in a long but restrained dissent.

…

The 6-3 ruling could encourage other states to consider copying Oregon’s law, used to end the lives of more than 200 seriously ill people in that state. The decision, one of the biggest expected from the court this year, also could set the stage for Congress to attempt to outlaw assisted suicide.

Justices have dealt with end-of-life cases before, most recently in 1997 when the court unanimously ruled that people have no constitutional right to die. That decision, by then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, left room for states to set their own rules.

…

Scalia said in his dissent that the court’s ruling “is perhaps driven by a feeling that the subject of assisted suicide is none of the federal government’s business. It is easy to sympathize with that position.”

At the same time, Scalia said federal officials have the power to regulate doctors in prescribing addictive drugs and “if the term ‘legitimate medical purpose’ has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death.”

He was joined in the dissent by Thomas and Roberts. Roberts did not write separately to explain his vote. Thomas also wrote his own dissent.

…

Oregon’s law, which was passed by voters, covers only extremely sick people – those with incurable diseases and who are of sound mind. At least two doctors must agree the ill have six months or less to live before they can use the law.

Just like the Netherlands where its degraded into the killing of children.

“For Oregon’s physicians and pharmacists, as well as patients and their families, today’s ruling confirms that Oregon’s law is valid and that they can act under it without fear of federal sanctions,” said state Solicitor General Mary Williams.

The ruling backed a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said Ashcroft’s “unilateral attempt to regulate general medical practices historically entrusted to state lawmakers interferes with the democratic debate about physician-assisted suicide.”

The court’s ruling was not a final say on federal authority to override state doctor-assisted suicide laws – only a declaration that the current federal scheme did not permit that. However, it still could have ramifications outside of Oregon.

“This is a disappointing decision that is likely to result in a troubling movement by states to pass their own assisted suicide laws,” said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which backed the administration.

The case is Gonzales v. Oregon, 04-623.

Current Events, Media

Joy for Judas?

I read of this while perusing the Remnant Newspaper. I like the Remnant for its critical eye toward modernism. I especially agree with their calling to mind what many ‘conservative’ Roman Catholics engage in these days —“ papolatry (pope worship —“ hey he’s the pope, what he says must be true, and isn’t he nice, great, kind, loving, always smiling).

Anyway, before I go off on a rant, I would love your perspective on this.

It does in fact make me sick to think that such a thing is even being considered. Now I love intellectual debate as much as the next cleric, but this stuff just supports the evil of the age. There is no God, there is no right and wrong (just do what makes you feel good —“ and don’t hurt anyone), there is no evil, and people cannot possibly knowingly participate in or make evil choices.

Judas the Misunderstood
From Richard Owen, in Rome for the Times of London

Vatican moves to clear reviled disciple’s name

JUDAS ISCARIOT, the disciple who betrayed Jesus with a kiss, is to be given a makeover by Vatican scholars.

The proposed —rehabilitation— of the man who was paid 30 pieces of silver to identify Jesus to Roman soldiers in the Garden of Gethsemane, comes on the ground that he was not deliberately evil, but was just —fulfilling his part in God’s plan—.

Christians have traditionally blamed Judas for aiding and abetting the Crucifixion, and his name is synonymous with treachery. According to St Luke, Judas was —possessed by Satan—.

Now, a campaign led by Monsignor Walter Brandmuller, head of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, is aimed at persuading believers to look kindly at a man reviled for 2,000 years.

Mgr Brandmuller told fellow scholars it was time for a —re-reading— of the Judas story. He is supported by Vittorio Messori, a prominent Catholic writer close to both Pope Benedict XVI and the late John Paul II.

Signor Messori said that the rehabilitation of Judas would —resolve the problem of an apparent lack of mercy by Jesus toward one of his closest collaborators—.

Yes, yes, Jesus is all merciful —“ we can all agree on that. But His mercy has a requirement, conversion and repentance.

He told La Stampa that there was a Christian tradition that held that Judas was forgiven by Jesus and ordered to purify himself with —spiritual exercises— in the desert.

Of course the Gospels differ. But I like this one…

In scholarly circles, it has long been unfashionable to demonise Judas and Catholics in Britain are likely to welcome Judas’s rehabilitation.

Father Allen Morris, Christian Life and Worship secretary for the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales, said: —If Christ died for all —” is it possible that Judas too was redeemed through the Master he betrayed?— The —rehabilitation— of Judas could help the Pope’s drive to improve Christian-Jewish relations, which he has made a priority of his pontificate.

Looks like under Anglican auspices England has become the new Las Vegas —“ anything goes. I’m OK, you’re OK; there is no sin. Thanks Gene Robinson and the rest of the heretics. For my part I believe what happens in England should stay in England.

Some Bible experts say Judas was —a victim of a theological libel which helped to create anti Semitism— by forming an image of him as a —sinister villain— prepared to betray for money.

In many medieval plays and paintings Judas is portrayed with a hooked nose and exaggerated Semitic features. In Dante’s Inferno, Judas is relegated to the lowest pits of Hell, where he is devoured by a three-headed demon.

The move to clear Judas’s name coincides with plans to publish the alleged Gospel of Judas for the first time in English, German and French. Though not written by Judas, it is said to reflect the belief among early Christians —” now gaining ground in the Vatican —” that in betraying Christ Judas was fulfilling a divine mission, which led to the arrest and Crucifixion of Jesus and hence to man’s salvation.

Perhaps someone at the Vatican has a financial interest in the book? No, that couldn’t be true.

Mgr Brandmuller said that he expected —no new historical evidence— from the supposed gospel, which had been excluded from the canon of accepted Scripture.

But it could —serve to reconstruct the events and context of Christ’s teachings as they were seen by the early Christians—. This included that Jesus had always preached —forgiveness for one’s enemies—.

Lets be exact here —“ not forgiveness, but love and prayer.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matt. 5:43-48)

Oh, and by the way, its a little hard to write a gospel while you’re hanging from a tree with your guts spilling out on the ground. Now, on with the article

Some Vatican scholars have expressed concern over the reconsideration of Judas. Monsignor Giovanni D’Ercole, a Vatican theologian, said it was —dangerous to re-evaulate Judas and muddy the Gospel accounts by reference to apocryphal writings. This can only create confusion in believers.— The Gospels tell how Judas later returned the 30 pieces of silver —” his —blood money— —” and hanged himself, or according to the Acts of the Apostles, —fell headlong and burst open so that all his entrails burst out—.

Some accounts suggest he acted out of disappointment that Jesus was not a revolutionary who intended to overthrow Roman occupation and establish —God’s Kingdom on Earth—.

In the Gospel accounts, Jesus reveals to the disciples at the Last Supper that one of them will betray him, but does not say which. He adds —Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.—

But he also —” according to St Matthew —” acknowledged that Judas had a divine function to fulfil, saying to him during the arrest, —Friend, do what you are here to do— and adding that —the prophecies of the Scriptures must be fulfilled—.

The —Gospel of Judas—, a 62-page worn and tattered papyrus, was found in Egypt half a century ago and later sold by antiquities dealers to the Maecenas Foundation in Basle, Switzerland.

Michael J. Natt, publisher of The Remnant had this to say:

The following article, published under the title “The Priest and the Present Crisis in the Church”, was written by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (RIP) and appeared as a Remnant exclusive in June, 1972. In the wake of the mind-blowing news out of Rome this week that the Vatican’s Pontifical Committee for Historical Science has proposed some sort of bizarre process of —rehabilitation— for Judas Iscariot (no, I’m not making it up! [full story]), it seems somehow apropos to revisit the predictions of universal ecclesial crisis that Archbishop Lefebvre was warning against some 35 years ago. As the Vatican embarks on this surreal quest to recast in a more favorable light the betrayer of our Savior and the one whom Christ Himself said would have been better off had he never been born, three things become clearer: 1) A reprieve for Catholics longing for an end to this 40-year nightmare is evidently not in the offing; 2) The need for traditional Catholic resistance to this Modernist madness is greater now than ever before; 3) A significant number of the Catholic hierarchy have taken leave of their Catholic senses.

Current Events

St. Stanislaus Suppressed

I guess I stayed away from the St. Louis news for too long after the New Year. Thus, from the Associated Press via the Springfield News-Leader:

Archbishop ends St. Stanislaus’ status as parish in archdiocese

St. Louis —” St. Louis’ Roman Catholic archbishop has issued a —decree of suppression— of St. Stanislaus Kostka church, ending the historic church’s standing as a Catholic parish in the St. Louis archdiocese.

The traditional Polish parish, which is at odds with the archdiocese over control of the parish’s property and assets, is appealing the suppression, along with last year’s interdict and last month’s excommunication of its lay board of directors and priest.

—We saw it coming,— parish spokesman Roger Krasnicki said, adding that St. Stanislaus has retained a canon lawyer. —We’re doing as much as we can as fast as we can.—

According to church law, a move to —suppress— a parish ends its affiliation to the larger Catholic church.

The decree, dated Dec. 29, but announced in the archdiocesan newspaper today, was delivered Wednesday (Jan. 4, 2006) to the parish’s lay board along with a cover letter from Burke.

…

The move to —suppress— the parish was the latest development in a two-year dispute between Burke and the parish’s lay board of directors over control of St. Stanislaus’ $9.5 million in assets.

The church’s property and finances have been managed by a lay board of directors since its founding 126 years ago.

Since Burke arrived here in January 2004, he has sought to make the parish conform to the same legal structure as other parishes in the diocese and hand over control of its assets. As the parish resisted, Burke responded with increasing pressure —” removing its two parish priests, issuing an interdict denying sacraments to the parish’s board, and establishing another parish as the official home for Polish Roman Catholics.

Last month, Burke declared the board and Father Marek Bozek, the former assistant pastor at St. Agnes Church in Springfield who was hired to serve St. Stanislaus, had been excommunicated.

Krasnicki, an attorney, said it’s possible that suppression might be used as a prelude to a civil attempt to get back the property, but doubted such a move would succeed.

Now, here is the most interesting part of the story:

For more than a century, St. Stanislaus has been the religious, cultural and historical home of Polish Americans in St. Louis. The tradition of self-governance in matters of property and assets dates back to the European immigrants who brought the church to America in the 19th century. But that model has faded over the years as the nation’s bishops have asserted control.

The Rev. William Barnaby Faherty, official archdiocesan historian, said late last month that many of St. Louis’ immigrant parishes closed after descendants of the founders moved to the suburbs.

—But enough of the Polish people stayed to keep St. Stanislaus alive,— Faherty said. —The thought was, ‘who cares about those Poles down there?’ No one bothered about them. They went on their way, kept things alive and spent money on their church.—

Yes, they kept the faith, and were largely ignored by the Diocese, especially when they asked for help.  They probably understood the subtext, which has now been made abundantly clear by Rev. Faherty, an archdiocesan representative: Who cares about you, we’re not bothering with you, go on your way.  Now I can add —“ but ooops you have $9.5 million.  Now its time to care, bother, impede and close —“ just like the rest of the ethnics.

Another thought —“ since I like coining odd phrases, perhaps the nativist influences affecting American Roman Catholic bishops, at the time of the 3rd session of the Council of Baltimore, left an ingrained feeling that —ethics do not count with ethnics—

The Roman Church stands by in amazement at the fact that Hispanic ethnics are leaving in droves for Pentecostal and evangelical churches.  Since Spanish, being a great romance language, is so closely allied with Latin, perhaps they intuit the term Modus Operandi and can see the handwriting on the wall.

Another aside, from KSDK, Abp. Burke was away on retreat at the time the suppression was announced:

Archbishop Raymond Burke is on retreat, but released a faxed statement that said, “It is not possible for St. Stanislaus Kostka Parish to remain a parish of the Archdiocese of St. Louis and, at the same time, to operate completely independently of the Apostolic See and the Archdiocese of St. Louis.”

Current Events, Media

On church ownership

I found an excellent article, Who owns the Church (sic) written by Thomas Szyszkiewicz at the Epiphany Blog.  Mr. Szyszkiewicz is a Catholic journalist. This is a good addition and follow on to my Catholic Church Is Dealt a Blow in Asset Dispute post. One of the items in the article I found most humorous was:

In 1911, the Sacred Congregation for the Council (now the Congregation for the Clergy) told the bishops of the United States that they did not like the corporation sole model all that well and preferred the method of parish corporation, where each individual parish is separately incorporated in the state.

Among the methods which are now in use in the United States for holding and administering church property, the one known as Parish Corporation is preferable to the others, but with the conditions and safeguards which are now in use in the State of New York. The Bishops therefore should immediately take steps to introduce this method for the handling of property in their dioceses, if the civil law allows it. If the civil law does not allow it, they should exert their influence with the civil authorities that it be made legal as soon as possible. Only in those places where the civil law does not recognize Parish Corporations, and until such recognition is allowed, the method commonly called Corporation sole is allowed, but with the understanding that in the administration of ecclesiastical property the Bishop is to act with the advice, and in more important matters with the consent, of those who have an interest in the premises and of the diocesan consultors, this being a conscientious obligation for the Bishop in person. (Quoted in New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, 2000, New York, Paulist Press, page 1457.)

The New York model the Congregation favored is one where the state has written into law recognition of Roman Catholic parishes and the authority of the bishop over them. The law there allows for two lay trustees to be named to the corporate board, but those trustees serve at the pleasure of the bishop, thus avoiding the whole trusteeism question. But that is not the case in many states.

Making the changes

Unfortunately, not many bishops listened to that directive. It’s only been in recent years that some dioceses have been making the civil changes necessary to reflect canon law.

It is funny because, if this is accurate, many U.S. Bishops have been ignoring Vatican opinion on this issue since at least 1911.  This again goes to the point in my original posting, you reap what you sow. 

The article also discusses the St. Stanislaus situation in St. Louis as it is pertinent.  As my readers may know, I have commented heavily on this situation.

Current Events, Political

Alito —“ Politics is a dangerous game

I’m probably one of the few Christian bloggers who are not coming out hot and heavy for the Alito nomination.  Let’s go Alito, he’s our man, etc., etc.  Well I’m not coming out for him, nor for anyone else.

I like the voting booth.  It’s private —“ and that’s a protection.  My vote is between me, the machine, and God, and you know Deus ex machina.  It’s why we as the faithful must work to stop evil, must pray diligently, but must not yoke ourselves to anyone, most especially to someone in the government realm.

The problem as I see it comes down to this:

He’s a Politician:  Anyone in the judiciary or any other public office is subject to the old give and take.  Whether it be to financial supporters or interest groups what wield power, no one is true to who they are.  They can be, but alas are not.  Our system is too corrupt to allow it.  Can you imagine if he were to be honest about abortion or a thousand other things?  Rather, he will say what he has to.  If he were honest, the old ‘borked’ adage would be gone.  It would now be ‘roasted ala Alito.’  Even Peter capitulated under pressure in the outer court of the High Priest.  Can we expect more from Alito?

Where does he stand? Caveat emptor —“ how many Supreme Court nominees, once appointed were not who people thought they would be?  Plenty, and the Presidents’ that offered up the nominations were as surprised as the interest groups.  I don’t want to try to foretell the future of another person.  I don’t believe in fortunetelling in the first place and secondly I can’t even predict my own future.  Even if he had a slew of published decisions and writings expounding on the evils of abortion, euthanasia, or other pertinent subjects (he’s be dead already), it is already in the past.  The past can give us a clue, but only a clue.

Outward signs: OK he is Catholic, ethnic, has two children (good family planning I think), belongs to the right societies.  He has some good decisions and was nominated by an allegedly conservative president.  But remember the oft quoted Henri IV, ‘Paris is well worth a mass’.  It has been said that this quote shows the depth to which people would go for power.  While some scholarship reports it as being apocryphal, it is in any event a statement that makes the case very clearly —“ we do not truly understand another man’s motivations.

What’s the right thing to do:  Instead of pretending to read the political tea leaves, instead of pretending to know who gave whom private assurances and what secret litmus tests were administered, maybe, just maybe, we should pray twice as hard.

Pray that whomever is confirmed is a person of integrity.  Pray that the other Justices will be enlightened by the Holy Spirit.  Pray that those who are blind to government sanctioned murder will have their eyes opened.  Pray that their decisions on cases move to affirmatively end abortion, euthanasia, and thousands of other evils.  Pray that the states do not allow abortion and euthanasia to continue.

For me and my house we will pray.

Current Events, Media

Catholic Church Is Dealt a Blow in Asset Dispute

In the ‘if you live by the sword you die by the sword’ category:

Catholic Church Is Dealt a Blow in Asset Dispute
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL – December 31, 2005; Page A3

A federal bankruptcy-court judge in Portland, Ore., ruled Friday that the Catholic archdiocese there can’t shield the sale of parish assets from compensation claims made by victims of sexual abuse by priests.

In a decision that could have national ramifications, Judge Elizabeth Perris found that sex-abuse victims, who have filed about 100 outstanding claims with potential damages of at least $300 million, may seek compensation from assets including parish churches and schools within the diocese.

While a victory for abuse victims, the decision represents a blow not only for the diocese but also for Catholic parishioners in Portland and across the country who are trying to protect church properties and bank accounts from liquidation.

Ruling in the bankruptcy case of the Portland archdiocese, the judge denied the diocese’s claim that its extensive real-estate holdings—”valued from $400 million to $600 million—”shouldn’t be available to pay creditors’ claims because they are held in trust for the parishes as beneficiaries. The diocese contended that victims should only be entitled to diocesan possessions, valued at around $19 million, including the bishop’s residence and chancery.

Although the diocese said that the question should properly be decided under canon, or church law, the judge wrote, “Who owns the property is, quite simply, not a theological or doctrinal matter.”

The judge is right and you’ve entered his realm.  The title to all church property in every diocese in the United States is held in the name of the Bishop Ordinary only.  He is the sole trustee for the diocese, the parish, and for any and all assets.  He can do what he sees fit with the assets as long as it is in keeping with Canon Law.  It’s been that way since the 3rd Council of Baltimore (1884).  From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

[The] Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1884), in its decrees on the subject of church property, urges the bishops to place all church property under the protection of legal incorporation, where it can be done safely, as in the State of New York; where such incorporation cannot be made it requests the bishop to have himself made a corporation sole and thus hold the property as any other corporation would; and where this cannot be done it permits him to hold the property in fee simple” (Rev. J. M. Farley, now Archbishop Farley, in “The Forum”, June, 1894).   

People just keep thinking, ‘hey, this is my church.’  No, sorry, it is not and never was.  It is one of the reasons that the PNCC broke away from the Roman Catholic Church.  It is why the Bishop can close your parish.  He doesn’t need that white-wash committee of laity and a few nuns.  They are there only as a faí§ade.  If the Bishop says so, it is so.  Only the Roman Pontiff or his delegated authority in the Curia can overrule your Bishop.

Back to the WSJ article:

The judge also rejected the argument of the Portland diocese’s 390,000 Catholics, who were named a separate defendant class, that civil law would bar the diocese from selling assets against parishioner wishes. “Under civil law, the parishes and high schools are not separate civil legal entities,” Judge Perris found.

A written statement issued by the diocese said: “We feel strongly that this decision is not supported by the facts or the law, and believe it infringes on Archdiocese’s right and the parishioners’ rights to freely exercise their religion. We will review our options to appeal.”

Sure, but the civil court will look at the documentary evidence.  Who holds title to the property?  It is the Bishop as CEO and trustee for the corporation —“ i.e., the diocese.

He is in effect ‘the diocese.’  The Church is certainly the body of Christ in all its constituent members.  However, the church (small ‘c’ meaning its physical belongings) has nothing to do with the members.

When the Church subjects itself to the civil courts you will get a civil court verdict.  Did you expect an ecclesiastical decision based on Canon Law from the United States Bankruptcy Court?  You are not dealing with the Rota.

As you appeal, the decision takes a higher level of precedence.  It goes from a decision applicable in the Federal District to one applicable in the Circuit and eventually, if taken to the Supreme Court, applicable nationwide.

Although Judge Perris’s decision and a similar ruling by a bankruptcy-court judge in Washington state in August aren’t binding on judges in other jurisdictions, they are expected to influence cases cropping up across the country that also deal with control over church assets.

Catholics in Boston, New York and elsewhere are fighting the closings of their parishes by contending that they, rather than the diocese, have control over churches, schools, bank accounts and other assets. These internal battles have become so heated that the St. Louis archdiocese recently excommunicated leaders of one parish who refused to turn over assets to the bishop, a subject of a page one Wall Street Journal article on Dec. 20.

Abp. Burke in St. Louis had to beg St. Stan’s for its $10 million because by act of a Bishop 125 years ago the property was deeded to the parish council, not the Bishop.  Thanfully these people saw what was coming and said no.  Abp. Burke wants it one way, Portland and Spokane want it another way.  The R.C. Church and its bishops look like keystone cops.  Where’s the USCCB?  Shouldn’t the bishops speak with unanimity on issues?  Not in the United States! 

Each is in charge of his personal fiefdom.  Each feels completely separated from the center.  Each proclaims the strength and unity of the Church and —Ex Ecclesia Nulla Salus— (Outside the [Roman Catholic] Church there is no salvation), all the while each chooses his own way.  Who may/may-not receive the Eucharist, will I follow the Church’s rules on homosexuality and seminary life, and whatever else (architecture, music, liturgy, inclusive language..).

The poor Roman Catholic faithful are faced with an episode of cognitive dissonance.  Their bishops say one thing, but do another.

Another federal bankruptcy judge sided against the Spokane, Wash., diocese in a similar bankruptcy ruling in August. The Spokane bishop has appealed.

David Skeel, a University of Pennsylvania law professor, said that the Portland ruling hurts parishioners nationwide who contend that dioceses cannot close churches or take assets on their own. “What this opinion confirms is that the archdiocese is in charge, with respect to the property,” he said. He added that the decision is likely to unsettle parishioners by making clear that parishioners will ultimately pay for the abuse scandal. “Even if…the priest was never in their parish, they still pay the price,” he said.

Yep!

All Right Reserved © 2005 - 2023