Friday, September 22, 2017

Archbishop Chaput Defending Wolf-Jesuit -- Not Much Love for the Sheep

Edit: thanks to Susan for this. Worst Things is probabaly worse than America Magazine. Controlled oppositions, pretending to be a voice or reason, like the Neconservative Archbishop Chaput, who, rather than be worried about the honor of the Catholic Faith and the absurdity of having a Jesuit like Martin floating around, is more worried about the tone of his critics. It reminds us of the time when he was upset with Diogenes from the Mail of Olde, chastising him for allowing a Mass to he said for his pro-Abort governor, the evil Bill Ritter. Chaput's thin-skinned response through his mouthpiece was as telling as it was pathetic. Diogenes disappeared from public circulation not long after that, and he's been missed...

Chaput might not be the prelate we want, but is he the one we deserve? How long?

As I write these words I’m looking at an untitled cartoon from the National Catholic Reporter in the Wojtyla-era 1980s. It’s an image of an elaborate canopy with praying angels draped over a Chair of Peter—in this case, a toilet with the papal insignia. It’s tied to a column that argues, among other things, that the “Catholic church is uncomfortable with two things. Sex and bowel movements.”
The humor is childish. It’s lightweight snarkiness compared to much of the Reporter’s caustic fare for the past few decades. It pales next to the savage anti-Roman woodcuts of early Lutheran polemics. But the cartoon’s message is nonetheless—how to say it?—not one of filial esteem. Or even Christian civility.
I remembered the cartoon, and its source, while reading Massimo Faggioli’s recent (Sept. 18) thoughts in La Croix’s online international edition. In “Catholic Cyber-Militias and the New Censorship,” Faggioli rightly worries about the river of vitriol now “profoundly changing the communion of the Catholic Church.” He also generously mentions my own public repudiation of the tactics of groups like the Lepanto Institute and Church Militant during our 2015 ramp-up for the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia and the visit of Pope Francis.



Long-Skirts said...


Good cap, bad cap
Last fifty years or two -
One says "yes"
And the other says "boo".

“Bravo”, say the most
“Error”, just a few -
Take the Body of Our Lord
Swallow, munch or chew.

Bad caps rail
Good caps hush -
Good caps snooze
Bad caps gush.

Of course their precinct captain
Knows his hired men -
Likes to act concerned
But never will defend,

Won't correct abuses,
Like rainbows from a prism,
When accused together pray
They're framed to look like schism

Good cap, bad cap
All around the town
Bad cap beats you up
While good cap holds you down.

Kathleen1031 said...

Nice, Long-Skirts, that about describes it.

These predictable quasi-defense statements are maddening. It's all verbiage and blarney, it clarifies nothing, virtue signals to all the "right" people, I'm sure. In the end, neither the sheep nor the faith are helped. A man who fifty years ago would have been excommunicated and shunned is defended and kept propped up. Somewhere in Rome a man smiles. All is well.

N.D. said...

I am stunned that Archbishop Chaput would defend any priest who would deny The Catholic Church's teaching, as Revealed by Christ, on the Sanctity of the marital act, which is Life-affirming and Life-sustaining, and can only be consummated between a man and woman, united in marriage as husband and wife.
The error beneath Archbishop Chaput's error, is the belief that that which a Catholic must believe with Divine and Catholic Faith, (Catholic Canon 720) is up for debate. Woe to those who serve to manipulate The Deposit of Faith.

"Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity."

Archbishop Chaput is well aware that these "perceived ambiguities" on sexuality, are a complete rejection of Christ's teaching on the Sanctity of the marital act, and thus the Sanctity of marriage and the family.

To deny that God Is The Author of Love, of Life, and of Marriage, is to deny Salvational Love, God's Gift of Grace and Mercy.

It is both Loving and Merciful to desire that we overcome our disordered inclinations, so that we are not led into temptation, but are able to be transformed, through Salvational Love, God's Gift of Grace and Mercy as we develop Healthy and Holy friendships and relationships that are grounded in authentic Love, and thus respectful of our inherent Dignity as human persons.

If it were true that it is Loving and Merciful to desire that we remain in our sin, we would not need our Savior, Jesus The Christ.

Why not tell those men and women who have developed a same-sex sexual attraction the truth? It is because we Love you, and respect your Dignity as a beloved son or daughter, that we cannot condone the engaging in or affirmation of any act, including any sexual act that demeans your inherent Dignity as a beloved son or daughter. The desire to engage in a demeaning act of any nature, does not change the nature of the act. We Love you, and because we Love you, we desire that you will always be treated with, and will always treat others with Dignity and respect in private as well as in public. We will not tolerate the engaging in or condoning of sexual behavior that does not reflect the upmost respect for the human person, because you are Sacred in the eyes of God.

Civilized speech must be civilized not only in tone, but also in content. Condoning sexual acts, including between a man and woman, united in marriage as husband and wife, that demean the inherent Dignity of the human person, is uncivilized speech.

Anonymous said...

"the Wojtyla-era 1980s" - is that now the way ambitious archbishops refer to the late great saint john paul ringo and george? ha ha ha ha ha

Justina said...

No one ever tells Jorge Bergoglio to keep a civil tongue in his head. Is politeness only required of underlings?

jac said...

The eternal fate that awaits the souls of these shepherds in wolves' clothes, true Judases will probably be terrible.
Here is an excerpt of an interview of the famous seer Maria Simma" in the book "Let us get out of here":
"The Poor Souls have told me that our last Pope John Paul I was murdered, and it was the freemasons who did it. And when a Cardinal who had held a very important position had also died, a spiritually gifted woman in Carinthia wanted to pray for him. She prayed and she was blocked. She tried repeatedly, but simply couldn't. One day, this same Cardinal himself appeared to her in a fiery state and said: "You cannot pray for me because I am lost due to my Freemasonry. And I have PopeS on my conscience". Then she and her spiritual director, and it was he who came here and told me this, took this to the Vatican and again to the highest Officials of the Church. There one of them, who acknowledged having been at the former one's deathbed where he had witnessed piercing screams, said that he did not want to die like that and went to confess to the present Holy Father (John Paul II)".
I suspect that this high ranked Cardinal was the Secretary of State Cardinal Villot who died 6 months after JPI. Proofs of his F.M. belonging were found later.
When he said "I have PopeS on my conscience", we may understand that he murdered at least another Pope before JPI. (Hearsays have circulated about a possible poisoning of Pius XII)

Anonymous said...

St Catherine of Siena :We've had enough exhortations to be silent. Cry out with a thousand tongues - I see the world is rotten because of silence.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget, Chaput used an eagle feather on Christ's altar in some kind of syncretistic nonsense. He's already compromised.

susan said...

wow!.....incredible story. People need to be reminded of the reality of hell.

susan said...

....aaaaand I just ordered the book! (if anyone else would like to also, think of getting it (and others) from rather than Amazon; don't want to put one red penny in Dr. Evil-Bezos pocket...he's an unwrinkled, unripened version of Soros).

Also, great article on this mystic here....

Anonymous said...

The good ArchBishop wants a Red Cap more than that eagle feather!
He has made all the right moves alas to no avail. Initiated a Symposium on Pope Francis´s teachings, hosted the Holy Father, made a public air of feeding the poor, Year of Mercy events, and now this
to cap it off! Pandering for that red Cap hitherto the Holy Father ad naseum spoke out against Clericalism and power climbers within the Church the good ArchBishop just doesn´t seem to get it.
Perhaps Mother Angelica has Our Lord´s ear. At any rate if he hasn´t got the Red Cap by now well...

Anonymous said... is to laugh. Francis took the job of priest because he saw it as a way to get a permanent job. It was a free ride to him I assure you. Thomas Aquinas, he's not. He's the Chauncy Gardiner of the Church. He says whatever they tell him to.

Anonymous said...

Like Chauncy, he spews the most preposterous and pedestrian nonsense and he's hailed as the philosopher king. (Snort)

Carl J said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
N.D. said...

I do not believe that Archbishop Chaput is aware of Father Martin's condoning of same-sex sexual acts.