Jeffrey Miller

Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of the Diocese of Brooklyn is exactly right.

Today, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have deconstructed the single most important institution in human history. Republicans and Democrats alike succumbed to powerful political elites and have passed legislation that will undermine our families and as a consequence, our society.

With this vote, Governor Cuomo has opened a new front in the culture wars that are tearing at the fabric of our nation. At a time when so many New Yorkers are struggling to stay in their homes and find jobs, we should be working together to solve these problems. However, the politicians have curried favor with wealthy donors who are proponents of a divisive agenda in order to advance their own careers and futures.

What is needed in our state is leadership and not political gamesmanship.

In light of these disturbing developments and in protest for this decision, I have asked all Catholic schools to refuse any distinction or honors bestowed upon them this year by the governor or any member of the legislature who voted to support this legislation. Furthermore, I have asked all pastors and principals to not invite any state legislator to speak or be present at any parish or school celebration.

The above request is intended as a protest of the corrupt political process in New York State. More than half of all New Yorkers oppose this legislation. Yet, the governor and the state legislature have demonized people of faith, whether they be Muslims, Jews, or Christians, and identified them as bigots and prejudiced, and voted in favor of same-sex “marriage.” It is mystifying that this bill would be passed on the last day of an extended session under the cover of darkness.

This issue has been framed as upholding marriage equality. This is not the case since one of the principal purposes of marriage is to bring new life into the world. This cannot happen in same-sex marriage. It is not a civil rights issue, but rather a human rights issue upholding the age-old understanding of marriage. Our political leaders do not believe their own rhetoric. If they did, how in good conscience could they carve out any exemption for institutions that would be proponents of bigotry and prejudice?

Republicans and Democrats equally share responsibility for this ruinous legislation and we as Catholics should hold all accountable for their actions. [Source]

In the meantime Gov. Cuomo will still go and receive Communion.

Players are divided into two teams based on their opinions on topics including abortion, same sex marriage, the ordination of women and the use of birth control. Each team then works to ensure that a player from the other team is not elected Pope.

“We did extensive surveying of Catholics before launching the game and were surprised to find that 80% of Catholics surveyed supported creating a game where they could debate these topics,” said Cheyenne Ehrlich, Founder of SGR Games, LLC. “It will be interesting to see if that’s because they want to elect a liberal Pope or because they want to prove that Catholics are unified and conservative on these issues.”

In Vatican Wars, a player who is elected Pope can make gradual changes to the Church’s position on each topic. Gradual changes made by ten consecutive liberal Popes could, for example, reverse the Church’s position on same sex marriage. Popes are elected based on their own gameplay, their team’s gameplay and actual voting by all players. Gameplay within Vatican Wars is based on the Catholic liturgical calendar, daily readings, Saints of the day and debating theology [Via The Deacon’s Bench]

This same company previously put out Priestville on Facebook.

SGR Games LLC is a developer of social games. SGR has no business relationship with the Holy Roman Catholic Church, The Vatican or the Holy See.

Though there is a Catholic connection, SGR Games is named after Saint Genesius of Rome.

Personally I am waiting for Liturgical Wars, though there seems to be a version played in many of our parishes.

As to the premise of the game it isn’t very imaginative. Come on I want game play based on the arguments on the Filioque or perhaps settling the issue of predestination between the Thomists and the Molinists. There are lots of disputed questions that we will see development of doctrine on at some point.

Besides the basic premise of the game is flawed. One of the worst things that could ever happen to progressive Catholics is the election of a progressive pope or even series of Progressive Popes. When doctrine still didn’t change they would be freaking out not knowing what went wrong. Just a minor problem with the indefectability of the Church. The idea to support a pope to change a doctrine is nothing new. Empress Theodora backed Vigilius to become Pope so as to support the Monophysite heresy. Things did not go as planned though. In a letter he wrote the Empress Theodora:

“Far be this from me, Lady Augusta; formerly I spoke wrongly and foolishly, but now I assuredly refuse to restore a man who is a heretic and under anathema [the deposed Mono physite Patriarch of Constantinople, Anthimius]. Though unworthy, I am vicar of Blessed Peter the Apostle, as were my predecessors, the most holy Agapitus and Silverius, who condemned him.”

The Holy Spirit doesn’t mess around when it comes to protecting the Church.

By now most people have heard of Fr. John Corapi’s announcement that he is leaving the priesthood. His announcement came with a new blog The Blog SheepDog.

I never blogged on the original accusation and his suspension thinking it was best just something I would wait for an outcome on. While as far as I can tell the accusation was more than likely a false one, I know that even people I greatly admire and think much of can fall.

I also have much sympathy for people who have been falsely accused. I know in my own life that being thus accused when you are indeed innocent is much worse than being found out for something you did. There is a massive unfairness that results and proving you are innocent of a false charge is next to impossible to defend yourself of in most cases.

I have also been a critic of the Bishop’s Dallas Charter and had blogged against the zero tolerance policy since all zero tolerance policies result in mindless and often knee-jerk actions. Despite the credibility or circumstances of an accusation the movement is towards instant suspension not in the name of justice, but to appease those critical of the Church regarding the sexual abuse crisis. That a serious policy for investigating abuse and protecting people from actual abusers was seriously needed since many bishops failed in this; it does not mean you institute a policy that tramples over the rights of the accused and once a priest has been suspended his reputation is gone. There is the recent sad story of one such innocent priest accused who committed suicide as a result.

On the other hand what Fr. John Corapi has done in response is unacceptable.

We all have an example of somebody who was innocent and unfairly treated. Who could be more innocent than Our Savior Jesus Christ who was unjustly accused, scourged, and then executed on the Cross? His answer to this was “Father forgive them for they know not what they are doing.” He has given us an example to live by and warned us that we would be treated like him and even falsely accused like he was.

Fr. Corapi says he was thrown out like the morning garbage. St. John of the Cross was also horribly treated by his order. During the reform of the Carmelites and the establishment of the Discalced Carmelites his order took him and locked him up in a room that was more of a closet than a living space. He was locked up in this room for almost a year before he escaped. Yet during this time of imprisonment did he write critiques of the unfair process that occurred – no instead he wrote one of the greatest books on the spiritual life, The Dark Night of the Soul.

St. Padre Pio was also ill treated by his order. He was falsely accused of multiple things and basically was suspended as a priest. He was not allowed to say Mass in public, hear confessions, etc. This unjust period of his life was not just 3 months or a year, but around a decade. Yet St. Padre Pio did not lash out against his treatment, but instead grew in holiness.

I give Fr. John Corapi credit where credit is due. His forgiveness of his accuser and warning people not to write the bishops about his circumstance. Though there is a mixed message in his announcement with his complaints against the bishops and his telling people not to bother the bishops about this. It also seems he is leaving his religious order without permission from the order and a formal process of laicization. If so this is a very serious lapse and total disobedience.

He will continuing his outreach via http://www.theblacksheepdog.us/ and the various social networks in combination with Santa Cruz Media. There is a crassness with his blog post announcement and his “Ordination Anniversary Sale” of some of his talks. Does he have one on obedience? Even odder his new website was registered by godaddy.com. Some people might not know of their commercials but the main page of their site specialize in the objectification of women.

Sadly this is also a result of the phenomenon of the “celebrity priest” and a situation that can feed the ego of some priests. We’ve had the examples of EWTN priests, Fr. Cutie, etc who became celebrity priests and subsequently left the priesthood. A reminder for all of us to hold our priests up in prayer, but very public priests need even more prayer due to temptation. St. Padre Pio was certainly a celebrity priest and was attacked by the devil, but he also had great humility.

I have no respect for what Fr. John Corapi has done. He could have born this gracefully with the help from Our Lord and provided an example to us all. If his suspension was lifted it might have helped the bishops to seek changes to the Dallas Charter to more fully consider the rights of priests accused. Instead we have just another case of disobedience and somebody setting up on their own. His announcement also seemed to me to be tinged a bit with paranoia of some bishops being out to get him and that this was kind of a result of such an conspiracy. No doubt some bishops did not like his teaching style which previously taught the truths of the faith, but his suspension was no doubt based more on worries about public reaction than an attempt to derail his ministry. His new persona of The Black Sheep Dog is rather strange with the motto “Truth, Hope, Unleashed.” I am thankful his bitterness is not causing him to leave the Church which he apparently still loves, but he has veered off the narrow road and laid aside the cross for his own way.

Another point I am addressing is that I have seen many people refer to him as simply John Corapi. This is understandable, but a priest is a priest forever. It makes sense to drop the Fr. honorific from his name if he was laicized, but he has not been or as far as I can tell had that process started.

(CNSNews.com) – At a congressional hearing on Muslim radicalization in U.S. prisons, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said that investigators needed to analyze Christian militants in America because they too might try to “bring down the country.”

In an exchange with witness Patrick Dunleavy, the former deputy inspector of the criminal intelligence unit, New York Department of Correctional Services, Rep. Jackson Lee mentioned the case of a man who blew up an abortion clinic and proposed that this perhaps was an attempt to undermine U.S. law that allows a woman to procure an abortion.

I think she had watched too many episodes of Law & Order where abortion clinic bombings were prevalent. The list of abortion clinics that were actually “blown up” might be one or two. The Christmas bombing of a clinic in 1984 by four Christians was one of them and the blowing up of a wall of an abortion clinic in Tacoma in 2001 remains unresolved. One other incident was an attempted bombing was by a man with a long criminal record for armed robbery and theft whose motive was indeed “In the service of the Un-Born and our Lord Jesus Christ.” The only case of abortion clinic bombing killing someone is the case of the Centennial Olympic Park bomber Eric Robert Rudolph who was part of the racist Christian Identity movement. There will always be nuts and people on the fringe resorting to evil. When someone no matter how nominal a Christian does such acts they are roundly condemned by Christians.

But Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee would like to equate less than a handful of such bombings spread over 35 years as a moral equivalence for radical Islam. Radical Islam on the other hand is not some minority containing only some fringe losers (though they have them also), but populations of people financed from abroad who truly want to “bring down the country.” Just how many plots of “Christian Militants” have the FBI broken up in recent years? Hard to compare zero to the multiple coordinated attempts at terrorism right here in the country. How many Christians are going into prisons to radicalize converts to the cause of a militant Islam? How many receive funding from other countries?

But it is hard to blame Rep. Lee since the media has been reaching for a poster boy of “Christian Terrorism” for some time. Just a bit of moral relativity and attempt to equate radical Islam with Christianity such as DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano putting abortion opponents on a list of potential terrorist threats.

Dunleavy answered: “I don’t know that Christian militants have foreign country backing or foreign country financing.”

Lee then said, “I don’t think that’s the issue. The issue is whether or not their intent is to undermine the laws of this nation. And I think it is clear that that is the case. So it’s not — your distinction is not answering the question.”

A better answer might have been “I don’t know what Christian Militants have to do with a hearing on Muslim radicalization in U.S. prisons unless you can point to Christian Militants doing the same in the prison system.”

As for me I do intend to undermine some of the “laws of this nation” via prayer and dialogue in every case where the nation’s law contradicts the natural law.

From an article by Phil Lawyer on How the Boston archdiocese helped bring contraception to Massachusetts

… In 1965, as the state legislature discussed the repeal of the contraceptive ban, Cardinal Cushing said that he personally opposed the use of contraceptives. But he added, significantly: “I am also convinced that I should not impose my position—moral beliefs or religious beliefs—on those of other faiths.” To legislators weighing the merits of the bill, he said: “If your constituents want this legislation, vote for it.”

Thus did the leader of Boston’s Church signal an end to any active Catholic opposition to legalized sale of contraceptives. But the Boston College Magazine article reveals that the archdiocese had begun quietly planning for a change in the law even before Dukakis introduced his formal bid for repeal.

In 1963, the article reports, Cardinal Cushing was a guest on a radio call-in show. One caller asked the cardinal about his stance on the contraceptive ban, and he replied: “I have no right to impose my thinking, which is rooted in religious thought, on those who do not think as I do.”

At the time of that broadcast, listeners in the Boston area did not know the identity of the woman who called in with the question that drew that response. But now, thanks to Boston College Magazine, we know that it was Hazel Sagoff, the executive director of Planned Parenthood. There is reason to believe that both Sagoff’s call and the cardinal’s response had been arranged in advance. Prior to the show, Sagoff had been conferring with Msgr. Francis Lally, the editor of the archdiocesan newspaper, The Pilot, and a trusted adviser to Cardinal Cushing. Sagoff had said that a bid to repeal the contraceptive ban was doomed to fail, unless legislators were confident that the cardinal would not fight the measure. Msgr. Lally had indicated that he favored an end to the ban—although he hoped that the courts would settle the issue, making legislative action unnecessary.

Thus in the early 1960s, Planned Parenthood was coordinating plans with the Boston archdiocese to ease the way toward legal acceptance of contraception. When Dukakis introduced the repeal bid in 1965, the Catholic journalists at the Pilot received a memo instructing them not to comment on the legislation, “lest we stir up trouble with the Planned Parenthood people who have also pledged their ‘cooperation by silence.’”

“I have no right to impose my thinking, which is rooted in religious thought, on those who do not think as I do.”

Now I am just a armchair pundit and also just another Catholic convert who most of my life ignored theology and philosophy totally. But a statement like that sends me screaming in its vapidness. Now I can easily imagine this on the lips of many people, but on a Cardinal’s? What the heck happened to the Natural Law, did it get thrown under the bus here? Contraception is not rooted in religious thought, but the Natural Law. While certainly we do have revelation that supports contraception as in intrinsic evil and many statements from the Church the wrongness of contraception can be found by people of good will. Besides the Church does not impose her thinking, but proposes the truth.

Whether the Cardinal actually orchestrated a campaign to show that he would not fight the legalization of contraception in any way is beyond my ken. But his statement surely aided that happening and I just hope he was just a real lousy theologian.

Though there wasn’t much fight by American bishops in regards to the legalization of contraception, or for that matter abortion and the liberalization of divorce laws. This is one reason I am very proud of the way the Filipino bishops have been acting and fighting against attempts to legalize contraception in the Philippines along with the fight against allowing divorce. The American bishops might not have been able to stop or slow down the cultural destruction that occurred from the acceptance of contraception, abortion, and divorce, but as Blessed Mother Teresa said “We are not called to be successful, but faithful.”

This weekend at the conference for the American Catholic Council you can see these womyn priests attending.

Yet who do they have celebrate the Mass?

Yes a Male priest, Fr. Wurm. The oh so inclusive American Catholic Council excluded women from being the main celebrant.  Reports are that the womyn priests con-celebrated from their seats with the emphasis on con as in con job.  How dare they hold down the prophetic voice crying out for womyn priests and allow a MAN to be front and center.

From my inner snark I am all for them having womyn priests for their Masses.  This way they aren’t profaning the Eucharist since they won’t have the Eucharist, but just a Protestant service.

Now, the Archdiocese of Detroit said it will conduct a review of the priest’s actions.

“There were several, serious liturgical abuses at that service,” said Ned McGrath, spokesman for the Archdiocese. “It’s disheartening that a Detroit priest would preside over a service with so many…serious liturgical abuses. There will be — has to be — a careful and thorough review.”

Wurn told the Free Press afterwards he was aware that Archbishiop Allen Vigneron had explicilty warned all priests and deacons to not participate. But Wurm said he’s not worried being punished.

“I don’t see that happening,” Wurm said. “I’m older than he (Vigneron) is.” [Source]

What?

Update: Larry D at Acts of the Apostasy was thinking along the same lines as myself.