NEW YORK BISHOP RESIGNS

At the very least, our bishops should be above reproach when it comes to obeying their vows and should NOT be in a continuing state of mortal sin.

Could we not say the same thing about married people who commit adultery and practice artificial means of birth control and take holy communion in the state of mortal sin?

As many are asking why no Muslim stands up and admits that his religion has done wrong, I refuse to do the same.

I, a Catholic, rebuke the Catholic Church for intentionally and deliberately accepting pederatsts into the hierarchy of same and of intentionally and purposefully defending such pederasts for the sole purpose of defending their agenda.

Well, I couldn't have said it better Dec31rst, as a Catholic I feel the same!

I do not advocate monarchy for America. I think a continental superstate made up of three hundred millon people divied into a myriad of diverse (and often mutually antagonistic) ethnic and cultural interest groups is impossible to rule well by any means; therefore, our current mob-rule TV oligarchy is as good a way to keep the lights on and the streets paved as any other. God commands us each to be loyal to our fatherland; therefore, I am an unabashed patriot, and I do not advocate the replacement of our current system of government by any other form.

That being said, I am a believer in monarchy, in defined social structures, and in traditional Western culture -- a hierarchical, communitarian, and duty-centered culture, rather than the democratic, atomistic, and rights-centered culture we have today. I do not find popular government to be anywhere endorsed by Our Lord or His Apostles, who instead command us to be humble, law-abiding, and submissive to authority rather than prideful, anarchic, and rebellious. I think that Western man is naturally suited to monarchy; that a overtly Christian, duty-oriented culture is more genuinely humanistic than one animated by the atheistic false humanism promulgated by the spirit of the Enlightenment; and that the average citizen -- myself included -- is neither inclined towards nor capable of genuine self-government. In short, I think that the establishment of a genuine Christian culture, coupled with an aloof authoritarian government beholden to no outside power or money, is the best way to run a Christian society. "Fear God; Honor the King."

As I said: I do not advocate monarchy for the United States, and I fully support our current government and laws to the exclusion of all others. However, I do think that all societies like our own bear within them the seeds of self-destruction, and that eventually (to use Kiling's memorable words) "the gods of the copybook headings will with terror and slaughter return". The survivors of the breakup of the false utopia that Western man has built for himself since his so-called Enlightenment -- if any -- will have no illusions about the wisdom of popular and secular governnment; perhaps then, his bitter lesson learned, he will look to the past to build a better future.

Well, that's good - at least he didn't anally rape some 8 year old altar boy.

All these priests need our prayers.

Code words, nothing more. "lay participation" advocates want nothing less than a democratic Catholic Church, where elected boards of laymen will effectively control the Church at the parish level, dictating policy to each priest below and (collectively in each diocese) to every bishop above. The drive for "a more open church" is nothing but Presbyterianism-on-a-Crucifix, a modern-day neo-reformation in which independent congregations ruled by councils of "elders" (certain to be dominated by radical reformers out to "bring the Church into step with the 21st Century") will democratically control the Church in America, superseding the local Lords of the Manor (parish priests and deacons) and surrounding the places of the local aristocrats (the bishops) with mobs of pitchfork-wielding peasants shouting "Accountabilty!" -- the war cry of Martin Luther.

Should priests, deacons, and religious be accountable under Canon and civil law? Yes! But the structure for enforcing those laws exists now; the reason so many molesters and sodomites have ben allowed to run around scot-free is precisely because the Bishops feared the public (and lay) reaction to enforcing those laws. What we need is not more lay accountabilty, but more authoritative bishops a la Bruskewitz who quite simply intend to obey the Pope and the Lord no matter what the laity or the public at large thinks. A few bishops seen on TV excommunicating (or physically removing) the radical reformers from their positions in the Church would to more to ameliorate the current crisis within Catholicism than all the parish democracy in the world.

The Church is not a modern, atheistic democratic institution; it is a medieval, hierarchical, God-centered Body. American Catholics of a "progressive" bent would do well to be reminded of that fact.

You must not know any women who have a little power and authority.

Your posts on this thread seem to be inspired by the spirit of Truth. They are powerful,well written and reflect a reality that transcends the natural.Just escellent,thankyou.

That deserves repeating:

As many are asking why no Muslim stands up and admits that his religion has done wrong, I refuse to do the same.
I, a Catholic, rebuke the Catholic Church for intentionally and deliberately accepting pederatsts into the hierarchy of same and of intentionally and purposefully defending such pederasts for the sole purpose of defending their agenda.
116 posted on 12/08/2002 7:56 PM PST by Dec31,1999

G~d is revealing the fruit of false prophets in both Protestant and Catholic leadership and the wise will see that and obey G~d rather than man and come out. Most people when confronted with wolves in sheeps' clothing tend to follow their blind leaders down the broad road to destruction and into the ditch. Truly, you are a man of conviction and strength. Blessed are your eyes for they see.

The Church is not a modern, atheistic democratic institution; it is a medieval, hierarchical, God-centered Body. American Catholics of a "progressive" bent would do well to be reminded of that fact.

I will agree that there are some aspects of the Church that are still medieval. That is a sad fact. Bishops were elected by fellow clergy well into the 19th century in this country, and great men, like John Gibbons, were produced by that method.

It's also sad that you are so distrustful of your fellow American Catholics and citizens by saying that we are "not suited to self-government."

This little democratic experiment has worked rather well, compared to even the "benevolent monarchies" of past history.

I don't know about this, this obviously is a bad thing, but a priest admitting to having sex with women (not girls)... is not going to bring the church down. Priests have been quietly doing such things for eons...

What is bringing the church down is their protection and defense and covering up of the homosexuals, and yes, predatory pedaphiles within their ranks. And yes it is not a select few who are gay, it is a continually growing number. They swap sex for advancement, consideration and other things as well. This is why the pedaphile stuff in my oppinion has been covered up so vehemently, because they don't want the public to see exactly how compromised the entire heirarchy has become. Its gotten to the point in some areas I bet if you don't provide sexual favors, you don't get advanced at all.

Now, yes that last part is my personal speculation, but the fact the priesthood has become a gay subculture in america, is next to undeniable, in particular certain locales.

Even as a Christian, I have no desire to live in a medieval, hierarchical, communitarian society.

Ever tried it?

Freedom is God's gift to us! I believe God wants us to live free; He only asks that we use our freedom responsibly.

Moral freedom, yes; we are all given the choice of which master we will serve. But political freedom was unknown to the world of the Lord and His Apostles, and it is nowhere advocated in the Bible. To the contrary: St. Paul tells us

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Note: he did not say "those authorities that exist have been instituted by God, except the ones without fair and free elections". He said "there is no authority except from God"; that means all authority!

For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.

This call to obedience extends even to unjust taxation:

Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. [Rom 13:2-6 RSV]

Seems pretty plain to me: "the authorities", says St. Paul, "are ministers of God" and "have been instituted by God". Therefore, to rebel against their authority is to rebel against God. Not very American, but there it is.

And that's not all. The first Pope, St. Peter, goes even further:

Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.

Wow! No call for democracy or civil rights there -- just a commandment to submit to all authority. Why? Because St. Peter knows that the only true freedom comes from humble servitude:

Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.

So it's clear that the Christian is never to cast himsef as a rebel against just authority. But what if the authority is unjust? What if our rulers are tyrants who enslave us? Can we rebel then? St. Peter says no:

Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. [ I Pet. 2:13-21 RSV]
"Slaves obey your masters... to [slavery] you were called... that you should follow in His footseteps." Strong words, and words that beg to be explained away -- but they can't be explained away. Jesus Christ was every man's servant, a king who washed the dirty feet of Galiean fishermen, the Creator of the Universe who was so humble had no permanent fixed place of abode. Jesus never raised a sword against the Pharisees, the wicked Herod, or the pagan Roman invader, nor did He counsel His followers to do so. Instead, he humbly surrendered Himself into the hands of the cruel and unjust State -- which killed Him.
How un-Amerucan of Him.
Besides, monarchies are not very often like the fairy-tale Camelot. Sure, sometimes you get a good ruler like Alfred, Charlemagne or St. Louis...but more often you get egomaniac jerks like King John, Henry VIII, Bloody Mary, James II, Mad Ludwig of Bavaria and Louis XIV. Or weenies like Prince Charles.
And republics are not very often like the fairy-tale Jeffersonian ideal. Sure, sometimes you get a good ruler like Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, John Adams or Ronald Reagan...but more often you get egomaniacs, incompetents, idealists, or plain old jerks like JFK, Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and You-Know-Who from Arkansas. Or weenies like Jimmy Carter.
And as for Martin Luther...don't you see that God often uses imperfect people to accomplish His divine purpose?
Yes. In the case of Martin Luther, the good that came from his evil acts was the Counter-reformation.
If it weren't for Luther, the Church at Rome would still be selling indulgences from Purgatory;
...not true...
no-one would be able to read the Bible except Latin scholars
untrue as well...
...and the threat of excommunication would still be used to keep people from trying to better themselves or enhance their lot in life.
...and excommunication wasn't used for that purpose
Medievalism is un-American!
Sadly, I agree.
And America, I believe, is a nation born of God Himself.
As are all nations.

No. I've never had the chance to live under the absolute authority of a despot.

Of course you have. Ever tried fighting the IRS? Your local tax man has more power over your life than any medieval king could ever have dreamed. (For one thing, he lays claim to far more of your income than any king did.) Like a king, he can claim your earnings as his own, confiscate any funds you may have on hand, prevent you from borrowing or lending, or seize your belongings and property -- or you -- at will. And, like a king, he has his own court system and gun boys to back him up.

At least a king swears an oath to God to serve justly. The tax man, on the other hand, is a god unto himself as far as the average Joe is concerned.

Never enjoyed the freedom-stifling social climate of Cuba or Taliban-dominated Afghanistan.

Apples and oranges. Cuba is an atheistic dictatorship, its leader beholden to no God -- the ultimate separation of church and state; Taliban Afghanistan was in the grip of a heretical gangster cult based upon a heretical false faith. (Both governments, however, were allowed to hold power by God.) Unlike Castro and Mullah Omar, a Christian King is answerable to God and to his peers for his actions, and his rule is based in the Natural Law.

I'm just an independent-minded American...guess I'm really missing out! [/sarcasm]

< sarcasm >
Yeah! I'm an American! Nobody -- cops, priests, politicians, bisops, kings, or Popes -- not even God Himsellf -- has the right to tell me what to do!
< /sarcasm >.

"...he did not say 'those authorities that exist have been instituted by God, except the ones without fair and free elections'. He said 'there is no authority except from God'; that means all authority!"

But God hates evil. He drives the wicked from power and deposes the unjust. Don't you see that God uses people—men and women of His choosing—to accomplish that?

Sure. But can't you see that God uses the wicked and unjust to punish His people when they turn their backs on Him? Egypt, Persia, Macedon, Rome -- the Bible is full of examples of God allowing (and even helping) wicked rulers to enslave His people. He allowed Jerusalem to be burned, the Temple desecrated, the Ark captured, and the Hebrews to be carrried away to Babylon as captives -- do you think that somehow He has changed or that they deserved it more than we?

Just as He lifted up Moses to lead the Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh (no, He didn't just let them languish under the authority He had established!)

He most certainly did. How long was it between the soujourn of Joseph and the Exodus of Moses?

...so also I believe God lifted up such fine and gifted men as our Founders to overthrow the unjust rule of King George and Parliament, and establish a government built on fairness and justice instead.

God undoubtedly allowed the United States' founders' rebellion to succeed. He also allowed Stalin to live to a ripe old age. He allows mass murder, genocide, child abuse and heartbreak. He allows a great many things of which He does not necessarily approve. I trust that His reasons for doing so will be be revealed in time.

Would you prefer that they'd thrown up their hands and said, "oh well, it's a tyranny and it sucks, but it's the authority God established..."

Yes, since that is what the Scripture and Tradition of the Church demands. Where did Our Lord ever teach that we have the right to rebel against unjust authority?

Like I've said before, I believe God uses even fallible, imperfect people to accomplish His goals. In that way, I believe He truly led Thomas Jefferson and gave him the Holy wisdom to utter those immortal words, "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!"

That teaching is not part of the Christian Faith, and Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian. Whatever you may believe about President Jefferson is irrelevant; although God does use non-Christians to accomplish His purposes, those purposes can never contradict the teachings of the Church; God cannot contradict Himself. To command us to submit to all authority and then to command us to rebel against certain kinds of authority would be such a contradiction.

Granted, it's not in the Bible...but then you yourself reminded me there are other places you'll find truth in our Christian tradition besides Scripture, right? ;-)

Yes -- but only in the Tradition handed down to us from the Lord via the Apostles and their successors (i.e. the bishops of the Church). Traditions outside of those preserved by the Church are not divinely inspired and are thus not infallible sources of Christian Truth.

Cool thing about a republic is, when a lousy ruler comes along, once enough people get fed up you can vote him out!

Really? And what do you do when the guy you voted out refuses to get out?

Under a monarch, you're stuck until he/she dies.

Under an elected dictator, you're stuck until he/she dies.

France had to put up with Louis XIV for 72 years—enough time for 18 U.S. presidential elections! You really want a monarchy?!?

Yes.

Yes, and the birth of the Jesuits—the most corrupt, whacked-out, commie-loving left wingers in the church today. Talk about outliving one's usefulness...

The Jesuits' current problems are the the result of centuries of slow Modernist/humanist poison, and God will deliver them from it or the order will be suppressed.

And not every Jesuit has the infection. Jesuits have done an immense amount of good work over the years, bringing the Gospel to some of the most demonic hell-holes on Earth and suffering horrible torture and death for their trouble. St. Francis Xavier was a Jesuit, and I dare you to call him a corrupt, whacked-out, commie-loving left winger!

Luther served to break the oligarchic monopoly on knowledge of God, held since the Middle Ages by Rome.

Yes. He replaced it with an anarchic free market, where the knowledge of God can be anything the individual believer says it can, and where Christ is marketed to the masses like soap and toothpaste by slick streetcorner popes with blowdried hair and TV smiles. Thanks to Martin Luther and his leap of faith, Christians can now sleep with each other before marriage, commit sodomy, sterilize themselves, divorce and remarry over and over (dumping the kids at each step along the way), and abort their children at the drop of a condom -- secure in the knowledge that "once saved, always saved" -- and all with the blessings of the local preacher. And if he gives you trouble over it, why you can just go to the megachurch down the street -- you know, the less-judgemental one where the Holy Spirit has led them to construct a swimming pool and bowling alley in the Family Life Center.

Some improvement.

He enabled ordinary people for the first time in centuries to read the Bible and get to know God personally.

And what of the illiterate? What did he do for those unable to read? Or for the blind? Is literacy a prerequisite for salvation?

More of the Lord's children got to connect with Him in their own lives (check into Pietism). Is this the "evil" fruit of the Reformation?

All of the "connecting" ever done courtesy of the Reformation isn't worth one second of actually being in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ at a Mass. It's not even close. Why would anyone settle for merely "connecting" themselves to the Lord when they can eat His Flesh and drink His Blood?

Finally, while it may be true that God allows the existence of all nations, I truly believe the United States of America is blessed with a singular mission to bring the light of freedom and hope to all of humanity.

Where is that in the Bible?

There's a lot of generosity, kindness, neighborliness and goodness that emanate from these shores...and the fact we are prosperous and so able to help our less fortunate brethren derives most of all from the freedom God has given us as a people.

We do not have a monopoly on generosity, kindness, neighborliness and goodness, and our prosperity is based upon the natural resources abundanty in this land (all of them gifts of God) and the Western, Judeo-Christian culture we inhereted from European Christendom. Voting had nothing to do with it.

Scripture and Tradition clearly teach that Christians are to respect authority, not rebel against it. I showed you Bible verses saying just that. To ignore them is to ignore the clear teachings of the Christian Faith. Is that what you propose to do?

Yours in Christian fraternity,

B-chan

I was about to say, "At least he screwed some women, as opposed to raping children!!" The guy deserves a medal!!