Replies

>>Am I imagining things or does it seem that news related to church scandals and dissent (if not outright heresy) has a common denominator of LOCATION with this statement? >>

I taught at a Catholic School in Boston, led by a militantly pro-abortion headmaster. Apon moving there, I was stunned how dead the Church was. Typical church attendence: two old ladies, a passed-out bum and a housefly. I was totally scandalized. Knowing how pro-abortion Massachsuetts Catholics were in general, I couldn't help wondering, "how could the church have fallen so far?"

Cardinal Law came to the school. At the time, he was known for presenting himself as orthodox. I can't descrobe it an objective way, but it became very clear to me that the Cardinal and the headmaster saw eye-to-eye very well. I then realized: Law is not orthodox at all. He is a very deceptive politician who realizes feigning orthodoxy is his way to power. I would later see how heretical the church in Boston was, how Law would fawn over the Kennedys, including granting annulments to any Kennedy who asked.

Law, like O'Connor, seemed conservative. It surprised me not in the least Boston would become the center of the scandal.

I notice ALI did not list Boston or New York as orthodox or progressive. This was very wise. Boston was the worst possible: Heretical, yet making the heretical seem as if it were the orthodox.

Law is not orthodox at all. He is a very deceptive politician who realizes feigning orthodoxy is his way to power.

I dunno, seems a pretty simplistic explaination of Cardinal Law. Remember when he was the ONLY bishop to stand up to Cardinal Bernardin regarding Bernardin's "Common Ground Initiative" (Law's letter to Bernardin can be found on the internet) and best of all was when Law wrote a widely published criticism of The Catholic Theological Institute (one of the worst dissenting organizations - the member list of theologians is a who's who of heretics) and he called the Institute "a theological wasteland" - incurring the wrath of the progressives.

Cardinal Law was personally orthodox but not strong enough to withstand the direct disobedience and scathing contempt of most of the priests and theologians in his archdiocese. So he compromised by doing almost nothing to curb the growing apostacy of the ordained and the laity. And I think that the USCCB, promoting "unity" pretty much hogties all but the most strong and faithfilled and faithful bishops. You saw what happened when Bruskewicz stood up and spoke the truth at that dog and pony July 2002 bishops meeting. It was if he never spoke.

I think Cardinal Law, God help him, also fell prey to the good life that can be had if one is so inclined. The nice dinners and hobnobbing with the "influential" people can be very tempting.

PS. Cardinal Law's Masses and homilies were very orthodox.