Dozens of priests ask Belleville's bishop to resign

Top of the afternoon to ye!

1. Unless you are a Roman Catholic in communion with the Holy See, this controversy is none of your business. Are you a Roman Catholic in communion with the Holy See??? I did not think so. Being a disgruntled ex-Catholic does not count.

2. The issue, only according to the rebellious loudmouth priest faction (in violation of their massacred oaths of obedience to ecclesiastical authority) at Belleville and their supporters, is theft. The remedy for that issue lies with the Vatican's Congregation for Bishops which acts against the misbehavior of bishops with regularity. The unspoken issue of these rebellious vipers in Roman collars is that they are being expected for the first time in decades to act as though they were Catholic rather than as free-lancing, free-thinking "Enlightenment" philosopher kings organizing politically for the Demonrats which was the standard under the leftist predecessor of Braxton, Wilton Gregory. They are shocked, shocked (!!!) that reflexive Kumbaya is NOT Catholicism.

3. There is nothing wrong with the dissenting priests and their supporters that cannot be cured by the Congregation for Bishops (IF and only IF there was misconduct by Braxton) and (regardless of that issue) silencing and/or defrocking and/or excommunicating the rebel priests. Catholicism is not a democracy and, thank God, never will be. Of course, a restoration of the powers and methods of the medieval Holy Office would be icing on the cake.

4. When these rebellious priest trash are disciplined and hopefully excommunicated, you can recruit them to be clergy in whatever denomination, if any, you may belong to and Catholics can say good riddance to each and every one!

5. The purchase of vestments for the saying of Mass (allegedly the "wrongful" application of the funds) is certainly a legitimate function of the Church whose ordained priests in good standing say Mass at the specific instruction of Christ Himself, whether you think so or not.

6. There is no reason whatsoever for Bishop Braxton to apologize to anyone for buying liturgical vestments. Abny "catholic" who would violate the precepts of the Church by refusing the obligation to contribute to the support of the Church because (horrors!!!) the bishop has purchased liturgical vestments is not much of a Catholic, anti-Catholic opinions of the Church's enemies notwithstanding.

7. Long after the loudmouths have died and been buried, the Church will continue to the end of this world, as guaranteed by Jesus Christ Himself. Neither the very gates of hell nor these disobedient pipsqueaks will prevail against the Church.

8. If I am wrong in perceiving you as non-Catholic and you happen to be Catholic and happen to agree with these priests, no one is barring the exit door or forcing you to stay.

9. If, for any reason whatsoever, Braxton ceases to be bishop of Belleville, then the Vatican should let St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke choose the successor and choose someone as Belleville's next bishop one who can and will wield the power of bishop as vigorously as possible to crush such dissent and re-establish and vindicate the authority of the Diocese of Belleville and its ordinary. Of course, it would be just as worthwhile for Braxton to purge every one of these dissenters personally, silence them, defrock them, and excommunicate them. Whichever.

10. As you well know, there is no real danger that any of these rebels are conservative or that, like SSPX schismatics, make believe they are.

11. Hang 'em high!!!

I was certain it was something like that! Where we have the bad bishops (won’t name names, we know) the “new Church” priests are either in cahoots with them, or the good priests are too busy trying desperately to catechize their flocks in the truth. Only where you have an orthodox and strong bishop do you get a bunch of Code Pink style priests, with the cooperation of the media, making public complaints, causing a scandal and confusing the faithful. If there were really issues of leadership or faith, they would go through the proper channels and not try to stir up dissent in the pews.

Easy on the Irish whiskey.

You hedged on #5. If a bishop takes money, say, from donations ear-marked for the liberal freakshow agenda also known as the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, and uses that money to buy vestments which add dignity to the celebration of the unique sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which is the Holy Mass, is it theft?

"Increasingly frustrated by the lack of collaborative and consultative leadership"

The useage of the words "collaborative" and "consultative" are dead giveaways, as they are code-words used by the left in the Catholic Church. I myself first saw these terms used and defined by a left-leaning Catholic author and journalist named John Allen in his book "Conclave". I have unfortunately seen them used many times since.

Many liberal priests believe that the Catholic Church has to change, and that Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope need to give up their absolute authority, and "share" it in a more "collaborative" way with all of the priests below them. They believe that Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope making all-encompassing decisions from Rome do not cover the more individual needs of local parishes. They believe that the priests who are on the scene locally know better what is needed for the faithful in their location.

As a result, they believe that Bishops need to consult with their underlings (via committees, etc...), before making decisions, and that the Bishops then need to be bound by the input of those beneath them. The term they use for this type of Church governance is "collegiality" (another code-word they like to bandy about). Hence, there is a large swath of left-leaning Catholic priests, laymen, and journalists who are calling for "greater collegiality" within the Catholic Church, and for the usage of a more "collaborative and consultative" leadership style (mostly when those doing the leading are Conservative and orthodox in their leadership style).

These terms and concepts can be found all over the left-leaning Catholic press (indeed, the positive usage of these terms in a given Catholic news article is one way to determine if you are reading an article written by a liberal Catholic). I felt that their usage by the priests in this article was a dead giveaway. The only time the lefties do NOT want to engage in "collaborative and consultative leadership" is if the people who are being "collaborative and consultative" suddenly become more Conservative or orthodox in their Catholicism. Then one will see "collaborative and consultative leadership" go flying out the window as if it had been launched with a slingshot!!

When these lefties say they want "collaborative and consultative leadership", they only mean for people who think like they do, and agree with them. Conservative and orthodox Catholics see no need for this garbage, and are content to follow the Church's call to humble obedience. The priests of this diocese sound like they may be in need of our prayers for a conversion of heart.

It depends on facts not in evidence. Is there a formal trust fund arrangement of some sort??? Passing money along to CHD is always questionable and I would like to see bishops refuse to do so and refuse to allow its collection in their respective dioceses which would solve the problem at the outset. The USCCB has no authority whatosoever over the governance of the respective dioceses by their Vatican appointed bishops, as Lincoln, Nebraska Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz has told the liberal USCCB to their faces. In any event, any Church discipline of any bishop who is a diocesan ordinary is reserved to the Vatican’s Congregation on Bishops or the pope himself. For similar reasons, appeals from the decisions of federal district courts in Los Angeles are not taken to traffic courts in Cincinnati. No jurisdiction means no jurisdiction.

[we have lived through a thankfully brief period in which the lunatics have been in charge of the asylum. ]

Apparently President Richard Nixon didn't see it that way:

NIXON: You know what happened to the Romans? The last six Roman emperors were fags. Neither in a public way. You know what happened to the popes? They were layin' the nuns; that's been goin' on for years, centuries. But the Catholic Church went to hell three or four centuries ago. It was homosexual, and it had to be cleaned out. That's what's happened to Britain. It happened earlier to France.
Let's look at the strong societies. The Russians. Goddamn, they root 'em out. They don't let 'em around at all. I don't know what they do with them. Look at this country. You think the Russians allow dope? Homosexuality, dope, immorality, are the enemies of strong societies. That's why the Communists and left-wingers are clinging to one another. They're trying to destroy us. I know Moynihan will disagree with this, [Attorney General John] Mitchell will, and Garment will. But, goddamn, we have to stand up to this.
EHRLICHMAN: It's fatal liberality.
NIXON: Huh?
EHRLICHMAN: It's fatal liberality. And with its use on television, it has such leverage.

Amazing what a little piece of tape can do, isn't it?

Nixon may be your idea of a religious authority but he is not mine. He also seems to have been factually confused. If the popes were laying nuns and the Church was homosexual, does Nixon mean to suggest that the popes were lesbians or male lesbians or ...........???? Did Nixon know what he was suggesting??? Neither do you or paleoPaulie.

[Nixon may be your idea of a religious authority but he is not mine.]

He's more credible than you'll ever be, Quisling.

"There were also many Christians in ancient Rome

but we Catholics buried the Roman Empire long ago.

We will also be here when the USA is over with. "

- BlackElk