The constant attack on the Catholic church

MusicForThePiano said:
It's not just a papal decree allowing for clergy to marry, which would fix many things, it's primarily the infiltration and subversion of men who have not rooted out their lustful gluttony and demonic sexual influences putting on the cloth. Post-Vatican II saw a rise in the number of priests (although the figures are still fictitiously overblown) engaging in molesting behavior. Very likely many of the ones who comprised this statistic were homosexuals who did not have the proper spiritual guidance to shed this demon from themselves. Priests have been guilty of many things over the centuries, even Cardinals, Bishops, and Popes too. Alighieri was very descriptive in placing these men in their literary punishments in the Divine Comedy to show how men of the faith when doing something criminal, either against a nation's laws, or against God's laws, are too held responsible.
Click to expand...
The rise in homosexuality in the Catholic priesthood is an open secret. I've seen some Catholic commentators estimate that 50% of the Catholic clergy is homosexual. Once you take into consideration that most homosexuals are also pederasts, then you can begin to see why the Catholic Church struggles so much with pedophilia. Unfortunately, I personally know 2 good men that left their Seminary after learning there were gay hookups occurring.

Allowing God-fearing heterosexual men to become priests won't eliminate the problem, of course, but it will help offset the sheer amount of homosexuals currently in the Catholic Church. Let's be honest: how many heterosexual men are willing to forgo having a wife and children? Very few and certainly not enough to staff the entire Catholic church. I applaud heterosexual men that can forgo their primal urge of "be fruitful and multiply," but these men are the expectation to the rule.
 
TheSurveyor said:
Agreed, Protestants all have married pastors and are still susceptible to abuse. It’s the fault of the person, not the tradition.

This idea of married priest in the Roman church comes from a lack of understanding as to why the tradition came about in the first place.

The idea of being able to properly fulfill the duties as a husband/father/breadwinner/confessor/spiritual director/celebrant is a lot and ,in most cases, too much for your average man. That’s why the tradition has been fine as it has been for centuries.
Click to expand...

From what I understand it also stems partly from laws governing inheritance of wealthy families in the middle ages.

Back then it was customary for noble families to send their second son to the seminary, and not having a family of his own any inheritance passed down to him (while it would only be a small portion of his father's estate, not being the firstborn) would then go to the Church upon his passing.
 
BasilSeal said:
More hard hitting research and insightful commentary from @MusicForThePiano
Click to expand...
It is a repost of an Anglin article yes, but the document checks out. Have you something to counter that claim?

"39. In any case, precisely to avoid any form of confusion or scandal, when the prayer of blessing is requested by a couple in an irregular situation, even though it is expressed outside the rites prescribed by the liturgical books, this blessing should never be imparted in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them. Nor can it be performed with any clothing, gestures, or words that are proper to a wedding. The same applies when the blessing is requested by a same-sex couple."

"41. What has been said in this Declaration regarding the blessings of same-sex couples is sufficient to guide the prudent and fatherly discernment of ordained ministers in this regard. Thus, beyond the guidance provided above, no further responses should be expected about possible ways to regulate details or practicalities regarding blessings of this type.[26]"

"
III. Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex

31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love."

They can doctor up the language as tidy and as ecclesiastically-appropriate as they want but the words 'same-sex couple' should not be in the lexicon of the Catholic church. I don't recognize it as being a valid state of relations for any human, and neither does God. At what point do we take back our church? When do we raise our own bishops and cardinals to defend against the counterfeits in Rome? It's been sixty years since Vatican II and the faith is nothing like it was before.
 
I've read the document. So, you would be okay with the whole of the document if only the phrase "irregular situations" was used?
 
staddlelateen said:
The rise in homosexuality in the Catholic priesthood is an open secret. I've seen some Catholic commentators estimate that 50% of the Catholic clergy is homosexual. Once you take into consideration that most homosexuals are also pederasts, then you can begin to see why the Catholic Church struggles so much with pedophilia. Unfortunately, I personally know 2 good men that left their Seminary after learning there were gay hookups occurring.

Allowing God-fearing heterosexual men to become priests won't eliminate the problem, of course, but it will help offset the sheer amount of homosexuals currently in the Catholic Church. Let's be honest: how many heterosexual men are willing to forgo having a wife and children? Very few and certainly not enough to staff the entire Catholic church. I applaud heterosexual men that can forgo their primal urge of "be fruitful and multiply," but these men are the expectation to the rule.
Click to expand...
What an absolutely preposterous claim! 50%? Really now? Who are are these supposed "Catholic" commentators? Michael Voris?

I have only ever met one priest in my whole life that I felt that could have been gay. But according to this claim, I'm expected to believe that 1 out of every 2 priests are gay? Ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
The most vicious attacks on Holy Mother Church are from its own Catholics, people like Taylor Marshall et all , who have set themselves up as their own magisterium and lead people literally away from the church.

The liberals use this to make it seem like the church is pro homosexuality , and the rad trads use it to further incite hatred of the Holy Father. The second one is worse because it comes from what are supposed to be sons of the church,m.



Great breakdown of what the document actually say. tl dr. The church cannot bless sin , cannot bless gay unions , but a pastor in his prudence can opt to give an informal blessing to individuals struggling with SSA, extending the church’s mercy while not affirming a sinful lifestyle. It’s like the so called traditionalists think it’s a bad thing that the church should reach out to sinners, as if our Lord didn’t eat with tax collectors and prostitutes. Schism is a lack of charity , as emj says. A refusal to associate with the body of Christ. These people are not lepers.

Beware of those who set up their own magisterium , claiming to be traditional catholic. Ironically not submitting to the Pope is not traditional at all. You can make an idol of purity or if the Latin mass can r of “tradition” and follow that stuff all the way out or the Church. There is no salvation without obedience. (These same people love to talk about wifely I obedience , which I agree with , but our manly submission to Rome , the defining attribute of Catholicism, nope). These people are basically Protestants at this point. I’m sure the early reformers talked in similar ways. I used to watch people like Tim Gordon but can’t stand them anymore.

Pls excuse any typos , wrote this on my phone
 
These "traditionalist" just aren't traditional. At best just Protestants, at worst pandering to church Karen's for likes and clicks. And don't forget the third secret still hasn't been revealed So gay.
I rack it up to the Catholic Church not doing a great job at catechesis since apparently indefectibility isn't understood at all. Apparently we're all our own magisteriums and know better than all the bishops and Rome. Sounds like this has happened before maybe.
Canon 1404 The First See is judged by no one. Yup that applies to everyone. So keep on declaring the Pope a heretic for that sweet sweet cash.
Maybe what I find more surprising is everyone just assumes these low IQ commentators are telling the truth instead of reading the actual documents. Or reading any magisterial document for that matter. They all lie because it generates clicks. I have to assume at this point it's intentional for the clicks because even a cursory reading of these documents shows otherwise.
So by all means, follow the Missal of 1962 and the internet grifters out of the church. Or maybe do some self study, I'd recommend starting with Lumen Gentium. I feel at this point I get to declare myself the most traditional since I attend both liturgies but usually go to the Novos Ordo mass and submit to Rome. I don't have my candles for the three days of darkness though or haven't tried channeling the third secret so that's probably a ding against my trad stats.
 
well said. It’s just rediculous that trads bash on someone like Bishop Barron, who has unequivocally done immense work as an evangelist and is so obviously well-meaning. Do they not want to bring more souls into the Church? I think it’s safe to say Bishop Barron has brought more people into the Church than anyone else this decade. We both called it Protestant, but I think there’s also a Jewish Pharisaical element here. Literally idolizing purity or something and clinging to their perceived most pure brand of religion, forgetting the entire essence of the Christian life, which is love. And they alone have the keys to bind and loose. It’s arrogance. talk about missing the forest for the trees.

You hit a great point too about the financial element here. The incentives are not aligned. Being a loyal son of the church does not get the clicks. Controversy , making yourself a prophet , these generate the money. Dave Gordon calls it “the dissenting podcaster class.” We need to support the faithful and obedient ones where we can.

Another great point I’ve seen elsewhere is that this document is basically a response to the German Bishops’ rediculous synodal way. It lays down the law of what is and isn’t allowed (no liturgical rites to bless homosexuals , nothing that can be confused for marriage, no approving of a disordered union), reaffirms the traditional teaching on marriage and sexuality, while still being charitable and pastoral. I think Pope Francis is trying to avoid a schism in Germany.
 
Last edited:
abraham said:
These "traditionalist" just aren't traditional. At best just Protestants, at worst pandering to church Karen's for likes and clicks. And don't forget the third secret still hasn't been revealed So gay.
Click to expand...
Not so sure about that.

"The Secret Masonic Victory of WW2 - The Miracles of Fatima"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top