Some of McCarrick's comrades are doing stellar jobs at emulating their patron saint!
Seriously, though, I'd urge you all to watch the video below. The denials of Farrell, Wuerl, etc are brazenly dishonest. I again urge you to implement this immediately; find some like-minded Catholics in your areas to help promulgate this so that the boycott will have optimum impact.
In light of the significant development in the McCarrick situation yesterday, that is, his ouster from the College of Cardinals and subsequent taking up of a life of secluded prayer and penance, I would have expected some sort of statement from the DC chancery to be read at Mass, as one was when he was first ordered to cease public ministry. Instead we heard - nothing! Zero-zip-nada! Crickets!
How disingenuous! Does the chancery really take faithful Catholics to be naive simpletons? I've no doubt that one big reason behind their silence is that they hope McCarrick's removal will satisfy us and that they no longer have to worry about the consequences of their aiding and abetting McCarrick throughout the years. This is pure damage control.
For those of you who believe that the poor dears in the chancery simply didn't have enough time to craft a decent statement, may I present this open letter regarding the situation that was released by Bishop Michael Olson of the Diocese of Fort Worth (TX)? In all honesty, I've had issues with Olson in the past few years as the Texas bishops seemed hell-bent on electing RINOs to offices as opposed to real pro-life people, but I appreciate his alacrity in addressing his congregation about this matter. By contrast we see how disingenuous the DC chancery really is.
If the chancery thought their silence would cause our attention and resolve to dissipate, they are sorely mistaken. We are NOT going to relax our vigilance and we will NOT cease our prayers and actions until the vile cabal that aided and abetted McCarrick throughout the years is dismantled and those members be forced to atone for their own sins in this matter. Let's be clear that many of these are in the DC chancery, as well as the USCCB.
So what do we do? First, we make sure we ourselves pray and remain in the state of grace. Under no circumstances do we contemplate abandoning the Barque of Peter' that is the mortal sin of apostasy. But there are other actions we must take, and these actions are predicated on the understanding that these bishops only understand one language from us, and that language is money.
We must cease contributing to any diocesan collections. That includes the Cardinal's Appeal. It means that we boycott the CCHD collection next week if we aren't already doing so. We should be boycotting it anyway, for those monies are used to fund various anti-God leftwing organizations. For those collection envelopes, my post from a few days ago had some suggested language. Alternatively, you might want to use the envelope stuffer at the bottom.
The Archdiocese of Washington skims 10% off the regular weekly collection at Mass. Two collections are exempted from the assessment: Christmas and Easter. Consider cessation of the weekly donations and instead put those funds into the Christmas and/or Easter collection. While it's true that this might make for uneven cash flow, it will actually mean more money for the parish as they will keep 100% of it. Recall that McCarrick abused seminarians at his beach house. With what money was this beach house funded? Our donation dollars!
For other localities, circumstances may vary, such as what collections are exempt, etc. Please do your own research and act accordingly.
We must financially starve these behemoths that condone and even facilitate such horrid crimes. As I've described above for the DC area, there are most likely ways to do so without detriment to decent parishes. Let's get going.
Today the USCCB announced that Cardinal McCarrick submitted to the pope his resignation from the College of Cardinals; the pope accepted that resignation and directed that the now ex-cardinal spend his life in prayer and penance in seclusion.
While this news is welcome, it is not altogether unexpected. When the story broke on June 20 that he had been removed from public ministry, I and others speculated that he might well be the designated "fall guy", taking "one for the team" and being handsomely rewarded for it. They were perhaps hoping that after the removal, that the public's admittedly fickle attention would be diverted elsewhere and McCarrick's situation fall off the communal radar. However, the media, both secular and the faithful Catholic outlets did not let it die. In fact, we started to ask questionsabout the network that kept McCarrick and others in office for decades while these crimes were occurring.
It was probably our interest in a large-scale boycott of all diocesan collections (and the USCCB ones) that really caused them to adopt more intensive damage-control measures - hence today's announcement. They probably fear not only the loss of revenues but the prospect of us probing into their skullduggary and exposing the cancer that they unleashed upon Holy Mother Church.
So now McCarrick is removed. We don't know how voluntary that resignation was, but at this point it doesn't matter. I suspect there will be no real change in his lifestyle. At his age he wasn't engaged in that much public ministry anyway. I believe he'll live in relative comfort. They won't do too much to him because they realize that he may well have dirt on many of them. We certainly must pray that he does repent and make a good confession before it's time for him to stand before God, as we all must.
Let the USCCB and the Vatican understand that while we are pleased at this first step, by no means are we satisfied. We will not be mollified by one prelate's removal, when there is an entire network of evil infesting the Church. We intend to keep probing, and yes, we will exercise our "power of the purse strings". The glare of public attention will not abate, although our donations certainly will.
Certainly we can say that no more will the donations of hard-working faithful Catholics go towards legal settlements occasioned by the debauched romps and orgies of faithless and perverted prelates. Case in point: the diocese of Great Falls - Billings Montana has to cough up $20 million to pay off several victims of perverted clergy. They had the unmitigated gall to go to their parishioners and tell them that 1) each parish would have to fork over 10% of their savings accounts (money from the laity) and 2) each family was expected to "donate" $1,000.00. My hope and prayer is that the Montana laity will tell Bishop Warfel to take his extortion demand and "shove it where the sun don't shine". Warfel's shakedown is nothing short of an outrage.
McCarrick should never have received that red hat. When that bestowal was announced, some went to Rome to advise Pope John Paul II of his crimes. Sadly, the pope ignored them. Those unnamed individuals are now justified. But there is the whole network that helped McCarrick move up the ladder to his former positions of influence. There are the prelates who most likely knew of his crimes. Let's shine the spotlight on them as we both pray our Rosaries and withhold our donations.
Below is a panel discussion that aired last night before news of McCarrick's removal broke this morning. Listen to get a flavor of the outrage that needs to continue to purge our Church of the filth and vermin within her halls.
Unless one is deliberately oblivious and clueless they cannot help but notice the revelations about Cardinal McCarrick and his sexual abuse of young men. Actually, most of us have known this "open secret" but now all pretenses of secrecy have been jettisoned.
Ann Barnhardthas some plausible theories regarding the archdiocese' current prelate. Whatever else Wuerl might or might not be, he certainly was an enabler for McCarrick. And no, we are not such dunces as to believe that Cardinal Wuerl (or J Tobin or Farrell) were innocently unaware of what was transpiring under their noses.
I link now to a LifeSiteNews article written by a psychiatrist who has dealt with clergy sex abuse. Here are two paragraphs that caught my eye.
In my clinical experience, bishops or those on their staff who are sexual heretics attempt to laicize loyal priests who did not abuse minors or adults and whose psychological conflicts can be resolved. They also support or generate false accusations of abuse against loyal priests whom they then try to laicize. As with Cardinal McCarrick, other bishops are aware of their hostile, passive-aggressive activities against loyal priests and the Church. Loyal priests are often told by their pastors or pressured by their bishops through his staff not to preach on contraception, sexual morality, marriage, fornication, homosexuality or adultery. Those who do not remain silent on these subjects are often victims of false accusations. Tragically, a ‘critical mass’ of homosexually inclined clergy has tipped the balance and the clergy who are faithful on sexual ethics are in danger of being falsely accused.
This very accurately describes the treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo at my parish just over six years ago. Prior to his encounter with the lesbian who tried to take Communion from him, he was preaching on the evils of homosexuality during the weekday Masses. Several guilty noses were thrown out of joint and they were looking for the opportunity to take him down. When the Post picked up on the situation with the lesbian (My! Didn't that happen with all speed?), they removed his faculties with barely the pretense of any due process. I've no doubt that they would have laicized him, if he weren't actually incardinated in another diocese.
I absolutely agree that all who enabled McCarrick over the years should immediately resign. That might mean an empty DC chancery, but that really would be no great loss.
Michael Voris has issued a call to action. Part of that entails the boycott of any and all diocesan collections. Obviously that is doubly incumbent upon us who reside in McCarrick's home diocese. Let us start by boycotting the CCHD collection that will occur during the weekend of Aug 4-5. We shouldn't be contributing one penny to that Alinskyian cash cow anyway. However, we have a way to send a message to the chancery. Don't just throw your envelopes away. Inside your envelope, place a note in it and drop that in the collection basket. Here is some suggested language for the note.
"I will not contribute one red cent to a fund that funnels money to anti-God and anti-life organizations. Furthermore, I will never contribute again to any diocesan collection unless Cardinal McCarrick and his enablers atone for their crimes against young men, nature, and the God whom they pledged to serve."
Please pass this on to your fellow Catholics, especially within the Archdiocese of Washington.
That is a key theme found in an article called "The Catholic Church Is A Cesspool". The title is true enough if by "Catholic Church" he means the institutional structure that is infested with perverts and their toads. Among the actions he suggests is the withholding of donations to bishops' collection. In the Archdiocese of Washington, that would mean the complete boycott of the "Communications and Human Development" (really the CCHD collection) that will happen during the weekend of August 4-5. We in this archdiocese simply cannot give financial aid to Cardinal McCarrick and his henchmen any longer.
Randy Engel, who wrote "Rite Of Sodomy" many years ago, gave an analysis of the situation that was published in AKA Catholic. In light of what she wrote, it makes sense how McCarrick and others were able to get away with their crimes (and resultant destruction of faith if not lives) of so many young men. She, like I, believe that he will retire quietly and live out the rest of his earthly life in relative comfort. She too believes that such will be enabled by the "short and faulty memory of American Catholics". She got that right. I live in the parish where six years ago Father Marcel Guarnizo was ousted because he obeyed Canon 915. I wonder how many of my fellow parishioners even remember that (a few do, but not too many)?
The fact is that we laity are not mere "little people" who have no clout. In addition to our own prayer (especially the Rosary), we must utilize our rights as laity. We must speak out, and even speak in rebuke to these prelates, should we ever encounter them. And of course we hold the "power of the purse". Until these prelates come clean (and that might be never), we should never contribute one red penny to any bishop's or USCCB-affiliated collection. Why should we finance their lawsuit settlements and their cushy "lives of secluded penance"? Don't forget to advise your chanceries of your cessation of donations. There are plenty of other worthy recipients of your donation dollars.
For residents in the Archdiocese of Washington, that is, McCarrick's home diocese, that would mean that we completely boycott the upcoming CCHD collection during the weekend of Aug 4-5. Of course the CCHD was always unworthy of our donations, but now we have even more reason to starve to death that beast known as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The abuse of young men by perverts in the clergy is nothing new. In times past, though, the Church knew how to deal with it. Consider these words of St. Basil the Great (as quoted by St. Peter Damian) regarding that topic:
"Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting into his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by six months of close confinement, and for three days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further six months living in a small segregated courtyard in the custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, subjugated to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers, never again allowed to associate with young men for purposes of improper conversation or advice,”
Last fall I wrote a bit about Don Minutella in the Italian diocese of Palmero who defended the teachings of Jesus Christ regarding marriage and Holy Communion against the heretical poison contained in Amoralis Lamentia. Eponymous Flower reports that he recently took a group of pilgrims to Ars in France to visit St John Vianney's church. They were barred from entering initially and only with difficulty gained access to the church. There is video of the confrontation on the EF site.
Until very recently, Ireland enshrined in its national constitution protection for unborn children. After a very contentious referendum battle, Ireland debased itself by expunging those protections. The snakes have returned to Ireland, with abortion being one of them. Father James Larkin a priest of the parish of Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal in the Archdiocese of Dublin spoke truth to his congregation when he said during a homily that those Catholics who voted for repeal should go to Confession. For that he was abruptly given the heave-ho by Archbishop Diarmuid Martin. He was told that he was to say no Masses or have any contact with parishioners. He is currently assigned to a chaplaincy for some sisters.
Last week in Glasgow, Scotland, that city held a "gay pride" parade. Father Mark Morris, chaplain of nearby Glasgow Caledonian University, led a Rosary of Reparation to atone (in part) for that celebration of sin. In retaliation, he was fired from his position by that university's administration. Such is the current UK knee-jerk reactions to Christian morality confronting their own immorality. Regrettably another priest, Father Paul Morton, lauded the debauched event, but was promptly rebuked by Bishop Joseph Toal. The one bright spot in this scenario is that Father Morris was vindicated by the local bishop.
I suspect this list will grow, and we laity must call out the evil and not be blind to it.
Christopher Manion, a Catholic journalist, wrote a piece in which he calls for the resignations of all bishops who knew of Cardinal McCarrick's abuses and did nothing to stop it. One Peter Five has commentary on that and I need not elaborate on that. I would only add that priests be added to that clarion call. Even if they were victims, even if their vocations were on the line, they still had a moral duty to come forth, yet they shirked it.
Today Church Militant published the account of John DeFilippis, a former seminarian who had his own harrowing experience with Cardinal McCarrick. However, even he doesn't name names. Clearly the priest who told him that McCarrick might want to share his bed was complicit. He should be named.
From the moment he arrived in Washington, Cardinal McCarrick was always prone to embroil himself in squalid associations, be they with Ted Kennedy, John Sweeney, Sr. Carol Keehan, etc. Over the years I've been involved with four pickets to protest his joint appearances with these pro-aborts. It appears that there will be no others from him - at least I hope so. Below I post a video from the last of these encounters. This occasion was the graduating ceremony of students from Gonzaga High, in June of 2010. The Obama Hell-Bill had just been signed, with the connivance of Sister Carol Keehan of the Pen of Perfidy. Guess who the commencement speaker was? Yes, the aforementioned Keehan! Guess who gave the invocation? Yes, Cardinal McCarrick! We were on hand to protest the debacle and Cardinal McCarrick received some well-deserved rebuke. Observe (please watch till the end).
Cardinal McCarrick's years are winding down. He hasn't much time left. Please pray that he repents - that he makes a good confession, and very soon. Else his eternal prospects look mighty dim.
On July 16th the New York Times published an article that details the sexual abuse that many seminarians endured at the hands of Cardinal McCarrick. It also makes clear that higher-ups in Church leadership did absolutely nothing when complaints about Cardinal McCarrick were lodged with them. LifeSiteNews links to the article, with helpful commentary of their own. By the way - this article links to another that details McCarrick's role in procuring the pontificate for Cardinal Bergoglio. McCarrick himself admitted it in the video embedded here.
The latest issue of the Catholic Standard published statements about McCarrick's mess. Frankly, given their absolute silence regarding the Archdiocese's treatment of Father Guarnizo in 2012, a situation that literally made world-wide news, I was wondering if they were going to try the "mum" routine again. They probably realized that they wouldn't get away with it this time, so they tried some "damage control"; either that, or they (and the New York Times) are participating in a wide-scale ruse. What do I mean by "ruse"? As I said in previous posts, I wonder if it's possible that McCarrick is simply taking "one for the team" to appease those of us who are tired of predators in roman collars roaming freely throughout the church. At his age, he hasn't that much to lose, and could easily be placed somewhere to live his remaining years rather comfortably.
Anyway, the Standard published McCarrick's statement, available here. I commented on the part where he said he "had no recollection" of the abuse. However, he also said "I am sorry for the pain the person who brought the charge has gone through.." Pain? What pain? If pain is present, what caused that pain? And why would McCarrick think it appropriate to say he's sorry for the pain? Freudian slip much?
Also on the 16th Renew American published a piece by Matt Abbott in which he discloses what one of McCarrick's victims told him about twelve years ago. The now-ex-priest's name is Bart Aslin So far he, Ciolek, and Father Boniface Ramsey (LSN article) are the only ones (to my knowledge) that have gone on record to detail My blogging colleague Vox Cantoris opines that all bishops today at least knew of McCarrick's sordid activities and yet remained silent. I agree but I think the conspiracy of silence goes much further than that. There are many priests who either were targeted by the Cardinal or knew of the targeting of their brother priests and seminarians. Mr. Aslin wrote that many of them chose silence to protect their chances of ordination. However, they were taught (or should have been taught) in their moral theology classes that the ends do not justify evil means. Yes, their silence was and is evil. By their silence they made it easier for the abuse to continue unabated. I reiterate my call for them to come forth and join Aslin and Ciolek to ensure that McCarrick has no more access to young boys.
I speak mostly of pious-sounding platitudes that are put before some good Catholics by others whom they hold in esteem. Many of them contain some elements of truth, but the truth is never differentiated from the outright rubbish that is also contained. So let's start.
The first is actually a statement of St Mother Teresa of Calcutta that has been largely yanked out of its context. In an interview when a reporter asked her about the growth of her order and her work, she said, "God has not called me to be successful; He has called me to be faithful."
She was speaking only of herself and the work of her order. I would bet that she, in her wildest nightmares, would never have envisioned that Catholics in other apostolates,would attempt to take her statement and turn it into a maxim for their own work.
She was responding to inquiries about her success. Too often pro-lifers, when faced with failed efforts, whip out that quote in a knee-jerk fashion instead of doing the hard work to see why failed and to learn from mistakes. They'd rather do that then address their own failures, and more frighteningly so, the failures of their co-workers.
In adopting her quote for their own work, pro-lifers actually act in disregard of the words of another saint, Pope St John Paul II. At the 1993 World Youth Day in Colorado, he told all people there "woe to you if you do not succeed in defending life". Notice that he said nothing about merely "trying" and "being faithful". The Holy Father clearly laid on our shoulders the onus for objectively measurable, tangible success. We are NOT allowed to yank Mother Teresa's statement out of context to give our failures an "escape clause".
Now a little dose of irony. If pro-lifers don't examine their failures and learn from them, if they don't strive with every ounce of effort to succeed, if they don't take ownership of their efforts and outcomes - they aren't truly being faithful!
Here's another regrettable platitude. It is half-true and half-nonsensical. "God doesn't called the equipped; He equips the called". The second half of that statement is quite true. It's the first one that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Consider that every ability, every talent that we have has its source in God, right? So if "God doesn't call the equipped", that is, the people on whom He bestowed the "equipment", why did He give them the "equipment" in the first place? That's absurd.
These are just two examples that come to mind. As I run across more, I will dissect them too.
In their June 27th decision regarding Janus vs AFSCME, the US Supreme Court stated that public sector employees cannot be forced to pay union dues when these unions support political positions with which they don't agree. It seems very simple; the average worker should not be subject to extortion by labor unions in exchange for their jobs. After all - the worker has his/her rights of association, speech, religion, etc, correct?
One would think that the Church would uphold that right - but a few days later, the USCCB bewailed that ruling. "Why", you may ask. The USCCB revealed how they operate. They get a fair amount of $$$ from these unions. If the unions cannot extort it from unwilling workers, well, that means less $$$ for the USCCB. Let's not forget how much the USCCB is in the pockets of their sugar-daddy puppet-string holders.
Bishop Thomas Paprocki remains (so far) the only voice of sanity who reminds his money-grubbing brother bishops of what Rerun Novarum had to say of the legitimate role of labor unions. Too many of them support abortion, sodomy and a whole host of anti-God positions.
John Sweeney, Labor Boss
One of my first forays into activism against the rot in the Church occurred in 2002, when some of us protested the Catholic Charities gala in the Dupont Circle area of Washington DC. Why? Because Cardinal McCarrick (heard about him a lot these days) was the co-chairman of the gala along with his buddy, John Sweeney, then head of AFL-CIO. At the time, AFL-CIO was pushing for labor agreements that would provide for contraceptives, and their web page linked directly to that of NOW. Moreover, we all know of the insidious SEIU; enough has been written on this blog.
When the USCCB goes so far as to issue such releases, they only show what lemmings they are for progressive money bags. I cannot say they undermine their own credibility, for they long since forfeited the last shreds of credibility they once had.
Apparently two priests of the diocese and two others from a neighboring diocese attended a rally in clerical attire to support a pro-life Catholic who is running for US Senate. President Trump also attended. Some pro-aborts got into a hissy over it and complained to the diocesan administrator, Msgr. Kevin O'Neill. He immediately waxed indignant at the two priests and browbeat them into an apology.
HOWEVER...
Church Militant obtained a photo of O'Neill attending the inauguration of pro-abort "katholyc" Governor Steve Bullock. It sure appears to me that O'Neill is in his clerics sitting towards the front. Bullock has voted to promote both abortion and homosexual perversion. O'Neill also allows Bullock to receive Holy Communion in complete disobedience to Canon 915. Bullock forks over healthy donations to the cathedral, so O'Neill happily accepts the "30 pieces of silver" in exchange for sacrilege against Holy Communion.
To the Catholics in the Diocese of Helena, I'd suggest that you boycott any collections until Msgr O'Neill issues an apology for:
Complete disregard for Canon 915
Toadying to the pro-abortion governor
His treatment of the four priests at the rally
Please let him know why you're boycotting. The contact information is here. Alternatively they have a facebook page. Catholics of other locations should visit these sites and make their displeasure known.
Yes, they abound. At this time a retired Italian bishop has earned top (or bottom) ranking of sacrilege and betrayal. Bishop Raffaele Nogaro, bishop emeritus of Caserta, said that he "is ready to turn all the churches into mosques" to facilitate the de facto muslim invasion of his country.
When I first heard of this, the term "judas priest" came to mind. Indeed, he voiced his willingness to cast aside the Blessed Sacrament so that idolatry could be conducted in sacred grounds. Would he be willing to remodel the churches so that child-"marriages" could take place or make rooms for the performance of female genital mutilation?
In addition to the passage from Matthew 15 to which the linked article refers, I'd suggest for consideration Matthew 24, beginning at verse 11. Therein Jesus warns not only of false prophets but also of "the abomination of desolation..standing in the holy place". We can also think back to Exodus 32, the first instance of mass idolatry committed by God's people - instigated by Aaron the first high priest. While God forgave the people after exacting a great punishment, Aaron would never see the promised land. Will these scenarios be repeated to appease those who hold to the barbarism of Islam? We can be grateful that Nogaro is an emeritus and not the actual prelate, thus lacking authority to implement his treachery - but how many more are of his mindset? Now Judas betrayed Our Lord for thirty pieces of silver. What are the "thirty pieces" being offered to Nogaro? Is George Soros the financier behind all this?
Coming stateside, we now deal with more antics from Cardinal Cupich. Recently, he caused Father Frank Phillips, a traditional priest from the Canons Regular of St John Cantius, to be removed as pastor of the parish of that same name because of allegations of improper conduct. Despite the proper investigations that exonerated Father Phillips, Cardinal Cupich refuses to restore him to his former position. Father will take recourse to canon law; I pray he prevails.
Meanwhile, a real dissident Chicago priest, Father Michael Pfleger (Where have we heard that name before? Oh, yes! He's "Obama's other pastor"!) decided to protest gun violence by shutting down a major highway for several hours. Cardinal Cupich reacted by thanking officials for allowing Pfleger's debacle to occur. By the way - take a look at Father's shirt. Those are raised fists! They are most commonly associated with violent revolution - the kind that Michael Sean Winters awaits with bated breath! They certainly don't evince sentiments of peace and non-violence! But then again, Father Pfleger did threaten to "snuff out" a local gun shop owner - all in the name of peace!
So Cardinal Cupich stabs faithful priests in the back while allowing renegade priests to run rampant. He and Bishop Nogaro are but two of many "judas priest" bishops.
These jokes happened twice over the years, and the Cardinal thought them so hilarious that he couldn't resist rehashing the "charming" anecdotes. Some questions come immediately to mind.
Hell is a serious business. It is one of the main missions of priests to save people from that horrible fate and direct them to heaven. Since when do competent priests consider hell to be a joking matter?
If, as Ms. Yore suggests, Pope Francis knew of McCarrick's sordid conduct with young men, why did he not address it appropriately? Was he afraid of McCarrick or were the jokes a "wink-wink" sort of approval of his behavior?
Let us pray for the gift of repentance to the cardinal and all clergy who have engaged in this conduct, lest they suffer the horrifying fate about which they so glibly joke today.
LifeSiteNews carries the story of McAdam's two-year ordeal inflicted on him because he stood up for a faithful student. The tyrants in this case are the administrators of Marquette University. It is supposedly a Catholic institution, but since it's run by Jesuits, we know that in truth it's anything but Catholic.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court found that Marquette violated McAdam's rights and ordered him reinstated with full tenure, pay, benefits. It's quite telling when a secular court has more sense of decency than Jesuits.
Yes, dear liberals who troll this blog! I almost hate to break the news to you if you haven't already seen it in the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter. It appears that he does espouse capital punishment after all. Knowing how its abolition is a cause that is near and dear to your hearts (in direct contradiction to Church tradition, but we've already discussed that), I surmise that your hearts must be broken by his (dare I say it?) mean-spirited rhtoric, to wit:
Normally, when I get into a debate with a conservative friend and we are at an impasse, with no hope for resolution, I try to ease the tension with levity, and say, "Well, when the revolution comes, I will put in a good word for you and your family." To my friends in the Republican political and legal establishment who have not stood up to Trump: When the revolution comes, you are on your own, and I will be clamoring not for mercy but for a seat next to the guillotine, where I can do my knitting.
Some of my friends have already pointed out Winters' rank hypocrisy in fantasizing about Trump supporters going to the guillotine, but that's not all he admits. He admits that the whole progressive dreams for revolution will indeed be about violence, much like the Bolshevik revolution in Russia was, and the Communist takeover in China was as well.
I think I detect another verbal indiscretion on Winters' part in this article. Here's the quote: Kennedy was my least favorite justice because he was the most libertarian of the justices. My liberal friends liked that he sided with them on same-sex marriage and upholding Roe but his reasons on both issues were always libertarian reasons, which are not my reasons.
Winters admits that he didn't disagree with Kennedy's favoring of Roe and same-sex "marriage", just his reasons. So Winters dissents from God's laws that call these evils out as abominations, albeit for different reasons than did Kennedy. Any doubts as to Winters' pro-baby-murder proclivities are now erased.
So my dear naive liberal friends, are your eyes now opened just a tad? You've just been given a glimpse into the real mindsets of your progressive "dear leaders". To those "dear leaders", do you realize that in Michael Sean Winters you have a blabbermouth who has just tipped your hand?
Ok, liberals. You can now come out of your little safe spaces! Open your eyes! Time to #walkaway from liberalism and convert to the One True Faith!
Both LifeSiteNews and National Catholic Register raise a very serious question. That is, "In light of what they knew regarding Cardinal McCarrick's crimes of perversion, why did his brother bishops say nothing, essentially allowing McCarrick to carry on unfettered?" We even know that when Pope John Paul II was considering the bestowal of the "red hat" on then-Archbishop McCarrick, a group of seminarians (some prior targets) went to Rome to advise against this appointment; the were ignored.
I now link to an article written a few days ago by Eric Sammons. It appears on the One Peter Five site and is entitled "Who Watches The Watchmen? The Fatal Flaw Of The Dallas Charter". He, like I, resided in the Archdiocese of Washington at the time and we experienced in our different ways the damage control mechanisms of the DC chancery when the Boston Globe first broke the story regarding the rampant abuse of minors by clerics. He relates his experiences as a parent of being treated as a potential abuser when he challenged the fatal flaws of Virtus.
My experience of the damage control was different but still quite revealing. In the wake of the scandals, the chancery decided to have discussion panels at various parishes to detail to concerned Catholics "what they were doing to address the problem". I realized very soon after the first and only session at St Raphael's in Rockville that its purposes was to quell our questioning and displeasure.
The room at St Raphael's was packed. The panel of so-called "experts" from the Archdiocese first tried to tell us that nationwide only about 10% of pedophile cases are homosexual in nature. That didn't work when we pointed out that we were not concerned with pedophilia as it occurs in the general population but that which is perpetrated by Catholic clergy, and that indeed is over 90% homosexual. For the rest of the evening, the "experts" adopted "deer-in-headlight" facial expressions as they tried to suffer through and end their torture quickly. This first of these sessions turned out to be the last as well. Clearly these "experts" were instructed to brainwash us into disregarding the homosexual component. Now they probably had no idea that their boss Cardinal McCarrick was one of those abusers, and we certainly didn't. However, last week's news puts my St Raphael's experience in a new light.
Also put in a new light is the situation that occurred at my parish over six years ago, when Father Marcel Guarnizo was expelled from the Archdiocese for denying Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian. I needn't go through these details, including the ADW's despicable conduct towards Father, but when you consider that another pervert, albeit retired, still wielded much influence in the chancery, we get a bit more insight into the mindsets of ADW leaders.
Some of my colleagues voice optimism that this revelation might signal a paradigm shift in attitudes of church leaders towards gay sex abuse among their clergy. I remain cautious for leopards don't change their spots overnight. I voiced a possibility that Cardinal McCarrick, since he is already of advanced age, might simply be "taking one for the team", and if our attention is diverted to other matters, he might simply be left alone to be quietly rewarded. But I may happily be proven wrong. God does work miracles.
