Father Ray Kelly - Beginning Of The End Of His Priestly Vocation?

I had written in recent weeks about the mess that Father Ray Kelly of Ireland made of a nuptial Mass.  I had thought that was the end of it, but alas, the sad saga continues.  You see, he's been offered record deals by both Sony and Universal.  And what does Father Kelly say of all this new-found fame and opportunity to make a bundle?  Sit down for this!

“It looks like it is going to happen (the record deal). Ninety per cent of people don’t get a break and now, at this stage of my life, it is happening for me. Dreams do come true.”

That's a direct quote, and quite revealing, it seems.  Just what "dream" is coming true?  Forgive me for being so boring and mundane, but isn't the "dream" of a Catholic priest to save souls and to be an "alter Christi"?  I understand that he thinks he's going to remain a priest -but what comes first?  Let's look at it another way - what will demand the most of his time?  The answer to that question is the answer to the previous question.

I'll now ask another question that I suspect will cause flaming attempts in my combox.  While the primary blame for the obscuring of Father's priestly vocation is his, might not some culpability lie with those who thoughtlessly swooned over this priest's abuse of the wedding Mass?  I think that's very likely.

Pray for Father.  Pray for those who remain bamboozled over Father's performance.  Pray that dust be knocked from their eyes and that eternal life with Christ, through His Church be the "dream to come true".

Now THIS Is A Campaign Ad!

Joni Ernst is running for US Senate from Iowa.  She's straight-shootin'!  In more ways than one!

(By the way lawyer lap-dogs!  Faithful Catholics of MD/DC Inc is NOT an IRS section 501c organization.  That means we can say what we dang well please in terms of politics!)

Cdl Muller Administers Much-Needed Truth To LCWR

A few days ago, Cardinal Gerhard Muller of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith administered some much-needed medicine to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.  He did not sugar-coat it, he did not adulterate it with disgusting "nuance" and "diplomacy".  He served the truth straight up.  The question remains whether or not the LCWR will actually repent and remind themselves that they took religious vows to obey Holy Mother Church.

Here is the address on the CDF site.

Obama-Appointed Former Vatican Ambassador Implicated In Sexual Harrassment

Miguel Diaz, theology professor at University of Dayton, will be transferring to Loyola University of Chicago.  This move comes on the heels of an investigation that he sexually harassed a married couple who also work at the University of Dayton.  No, that is not a typo.  He allegedly harassed the couple - both husband and wife.  If there's such a thing as an "equal opportunity harasser", Diaz might be the prototype.

The investigation results are that it is "likely" that the harassment occurred.  But should this be any surprise?  Let's look a bit more into Diaz's history.  This Catholic News Agency article sums it up.  He has been a member of the Soros-funded "Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good".  He has contributed to Obama's election (and rewarded with the Vatican appointment).  While claiming to be "pro-life", he signed a statement supporting the nomination of Kathleen Sebelius as HHS Secretary.

So what's the connection between his dubious associations and this current allegation of misconduct?  How about "lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi"?  If one is going to associate with progressives and in fact be a progressive himself, it's far more likely that he/she will adopt liberal and libertine morals.  Deviate from the Magisterium in one or few respects, and if you don't repent, the moral contagion will corrode the rest of your life.  Miguel Diaz may be just the latest piece of evidence for that truism.

Guess Who's Stung By Obamacare?

While the below clip is a parody, many citizens are living that nightmare - with many more to come.

Pope Francis' Communication Methods: Helpful Or Harmful?

I have written over the past year about my concerns regarding Pope Francis.  See this anthology.  As you can see, some of my concerns stem from the caricature that that some adolescent-minded folks insist on creating of the Holy Father.  In one of my previous posts, I call this the "barneyfication" of the papacy.

Other concerns stem from the communication methods that the Holy Father seems intent on using, despite evidence that such styles are counter-productive at best.  Yesterday, Father Dwight Longenecker, in his blog post, asked the question "Is Pope Francis a Loose Cannon?"  He articulates well many of my concerns and, I suspect, concerns shared by millions.

Below I'll pull two paragraphs from Father's article that should be shouted far and wide, particularly in Vatican City.

Furthermore, shouldn’t a pope realize he is pope and behave accordingly? No matter what the pope’s personal style and personal preferences, he is now the pope and whether he likes it or not, people hang on his every word and action. Yes, yes, we all know that a chat with reporters on a plane or a personal phone call by a pope are not infallible doctrinal statements. The problem is, a huge number of people in the world don’t realize that. Pope Francis should therefore understand that he is no longer Padre Bergoglio and learn that one of the greatest things a pope can do is to not do anything.

There is another problem with Pope Francis’ style which is lurking in the background which I have not heard anyone else commenting on, and it is this: if a person in a public role trivializes that role with a very personal and informal style, then when they want to make a formal pronouncement the chances are that they will not be taken seriously. Make enough gaffes and speak off the cuff enough and soon the world will consider everything you say to be a gaffe and all your pronouncements to be inconsequential, off the cuff matters of opinion.

Hear!  Hear!

Maryland's "Bathroom Bill"

SB 212, the so-called "Fairness for All Marylanders Act of 2014" is signed and will go into effect on October 1, 2014 - unless we can stop it.  Please read the text.  

For now, there is a petition that can be signed by registered voters in Maryland at MDpetitions.com.  Please be very exacting in following the instructions; any deviation from the instructions will very likely invalidate your signature.

Please spread the word.

Two Legal Victories - One National, One Local

Both are significant to us, particularly to those who labor in pro-life arenas.  First, I'll relay the national news.

The last nail has been pounded into the coffin of the 28-year-old case known as NOW vs Scheidler.  This case has been to the Supreme Court three times - all three times the rulings have been in Scheidler's favor.  The Thomas More Society has been assisting Scheidler all along and they have a report.  They've also racked up some legal costs during these past two decades.  A few days ago, the Seventh Circuit Court ruled that the plaintiffs must cover the costs that had been awarded to the defendants - a little over $63k.

This one is definitely closer to home, but still has much national impact on the pro-life effort.  In 2009, the Montgomery County Council (many of the members effectively owned by NARAL) passed a NARAL-inspired piece of unconstitutional legislation aimed solely at crippling the efforts of pro-life pregnancy centers.  In December 2009 I spent much time blogging about the hearings.  One of the pregnancy centers, Centro Tepeyak of Silver Spring, took the lead in filing legal challenge.  They were assisted by Alliance Defending Freedom.  As in the Scheidler case above, several court rulings had been decided in favor of the pro-life side.  Finally Montgomery County saw the light, realized it just couldn't win and decided to give up its obviously futile effort.

By the way - in reference to the Montgomery County affair, I remind all Montgomery County citizens that every one of these council members is up for reelection this November.  Since so many of them show a disdain for the Constitution that they promised to uphold, it's time to give them their pink slips next Election Day.

Strange Double Standards From The Vatican

Two days ago came the news that a flagrantly dissenting priest of Ireland, Father Sean Fagan, has had all sanctions lifted.  Six years ago he had been silenced because he refused to cease his dissent in matters pertaining to sexual morality.  It has been said that he was an advocate for the liberalization of abortion.  The news report does not indicate any repentance on Father Fagan's part.  There are intimations that the lifting of sanctions came about as a result, at least in part, of intervention by Pope Francis.

Contrast this treatment with that of Father Stefano Maneli, a founder of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.  They are the order that has been wildly successful in promoting the Traditional Latin Mass - until some malcontents managed to bend the ears of influential Vatican officials to stifle the order.  The elderly Father Maneli is essentially under "house arrest", forbidden to visit his parents' graves to celebrate his birthday.

I am having grave difficulty reconciling this strange double-standard.  One the one hand we have a flagrantly dissident priest having his sanctions lifted, out of the blue with no conditions placed upon him: conditions such as fidelity to the Magisterium, etc.  On the other hand we have draconian measures taken against a faithful religious order and no justice in sight for these Franciscans.  All this has occurred with the Pope's approval, if not at his direction.  How does this work?  Where's the "method to the madness"?  OR, what's the motivation to the madness?

Kumbaya To Archbishop Gregory

Note: the following is a parody - a work of fiction - that I'm using to illustrate a point that I'll explain at the end.  Please let no progressives pop a gasket when reading this.  Now let us begin..

In some seedy neighborhood within the Archdiocese of Atlanta, a group of thugs/terrorists/whatever were plotting to wreck mayhem by shooting up some Catholic Church within that archdiocese during a Sunday Mass.  They had just finalized their dastardly scheme when one of them glanced at a newspaper lying on a table.  He beheld the news that Archbishop Gregory has declared that Catholic property will remain "gun-free" in the wake of Georgia's law making it easier for licensed gun owners to take guns into venues previously prohibited.

With grave concern, he pointed this out to his accomplices in crime.  "We cannot do this!", he exclaimed.  "Our guns simply aren't permitted on Church property!  That's what the archbishop just said!"  His companions nodded in agreement and laid their shoot-em-up scheme aside.  Thus the archbishop saved the day!  Hip-hip, hooray!

End of parody

Ladies and gentlemen, must I spell out how ridiculous the story is?  It's ridiculous for the same exact reasons as is the Archbishop's insistence on "gun-free" churches.  Of course the Archbishop is within his right to govern what happens on Church property.  But does he really think any malevolent individual will give a rat's rump about his desire for a "gun-free" Church?  The only ones who will honor his request will be those who might have stopped a terrorist but who would be reduced to becoming the victims of terrorists.

Such is the convoluted thinking of progressives - lots of "kumbayas" and wishful, unrealistic thinking.