Rorate Caeli

Unraveling

After the Pfarrer-Initiative (300 Austrian priests and counting) in favor of all that is wrong, lukewarmly condemned by the Cardinal of Vienna (who took the very strong and decisive measure of declaring: "I'm shocked!"), 157 American priests (and counting) support Maryknoll priest-activist Roy Bourgeois. From "Call to Action":
In an unprecedented move, 157 Catholic priests have signed on to a letter in support of their fellow embattled priest, Fr. Roy Bourgeois, who has been told to recant his support for women’s ordination or be removed from the priesthood. The letter that supports Roy’s priesthood and his right to conscience was delivered, Friday, July 22nd, to Fr. Edward Dougherty, Superior General of the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers in Maryknoll, NY.

“We can no longer remain silent while priests and even bishops are removed from their posts
simply because they choose to speak their truth,” said Fr. Fred Daley, a spokesperson of the effort and a priest of the Syracuse Diocese. “Together, we are standing up for our brother priest, Roy, and for all clergy who have felt afraid to speak up on matters of conscience.

“We hope that our support as ordained priests in good standing will help give Fr. Dougherty the support he needs to make a decision that is fair and just.”

[Tip: Catholic Culture; picture: excommunicated-laywoman and priest-impersonator Janice Sevre-Duszynska, at whose pseudo-ordination Bourgeois was present -  image source.]

40 comments:

  1. "they choose to speak their truth”

    There you have it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Their truth" - says it all.

    Nicolas Bellord

    ReplyDelete
  3. Does anyone think the Association of Irish Traitors will stand bye and do nothing...???

    This is shurely the type of band wagon they should be jumping aboard...???

    ReplyDelete
  4. rodrigo10:19 AM

    Let them all come out into the open. Even if there are no punitive consequences - and may God have mercy on those who should govern but don't - at least the faithful will have a better idea of which are the wolves among their clergy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Does anyone think the Association of Irish Traitors will stand bye and do nothing...???

    This is shurely the type of band wagon they should be jumping aboard...???

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes, Brian put it right. The priests of Jesus Christ are suppose to speak not 'their truth', but The Truth. Those 300 and these 157 have evidently forgotten what they are supposed to do and to speak. I just (and always still) wonder, why they don't leave the Church, why are they still pretending to be catholics? They act as protestants and clearly want to be protestants, thus they should simply leave and not put all the faithful in danger.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The protestant psychology is rampant amongst the modern presbyterate and some of their bishops. Once the Latin Way was ruptured the gates were opened to a vernacular rebellion and the sectarian mentality which pursues it. Now we can see it for what it really is.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous11:57 AM

    Protestant psychology indeed. Well put. Now it rears its ugly head among those ordained to bring us to truth. Is not some sort of guillotine in order?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "I just (and always still) wonder, why they don't leave the Church,"

    It's a pretty good gig
    with fairly good digs.
    Media swoons when they flip their wigs,
    And Rome acts like they don't give a fig.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Of course they speak the truth. They say "We no longer want to be Catholic priests and we're not sure we want to be Catholic laity either".

    A proper response is to thank them for their honesty and to thank them for being open and not quietly subverting the faith. It make that charitable response on helping them transition out of the priesthood and into secular life much easier.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous12:58 PM

    I would add that they are not speaking truth, in my opinion, but speaking in code, none too bravely. The statement issued supports a claim of conscience, by all appearances unobjectionable. The context, however, suggests their support for the no nos plainly not ever a part of the Church and clearly, firmly opposed by His Holiness. They do seem to me to want to be Catholic priests, but with Protestant 'rights.' What they truly want is courage, either to say they support what the Church rejects or to leave and join the schismatics and heretics. All in all, a kind of cat and mouse game. What will their Bishops do? What have these priests done calculating what their Bishops would do? The website Call to (or for) Action is obviously pro gay, etc. The sooner these priests leave the Church, or repent, the better.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Brian, santousebio, and Brian expressed my reaction exactly.

    I thought there was only ONE truth, and the ordination of women to the priesthood is not part of it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous1:05 PM

    “We can no longer remain silent while priests and even bishops are removed from their posts simply because they choose to speak their truth,” said Fr. Fred Daley, a spokesperson of the effort and a priest of the Syracuse Diocese.

    Just exactly what is their truth? Answer - no truth at all. The truth is that proclaimed infallibly by Holy Mother Church, handed down by Jesus to the Apostles and proclaimed infallibly ever since. Remember the "father of lies" goes about like a roaring lion seeking to devour the unsuspecting sheep.

    PEH

    ReplyDelete
  14. The longer bishops remain silent, thus implying consent, the more heretical conferences will produce 'ordinations' and inevitable excommunications. The shepherds are allowing sheep to stray and fall victim to the wolf.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Igumen Gregory,

    I actually agree with you... But, for legal purposes, it would be unwise to let your comment stand. But you could try to rephrase it in a more open, indirect, or euphemistic way.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous1:22 PM

    It will be interesting to see the bishop's response!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous1:43 PM

    Let them speak out, the more the better, in this case we shall watch and learn, who are the wolves among the clergy, they had been rooted for decades within the one true Catholic Church, now let them come out into the open, I hope our Church wait and pick the rightful time to strike, our job now is to pray and pray hard, pray very hard for our Church, pray for our holy father to make the correct move at the correct time. Their fate await them, their damage and their distruction they causes are uncountable, we need to pray for strength, I feel this is but the first crack in their armour, we need to remain silent and at peace, if one is distracted just go to a TLM to find peace or find a place to recite your rosary, remain at peace, because I know my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who is the eternal head of our one Holy Catholic Church is in charge and indeed it will be forever.

    MikeB

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bernonensis2:31 PM

    What we have heah is ... failure t'excommunicate.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Travesty though this is, note that it's a mere 157 priests . . . and just guess how many of them are under the age of 60, or even under the age of 70.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Lee Lovelock-Jemmott3:36 PM

    By The Grace of Our Lord and by the prayers of Blessed Peter and Paul, these heretics will suffer a fate worse than the heretic who never knew Jesus because he never got a chance to for these people have 'known' our Lord but have now turned their back him. I shall pray for their repentence nonetheless.

    ReplyDelete
  21. John McFarland4:30 PM

    Well, the Vatican surely won't sack priests by the hundreds, and so it would be rather silly to sack individuals, except perhaps particularly noisy and friendless ones.

    So if Pfarrer-Initiative/VOTF style thinking starts gaining support, there may indeed be significant additional unraveling. Most of these folks are not about the leave the Church, and it's hard to imagine the conciliar hierarchy fighting back very hard.

    So I myself certainly wouldn't rule out a significant further radicalization of the conciliar revolution that will leave us with a married clergy and priestesses, with the local female Church bureaucrats calling the turn for most purposes, and the hierarchy complete figureheads (and not necessarily all male).

    From an earthly perspective, perhaps the only issue is whether the utter ignorance and indifference of most of those left in the pews will benefit the moderates or the radicals.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous4:56 PM

    John McFarland said:

    "So I myself certainly wouldn't rule out a significant further radicalization of the conciliar revolution that will leave us with a married clergy and priestesses, with the local female Church bureaucrats calling the turn for most purposes, and the hierarchy complete figureheads (and not necessarily all male)."

    Mr. McFarland,

    Are you sure you aren't a sedevacantist?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous6:14 PM

    Crawl to Faction is back? I had almost forgotten about it.

    Notice the reference to "their truth", as if there ae countless parallel truths to pick and choose from. 'Your truth is no better than my truth' was an old whine but I'd be politically incorrect to identify the group with whom that whine was once associated.

    In closing, what on earth is that woman in the photograph wearing around her neck? Is it a sample for wallpaper?

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous6:20 PM

    Jordanes makes a reasonable point on the numbers. What worries me, though, is that numbers such as these can grow exponentially in the right circumstances, especially when our clergy is full of the wrong stuff.

    Ask yourself this: what per centgage of priests would likely go along with this nonsense if push came to shove? Yes, we have new and younger conservative priests but they are a small per centage in the West. Now would be a good time to reform the process of enlistment so as to keep out the freaks.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous6:25 PM

    Their truth?

    These are subjectivists. Each person is the maker and god of his own world, each having a truth that is no more or less verifiable than is anyone else's.

    Fine, well, I hope they don't mind, then, when we boot them out of 'our' Church. Then, in their truth, we shall have only ejected ourselves from their Church.

    They are as absurd as they are illiterate, frequently referring to 'being Church'. At first, I thought they meant 'being curt' but, of course, brevity is not a mark of the beast.


    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous6:33 PM

    The infiltration of the Church from Masons... Communists... and their allies... The evidence continues to surface...

    Why not sack the lot of them? And those in dissent in Ireland, as well. That'd send a message, would it not - call the scoundrels out in the open, as well. Seems tacticly wise, to me....

    +JMJ+

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous7:59 PM

    Will the US Bishops react?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous8:26 PM

    OH the Glorious fruits of VAC II.
    The church can not do anything about these hertics because we must dialoge with them. Until the rotten friut is remove from the church is doom to a small remnant.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous9:45 PM

    Is there any way we can get the names of these priests?

    ReplyDelete
  30. John McFarland10:32 PM

    Dear 16:56,

    You ask me:

    "Are you sure you aren't a sedevacantist?"

    Yes, I am sure that I am not a sedevacantist.

    However, I believe in what it says, and in what it does not say, the papal magisterium is not sound.

    And I believe that as a result, the Holy Father is defenseless against those further to its "left."

    If the Catholic Church can have one revolution, in which Fr. Ratzinger was a fairly prominent second-string revolutionary, why can it not have another?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I seem to recall an association of clergy was at one time formed in the Liverpool Archdiocese spouting similar ideas. Have not heard much of them lately, but presume they remain in being.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous9:31 AM

    Yes, and Mass attendance in Liverpool has plumeted. Just wait till they get the current Bishop of Shrewsbury as their Archbishop - he who welcomed the Institute of Christ Soverign Priest into his diocese.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Jordanes point reminds me that when modern catholics quote prebyterial numbers I always ask then if they know what percentage are retired and how many are over 50 years of age? We have been throgh numbers before here but the actual reality is stunning. This is why those at the top know we have a crisis of unimaginable consequence. I recall an African priest once told me that one day African priests would convert Europe to The Faith. I am just beginning to believe it.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Mr. McFarlane said:

    Dear 16:56,

    You ask me:

    "Are you sure you aren't a sedevacantist?"

    Yes, I am sure that I am not a sedevacantist.

    If the Catholic Church can have one revolution, in which Fr. Ratzinger was a fairly prominent second-string revolutionary, why can it not have another?

    Because the new revolution you allude to would entail dogmatic heresy and as such require the present pope not to be the pope.

    ReplyDelete
  35. John McFarland4:11 PM

    Dear Guadalupe Guard,

    "Because the new revolution you allude to would entail dogmatic heresy and as such require the present pope not to be the pope."

    If things were to play out the way that I suggest that (God forbid) they might, all it would require of the Pope or Popes reigning during and after the new revolution would be their silence. They could even talk as if they were still in charge, and probably would; but as long as they didn't try to do anything, the revolutionaries probably wouldn't care.

    So where is the heresy?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous6:15 AM

    Despair is a failure of faith.

    Snap out of it.

    Jason

    ReplyDelete
  37. Just as an effete passive liberal church has given way to a militant mahomaten religion in the world, so in its unraveling will ecclesiastical liberal modernism submit to the restoration of militant Roman Catholicism.

    The death of liberalism is unfortunately slow but thankfully inevitable.

    May Almighty God be praised.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Thank you Mr. McFarland,I see your point. It would be acquiescence, as we have seen happen, not formal promulgation, and thus Peter would still be present but morally betraying Christ by this acquiescence.

    However, I think any acceptance, even by omission, as something as tangibly heretical as "priestesses" would automatically excuommunicate the offender. Yes, theoretically there could even be a woman running a lacky pope but he could never confer in words or actions a priestly ordained character upon her and still be the pope.

    While the Novus Ordo, not to mention altar girls, woman admmistrators, homosexual masses, etc... does not justify sedevacantism,allowance of female ordination would.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Anonymous2:13 PM

    The butterfly neck scarf makes me giggle.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous3:34 PM

    How many of these 150 or 300 are pseudo-priests?

    ReplyDelete

Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.

_______
NOTES

(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!