Thursday, November 3, 2011

The Elephant Under Cardinal O'Malley's Big Top

Have you seen the latest?

I didn't see the original article. While I'm not fond of the way Avila structured his thoughts in the citations I saw, I'd like to know exactly what Terry Donilon's threats of retaliation are based upon.

What exactly is behind his claim it's 'not the teaching of the Church' that sexual temptation and sin come from the devil?

I'll get to Donilon's threats in a minute, but let's try something out relative to the teachings of the Church on temptation and sin:

In the piece, titled “Some fundamental questions on attraction to another's wife or husband,” Avila wrote that “disruptive imbalances in nature that thwart encoded processes point to supernatural actors who, unlike God, do not have the good of persons at heart.”

He continued, “Whenever natural causes disturb otherwise typical biological development, leading to the personally unchosen beginnings of attraction to the spouse of another, the ultimate responsibility, on a theological level, is and should be imputed to the evil one, not God.”

I don't see anything that contradicts Church teaching there.

Let's give it another whirl:

In the piece, titled “Some fundamental questions on attraction to masturbation,” Avila wrote that “disruptive imbalances in nature that thwart encoded processes point to supernatural actors who, unlike God, do not have the good of persons at heart.”

He continued, “Whenever natural causes disturb otherwise typical biological development, leading to the personally unchosen beginnings of attraction to sex with ourselves, the ultimate responsibility, on a theological level, is and should be imputed to the evil one, not God.”

That works too.

The theology is absolutely Church teaching.

Is Donilon saying the Church doesn't teach attractions to sin are from the devil?

That's how it comes across to me.

Do you think the buffoons from the Obama administration in control of the Boston Chancery would have redacted the article and threatened to retaliate if Avila wrote about attraction to heterosexual adultery, premarital sex or masturbation?

Yes, we are all made in the likeness of God but there's one big motherass difference: God was not born with original sin. There was no disorder in His Nature. Because there was no disorder, He was not attracted to any kind of sin.

Unlike the rest of us.

The rest of us were born with original sin and we are therefore disordered, attracted to sin and the temptations to think about them and act upon them come from... the devil.

All of us. Why would you exclude people attracted to same sex from this paragon?

There's something passive-aggressive going on with their reckless disregard for the salvation of gay Catholics. It comes across to me like they are deliberately withholding Church teaching and salvation from them. It's almost as if they consider them the proverbial swine in front of whom they will not cast their precious pearls.
It is exasperating to any Catholic of good will who cares about the salvation of every soul.

Christ said if you have lust in your heart, you've already committed adultery. Ergo, the thoughts and attractions to sin are (venial) sins, even if you don't act on it. Sins are the work of the tempter who is evil.

What am I missing here?

Duly noted is that Donilon would not specify exactly what he thought contradicts Church teaching. He must know that whatever his claims are, they wouldn't stand up to scrutiny by the Holy See.

And this was an absolute corker:
It posted an apology from Avila saying the column didn't represent the position of the Conference of Catholic Bishops, whose stated purpose is to 'promote the greater good which the Church offers humankind,' and wasn't authorized for publication.

The "USCCB" exists to promote the greater good which the Church offers mankind.

Gives you the goosebumps all over, doesn't it?

At least they had the decency not to describe themselves as promoters of Catholic teaching. What a lovely description of a body of wolves who maul and devour truth.

I think this was my favorite sentence:

“As we absorbed what was in the paper, we said, ‘Whoa, that’s a problem,’ ” Donilon said of the reaction of archdiocesan officials. “That’s not the position of the church or the archdiocese.”

You read that right. There they all are up in the Chancery, reading the paper and reacting to positions that are not consistent with Church teaching. There are conferences about it with the "USCCB" who are beside themselves that a theological error has been published.

This is as good as a Kadashian wedding!

Fr. John Unni can schedule a Sacred Liturgy to culminate celebration of public simulation of sodomy on parade floats and you can't get anyone in the Chancery (let alone the Episcopal Embassy in D.C.) to bat an eyelash. You have to storm the Holy See.

Where are the 'retractions' from the National Catholic Reporter? America Magazine? The hundreds of thousands of whacked out articles in Catholic newspapers all across the country for the last 40 years?

BTW, don't miss the compelling evidence that Cardinal O'Malley and his administration is hostile, threatening, intimidating and retaliatory to those who promote Church teaching:

“It was a problem, and we would have dealt with it if Dan had resisted” writing an apology, Donilon said.

I'll refrain from the long list, but has anyone seen an apology from Unni? Cuenin? Bryan Hehir?

How about the heresies and public conduct of Monsignor Paul Garrity whose relationship with a married woman leaves a scandalous impression he is, at the very least, hijacking intimacy that belongs to her husband?

Dan Avila is not a priest, nor is he even a lay person employed by the Archdiocese. What is it exactly Donilon thinks his options were "if Dan had resisted"?

Assuming Terrance Donilon doesn't mean they would send people out to rough him up, Boston priests and Catholics who have experienced the thugs Cardinal O'Malley hired as he goes on his appointed rounds to the circus, pot luck dinners and frau-frau events 24/7 - we can crack that code:

1. Rake him over the coals in a public character assassination.
2. Hire private investigators to stalk you and find something they can use to
threaten your livelihood and paycheck.

Since Dan worked for the Church, all it took was a couple of phone calls to threaten his income.

Dan Avila worked here in Boston for many years. He is personally loyal to the teachings of Christ's Church and has many accomplishments. But when it became clear Cardinal O'Malley was adverse to Catholic teaching and we had a huge problem on our hands, the most charitable thing I can say is, Dan is a good man but would never be a nominee for Profiles in Courage. When the wolf comes to consume the flock, there is no resistance and he does not swim alone in the rivers of inertia and compromise to the devil.

They really had a winning streak going for an awful lot of years with these tactics. They could even cover up rapes with it.

It is a pity their winning streak has been interrupted by those of us who will tell them to stick their threats where the sun don't shine.


Anonymous said...

An apology was not enough; he also had to "run on his sword":

Adviser resigns following column linking same-sex attraction with devil

By Catholic News Service

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- A policy adviser to the U.S. bishops has resigned following a controversy over an opinion piece he wrote suggesting that same-sex attraction could be the work of the devil.

Daniel Avila, policy adviser for marriage and family to the U.S. bishops' Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage since June 20, offered his resignation Nov. 4 and it was accepted, effective immediately.

Carol said...

May God Bless and multiply good fruit for his faithfulness to Church teaching.

You can't work for communists who have wormed their way into the Catholic Church to deconstruct and dismantle Her. You just can't.

It is what it is.

Maria said...

The Epidemic of Error.

Pope John Paul II (was) relentless in exposing the widespread dissemination of error in moral teaching. He identifies professedly Catholic universities and seminaries as a seedbed of these errors. He stresses the fact that these errors are especially in the area of sexual and conjugal ethics. So called Catholic moralists are claiming that each person is to decide for himself what is right or wrong regarding contraception, direct sterilization, homosexuality, masturbation, pre-marital sexual relations, and artificial insemination. One result of this moral iconoclasm is to reject even the constant moral teaching of the Church’s magisterium.

The Pope leaves no doubt how believing Catholics are to react to these satanic ideas. They must be condemned as contrary to the truth about man and his freedom. They contradict the Church’s teaching on the unity of the human person, whose rational soul is essentially the form of his body. We are destined for a heavenly eternity in body and soul. We are therefore to serve God here on earth both in body and soul. We are to submit our bodily desires to God’s revealed truth about human pleasure here on earth.
John Hardon SJ


Anonymous said...

The homosexual lobby is congratulating the USCCB and by implication The Pilot, although demanding "more blood" on his behalf:

“I think it’s appropriate that he has resigned,” said Marianne Duddy-Burke executive director of DignityUSA, which advocates for gays and lesbians in the Catholic Church.

“I would hope that the bishops will follow it up with some significant action of repentance to demonstrate that they understand the harm that he has done to LGBT people and our families.”

From: Marriage adviser resigns over Satan-homosexuality column

By Daniel Burke| Religion News Service, Published: November 4

susan said...

This is truly beyond sick...Orwell couldn't have imagined the stuff going on here. They will not be happy until sodomy is championed, condoned, and celebrated by all.

"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" Isaiah 5:20

Islam and sodomy are the golden calves of this age, and the handwriting appears to be on the wall; anyone who speaks the truth about them WILL be persecuted. Another age of martyrs has begun. Pray that you will be given the strength and perseverance to witness to Truth.

Carol said...

btw - speak of the devil, here's the gem "croninjohn" (Comcast Cable (
Lawrence, Massachusetts, United States) left from his comcast account this morning:


You invoked the First Amendment and stated that you could use my comments any way you pleased and stated that there was nothing I can do about it. Fine.

You cannot then turn around and complain when I comment -- YOU decide what get's posted, but you have no right to deny an open forum and order them not to post. The first Amendment works both ways.

This is to inform you that I will be reporting AGAIN to Google yet ANOTHER release of private information.

You can try to justify this in your mind because in your mind you have convinced yourself that I have "intimidated and threatened you". While you can certainly turn my information over to Comcast (and a legal authority if you wish) -- you do NOT have the right to PUBLISH it publicly. That is a clear violation of the terms of the blog you think you own.

(You actually do not own it -- it belongs to Google, and they have guidelines that must be followed. And while you can request that I do not post, you do not have the RIGHT to prevent me from posting -- you are, of course, free to delete it.

I will also inform Google that if any problems arise from your rash decision, that I will be holding Google responsible as well as you. Since you will not read my comments, I have no choice but to communicate via e-mail.

At this point I don't care about the posting -- what you have never understood from the beginning is that I don't CARE if you delete my posts or not -- what I did not want was for you to alter what I said (you did it again in your latest post.

But I will be writing again to Google blogs about your violations of Blog Guidelines -- in multiple instances and in more than one violation -- you have also used (and encouraged others to use) hate speech, directed at Muslims in general.

Now I am writing to you to ask you RESPECTFULLY to remove the private information. If you do this immediately and with no delay, (I assume you will see this tomorrow, so I will be checking at the end of Sunday) then I will contact Google and remove the complaint.

If you choose to not comply with Google's own guidelines, I will report abuse again, and I will send them an e-mail with copies of the posts in question and with copies of the actual blog pages which clearly show your violations. I will also share with them the copies of all e-mails back and forth. (Just to remind you, this is only the SECOND time I have e-mailed you -- all the others were RESPONSES from me to YOUR e-mails.)

I never wanted things to reach this point, but you give me little choice. Identity theft is a huge problem these days, and I must take steps to ensure that does not happen to me.

If that DOES occur, and it is due to your actions violating Google's policy, then you (and Google) will be hearing from an attorney.

Repectfully, "

Sir, Call google. Call the Chancery, the Vatican, the Jesuits, the FBI, the CIA, Homeland Security, the Army, the Airforce, your lawyer, your doctor and the Indians Chiefs. Clearly you mistake me for somebody who gives a crap. STOP contacting me with threatening messages.

Emailing you back to tell you I don't care what you think, who you call and what you do and to stop sending threatening messages to me, does not constitute an initiation of communication FROM me that invites you to respond. STOP CONTACTING ME.

I want your name and IP address published for obvious reasons. Anyone who would spend an entire day repeatedly posting comments and sending emails to intimidate and harass them is clearly mentally unstable and unpredictable.


The constitution of the United States does not grant you the right to force me to publish you on my blog. STOP CONTACTING ME.

Carol said...

You don't intimidate me. I will say it again: Islam is a violent and murderous political regime like apartheid and the Nazis. They are killing Christians all over the world. They beat and rape their own women and children to to get them to comply with the regime.

There are too many victims of this violent regime for me to agree and publish your thoughts. Call it 'hatred' if you wish, that doesn't make it truth.


Good day to you Sir.

breathnach said...


I'll say it again, when the Boston Globe became a pay site, it unleashed it's massive stable of anti-Catholic malcontents, haters and kooks out into the net, searching for havens in which to spew their anti-Catholic bigotry. The daily fix of anti-Catholic hate is an obsession not unlike the need for a dose of smack.

The anti-Catholic obsessive commenters often dress themselves up as defenders of the "children" and as profound critics of Roman Catholic hypocrisy throughout history. One of their favored tacks is to take up the defense of "oppressed Islam" against the vile Christians. It's quite amusing to watch secularists and despisers of religion take up the cudgels to defend one of the most rigorist religions extant. Amusing on a superficial level, but as you become aware of the actual agenda of these folks, the smiles go away.

George Orwell, a man of the responsible Left, perfectly described the mentality of unhinged Leftists in his description of the "two minutes hate" in 1984. The "two minutes hate" has become a reality with the internet:

"The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp."

mike hurcum said...

A very clear and undefendable state of stalking by this jackass Carol. I am surprised you have not asked Google to defend you from such harassment.