Friday, March 29, 2013

Feetgate: Pope Francis Witnesses His Disobedience to Church Law

Earlier this week, the Magnificat had a spectacular meditation on Judas who at moments, contradicted Christ.  One of those moments was when Mary washed Christ's feet with precious oils and Judas became angry and chided Christ about not caring for the poor.

It asked the question "Why do they (these moments) provoke such a negative reaction in Judas?"

"In each of these situations Jesus appears weak and vulnerable, in search of communion.  He no longer looks like the strong, powerful Messiah who is going to liberate the Jewish people.  Jesus who loves and calls others to a communion of love.....Perhaps Peter has the same temptation but more fundamentally he trusts Jesus. He is not completely blocked by Jesus call to love and communion even if he does not fully understand."<

The meditation mentioned Judas may have been jealous or had psychological and spiritual blockages to commuion and love.  It ended with this compelling thought:  "This jealousy and revolt against a gentle, loving Jesus pave the way for the devil to enter his heart.  Satan then can take over and inspire Judas to betray Jesus and hand him over."

Let us proceed with caution - speaking the truth, but like Peter, trusting in Christ.

The damage done to this sacred ritual and to communion, is catastrophic.   It seems the Pope has taken his new name but is struggling with how to bring people into communion.  What he did yesterday to the Sacred Ritual that commemorates the ordination of the Apostles, the Institution of the Eucharist and Roman Catholic Church--is a disaster.  It's a disaster not only to the Sacred Ritual, it is a disaster to the witness of fidelity and consequently, to communion.

Jack O'Malley must be having a cow!

It's very important to express that come what may, even if he starts wearing a rubber ball on the end of his nose and his mother's tights and high heels, I'm staying on the Ark.  

I wil ride out any and every storm.  Pay any price.

But in loyalty to Christ, I can't and won't put the spin on a Pope's public display of disobedience.  The damage done by the Pope is being compounded by well-intentioned converts who are making up their own theology to paper over the Pope's disobedience.     Blogosphere and facebook has turned into a quite a brawl.

When I was a teenager, there was a woman who would throw parties for teens and supply them with liquor.  She would talk up charity and love and call the teens hon and honey.  She would subtley ridicule  parents with curfews and discipline and expectations that their children uphold civil, moral or religious laws.   All the teenagers were drawn to this cool cat.   Oh how they loved her.

But her love shack incited these children to have contempt for their parents, for the the kind of love that sacrifices and honors parents and God.  

I am sorry to say it, but the witness of Pope Francis is beginning to remind me of this Jezebel.  It has been several weeks now and..nevermind a Pope, I have yet to see a Bishop.

Excellent commentary by Ed Peters.

And, I couldn't agree more with some of the comments on Rorate.

I have been trying hard to give the Holy Father every benefit of the doubt, to exercise charity in my expectations and interpretation of his exercise of his office. I wanted to wait until he had actually *done* something wrong or ill-advised before criticizing him.

Well, I am very scandalized by this affair....

But instead of changing the law, he has chosen to break the law, as publicly as possible. The law remains as it was, but the lawmaker thinks he can decide for himself whether or not to abide by it.

If the Pope will not obey the law of the Church – why should anybody else?...

The young people were aged between 16 and 21 and chosen from different nationalities and religious backgrounds - including two muslims, according to a Vatican spokesman."

It just gets worse...

How can I speak about such things - the self-offering of Christ, the 12 viri selecti - when our Holy Father is witnessing to something different?

I feel like going up to the congregation and saying, "I don't have any idea what the symbolism of the washing of the feet is. Why don't we just all do what we want."

How hard this is for young priests...

Yes. And as Ed Peters points out, the Pope is inciting contempt for those who, out of love for Christ, uphold and remain faithful to Church teachings and law. Just like the woman in my neighborhood. I've mentioned this before but I'll say it again - Running a little blog with a couple of thousand readers, you wouldn't believe the inteference from the devil. I cannot imagine what this Pope is up against. I'm praying he can put on his big boy pants, uphold a faithful witness to Church teachings and law. And I'm praying for the rest of us. Satan is nearby and threatening to sift us like wheat. A Blessed Triduum, love and the peace of Christ to you and yours.


kd said...

oh dear, oh disappointing.
Now I am wondering more about prophesy. I guess PF visit with Pope Benedict had no affect. oh dear.

Happy & Holy Easter!

Lynne said...

Well, let's hope it (this particular papacy) doesn't get any worse. He will be in my prayers that he doesn't go any further off the rails...

Oh my! Facebook! I 'hide' posts and/or turn off friends from showing up in my newsfeed if what they're saying is disturbing to me (because I don't want to be tempted to reply rashly). Facebook arguments almost never convert and cause more harm than good. I had just started adding some friends back into my newsfeed when this hit yesterday so I was busy hiding etc all over again. :-)

Have a blessed Easter, Carol!

M said...

The Pope can give himself a dispensation from the rules, just as the previous pope gave the archdiocese of Boston a dispensation from the rules regarding the washing of women's feet. I don't know why he felt he had to do this but it's done. It does not abrogate the rules, which remain in effect and, with prayer, maybe he'll get it right next year. I still hope in Francis because he speaks openly about the devil.

TTC said...

Yes, I too have not abandoned hope for this Pope. But his poor must cry out about his trajectory. The communion he seeks is on his slippery slope. The time for madness has passed.

Lynne said...

I'm sorry, the Pope could have *changed* the rules, not ignore them. And did we in fact see the communication that Cardinal Sean received from the Vatican regarding feet washing? He told us he got an answer but was it published?

Also, going back to Pope Francis, was one of the girls Muslim and did she receive Holy Communion?

Catechist Kev said...

From a post at Fr. Zs:

I instruct in RCIA, and had with care explained that the 12 people to have their feet washed were to be men, and made the correlation of the apostles for my class. 12 men had been asked to participate in the liturgy. Imagine my surprise, and the confusion of my class, when our priest asked that 2 men be removed and we find 2 women to participate because ” the Pope did it”. This is why I am concerned. How to console ourselves? The Church has existed since Christ’s ascension over 2000 years ago, and she has survived all sorts of popes. The Holy Spirit preserves her. This is my mantra right now…

TTC said...

Kev- oooh yes. And, that is just the beginning of the contradiction, confusion, disobedience that will flow forth from the wound inflicted upon Christ's Mystical Body.

I do believe he is trying to find his way. Let us hope and pray that the chaos he has caused will redirect his course to the foot of the Cross.

breathnach said...

Carol, I'm also in a wait and see mode.But this was a kick to the head. Already the secular press is touting it as a sign of abandoning BVI‘s work to reform the reform of the liturgy.

Pope Francis speaks passionately about bringing the Gospel to the world and abandoning what seperates us from Christ. I sure pray he means mindless Church bureaucracy and careerist ambitions by the shepards.But this O'malley like action looks to be a replay of the dead hand of the 70s.

Anonymous said...

First, I wouldn't trust Ed Peters about anything. He steadfastly refuses to criticize Cdl. Wuerl for refusing to implement Canon 915. In fact, he has argued that Wuerl actually is not in violation!

Second, let's see how the new Pope deals with far more serious issues, such as the pervasive corruption within the hierarchy. If he cannot or refuses to do anything about that, then it really doesn't matter how well or how poorly he keeps liturgical rubrics.

Ed Peters said...

Anonymous, I wouldn't trust me either, but what on earth are talking about re Cdl. Wuerl and Canon 915? See

Or do you mean the Guarnizo case, that raised VERY different facts?

Anonymous said...

Ed, I've read your comments regarding both scenarios. I stand corrected regarding your views about Wuerl. But why are you more passionate about Guarnizo than about Wuerl?

And, that is just the beginning of the contradiction, confusion, disobedience that will flow forth from the wound inflicted upon Christ's Mystical Body.

Carol, if Pope Francis' actions on Holy Thursday constitute a "wound inflicted on Christ's Mystical Body," then that body is a lot weaker and in a lot more trouble than you might think.....

Lynne said...

Rules? e don't need rules...

Vatican spokesman on what happened on Holy Thursday

"That the Holy Father, Francis, washed the feet of young men and women on his first Holy Thursday as Pope, should call our minds and hearts to the simple and spontaneous gesture of love, affection, forgiveness and mercy of the Bishop of Rome, more than to legalistic, liturgical or canonical discussions."

That door swings both ways...

TTC said...

Anon, I do see a public act of disobedience as a wound to the Body of Christ because it has and will continue to be a gift of contempt that keeps on giving. It is, and will continue to damage the unity of his own flock.

Consequently, it is, and will continue to be, a blow from the whip. (Most Catholics see their own sin, which can scandazlie and affect others, as a crack of the whip).

Catholics, for some reason, feel the need to come up with a list of poor excuses for his scandal, which then compound his error. People who report the problem and consequences to disobedience are then marginalized, attacked for raising matters that affect souls and salvation.

For instance, Fr. Lombadi went out and put the spin on what the Pope did and consequently compounded the error by giving the appearance that the only place where Liturgical law needs to be followed is in St. Peter's Square when there are a lot of people and the cameras are rolling.

(Ed, spectacular job explaining the problems with Fr. Lombadi's 'explanation')

Thus far, the Pope has given the appearance that he is disgusted with his own religion and people have come to perceive his actions, perhaps unfairly at this point, that he is indeed a wreckovator.

Contrary to my good will attempt to explain what appeared to be a refusal to genuflect at the moment when the Divinity of Christ comes upon our Sacred Altar as perhaps back, knee, balance or other infirmities that comes with age, he symbolized ordination of a muslim woman into our Sacred Ritual and with great agility knelt, bent over and kissed her feet.

Aside from the scandal of inserting a blasphmer into the role of an apostle, do you think the muslim terrorists are going to like what he did? The Catholic Pope exposing the foot of a muslim woman and kiss it? We will be lucky if they don't announce a fatwa!

My jury is still out. My gut instincts are, he is a kind and loving man who can do great good but his nature is a bull in a China shop.

We've seen the Don Quixote show here in Boston. It does terrible damage. It's momentum is jettisoned by selling "love" through disobedence and a lack of discipline, thereby extinguishing sanctifying grace. The results are in, we can't keep up with the number of Churches we have to shut down and those who practice their religion and have brought their children into parishes who were then demoralized so the Cardinal can put on a show about love, resent him.

As we all know, Christ's Body can indeed be weakened to the point of Death. We also know that Christ's Mystical Body follows Christ's Passion and Death. But the weakness and flaws and sins of humanity do not weaken any of the properties of Divinity. That is an illusion. Christ will Rise from the grave every time.

TTC said...

Lynne, There are so many things theologically and materially unsound with Fr. Lombadi's statement, one hardlhy knows where to begin.

First of all, it was not spontaneous. He made the plans to break the law by putting her in the chair of an apostle in our Sacred Ritual and then had cameras there to capture the moment.

Ed's done a good job explaining the substance of the theological and legal problems with Fr. Lombadi's spin and I have a few things to add of my own which I'll be linking to later.

As the saying goes, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive!

Jack O'Malley said...

Dear Carol,

Yes, I am having a cow. Or, had a cow. Actually a portion of a cow, or steer, or wherever a nice filet mignon comes from just to celebrate Good Friday in style. After all, if a "bishop of Rome" can violate canon law, why can't I? I have in the past, and now I know it was OK. Canonically OK to boot. This should become a universal indult to all the faithful -- when confronted by a canon you don't like, ignore it. Follow Pancho. I mean Peter.

I liked the "cow" line. Very funny, btw. I laughed out loud and had to reread the post after that. It's an honour to be mentioned on your excellent blog. You are doing the Lord's Will and Work in exposing this iniquity. I have become convinced that the only thing to do is to laugh at the Atellan farce of the institutional Church while weeping for the Bride of Christ. God help us all.

I put a comment on Rorate's End of the Reform of the Reform thread with the quote from St. John's Gospel from the Holy Thursday Evening Mass (1962 Missale Romanum). I found no mention of women or mohammedans, let alone mohammedan women. And there was no foot kissing. (I thought foot kissing was confined to seminaries, where it is considered liturgical foreplay, if you catch my drift.)

Pope Pancho the Proud has violated not just canon law, or the rubrics, or custom, or all three, but mocked the very purpose of the rite. He is a fetishist sui generis. But follow Pancho.

We all know what this female footsie fetish is leading to. Kaspar has it nailed. Female deacons. Then female priests. Then lesbian female priests (we already have homosexual male priests.) Then mohammedan transgendered transvestites untransubstantiating the "wafer". Can hermetic hermaphrodites be far behind? Docetism will out! We will live to see it. Follow Pancho.

Speculation has arisen, and I think not without justification, that this hubristically humble Pope Orgoglio may in fact be an antipope. Perhaps Ratzinger was "induced" to "retire". There is more than one way to unreform the reform of the reform. The case of Papa Luciani is still fraught with ambiguity. Except to the inner circle.

Had Benedict XVI not appeared so frail in the televised meeting with Pancho of the Humble Paunch, I might subscribe to the speculation myself. All things in the fulness of time.

Ubi est Iesuitus, ibi non est Ecclesia. (Where there is a Jesuit, there the Church is not.) Follow Pancho.

Anonymous said...

There is a new sheriff in town, people, live with it.

Consolamini said...

I am so grateful for Pope Francis and the breath of fresh air he is bringing to the Church. God bless Pope Benedict but the problem was the neo-con priests looking to his example as a justification for their reintroducing pompous rituals in the place of prayerful liturgies. More and more of us felt we were being pushed to the side as Father said “his Mass” supposedly for our benefit. Francis’ simple style tells us that the windows are open once again and the fresh air of John XXIII is in the Church again. In the last two weeks I have seen people back at Mass—and happy to be back—that I haven’t seen in a few years.

TTC said...

"There is a new sheriff in town, people, live with it. "

LOL. Get behind me satan, never tempt me with your vanities.

Consolamini, what a crock. There is no such thing as a 'neo-con'. That is a political term. There are only faithful and unfaithful priests.

I don't know where you are but there are sissified men and women with osteoporosis who haven't seen the inside of Macy's or a hairdresser since they smoked a bong during those three days in Woodstock trampling our Sancturies. They've ruined every Catholic school and CCD program teaching our children immorality and sin and driven every young family with children out of them.

Most of the immoral priests who trampled our religion are finally in the nursing home and in the casket and there are solid priests teaching our religion and faithfully carrying out the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. If you think you're going to show up and bring back Peter, Paul and Mary masses in your Stevie Nicks outfits, I have something to say that you ca appreciate.

We'll follow you down to the sound of our voices will haunt you. LOL.

TTC said...

Whoops!!! There I go again!

breathnach said...

LOL Carol,

The Unni-ites are out in force hoping against hope that Pope Francis will be blessing "same-sex pretend marriages" and adding the anniversary of Stonewall to the liturgical calender. Once Pope Francis gets his sea legs and re-affirms the eternal teachings of the Magisterium regarding sexual issues, these lovelies will be crying in their beer (or pink ladies).

TTC said...


At one time in Christ's
Ministry, the crowds asked him about divorce. Do you remember what He said?

I'm standing in a line at White's bakery so I can't get the exact quote, but they were questioning the authority of Moses to dictate Church Law. He affirmed that authority by saying Moses permitted it, not because it wasn't wrong but because he had a crowd of stiff necked people on his hands .

The problem isn't that the Pope may abrogate through proper channels. Once he does this, we accept it, with one exception, if it turns out he is an antipope. I don't think that is what we have on our hands but if we do, we will have to cross that bridge when we come to it.

He will never and can never institute female deacons or priests. That came from the chair of Peter and is unchangeable. If he does so, we have an antipope on our hands.

The problem is, as you say, he has made church law and teaching debris that can be disobeyed because it stands in his way of doing what he wants to do. the lessons learned will put enmity between parents and children. Then, we will have to discredit and divide him from our families as anathema. I pray that cup passes us.

Anonymous said...

The problem is, as you say, he has made church law and teaching debris that can be disobeyed because it stands in his way of doing what he wants to do... the lessons learned will put enmity between parents and children. Then, we will have to discredit and divide him from our families as anathema. I pray that cup passes us.

Carol, he's not the only Pope who has done that, and you know it. Pope John Paul II's arbitrary revisionism concerning capital punishment for murder has effectively become Church policy, despite what the CCC might say. Pope Benedict XVI failed to correct publicly the president of the German bishops' conference, who effectively denies that fundamental dogma that Christ bore God's justified anger at sin on the cross -- and the Pope emeritus had a reputation as a theological stickler.

Pope Francis' actions on Holy Thursday pale by comparison. That's not an attempt to defend or justify them but to put them in perspective.

Consolamini said...

You know, nobody in right mind expects Pope Francis or approve same-sex marriage or abortion or even the ordination of women. We aren’t look for a change in substance. We are simply looking for a change in approach, of style. At the opening session of Vatican II, Bishop deSmedt of Bruges criticized the Church of his day for the triple faults (I believe he said “sins”) of triumphalism, legalism, and clericalism. For those of us of a certain age—and too old for Woodstock despite the claims—the fresh air of Pope John’s open windows were a breath of Life that gave new levels of intensity to our age-old Catholic Faith. We came to see our faith not as a static and ironbound set of laws and dogmas, but as a living relationship with God in Jesus Christ through His Gospel. The last twenty years have marked a long slow slide back into the swamps of a stilted and dead “faith” marked by shallow pomposity in worship, a pharisaical rigidity in practice, and a younger clergy who were more fixed on their status than eager for service. I wish I could say that I am sorry for y’all for whom the election of Pope Francis marks a loss of the restoration of a pre-conciliar Catholicism, but just as we suffered the loss of the promise of Vatican II over the past several decades but stayed faithful none the less, so now it is your turn to let go of your hopes for the Church and simply accept the direction the Chief Shepherd takes us in. Good Journey to you.

Anonymous said...

Of course, there's the widespread disregard for Canon Law (cf, 915 and Cardinal Wuerl) that has been SOP long now?

Why should we expect anything different from whoever succeeded Benedict?

Catholics have been double-minded for far too long. I don't mean that in the Biblical sense. I mean it in the sense that they will attempt to ignore or explain away anything that a Pope or archbishop does. It's just like Hans Christian Andersen's story of the emperor with no clothes. His subjects praised the "finery" because 1)he was the emperor and 2)he and they were guided by "experts." Only the little boy told the truth, and he was ignored.

It's about time that Catholics stop acting like the emperor's "subjects" and start looking at things as they are for themselves.

TTC said...

Consolomini, the twenty two year pontificate was filled with outreach, joy and love. Though a quieter man, so wasn't Pope Benediict's, so you are being intellectually dishonest..

It brings me great consolation to know that you will not live to see what you seek.

TTC said...

Pope John Paul never strayed from Church teaching on Capital punishment., despite the urban legends of sophomoric converts and the village cranks. The Liturgies were out in left field and that, along with the chaos of the lack of discipline definitely drove young Catholic families out of parishes.

TTC said...

BTW, we are indeed subjects of the Magisterium, trusting in Christ.

TTC said...

Excellent comments at Fr. Z's here:

Below resonates with all of us:

"When your loyalty is so strong that you will bend over backwards to justify anything that a Pope does solely out of completely blind love, you’ve got a wee bit too far.

We have to walk a very fine line where we affirm dogmatic teachings, maintain obedience and respect, but still notice and still voice when a Pope, who can and does sin and can be in error privately, starts making wholesale changes to ecclesiastical tradition and violates canon law. It was so bad with many folks that it seemed almost as though the deference that was needed in this situation was a simple laughing-off of the notion that a Supreme Pontiff could be bound by canon law. While this is technically true, it’s a complete cop-out, since it’s being used as a shield to avoid the question of whether the Roman Pontiff is acting outside of propriety and encouraging Liturgical abuse and scandal by implicitly invoking his power as supreme interpreter of canon law and exploiting the fact that he has no authority over him except the Holy Trinity when it comes to matters of governance and law.

May our Father bless Pope Francis. I pray that he is guided in the Spirit and that the Mother of God shelters him in a special way, as He acts as Vicar of Christ. I bend the knee… but I do not defend his actions"

Restore-DC-Catholicism said...

Carol, I got the "new sheriff" comment on my post about 2 minutes after yours appeared. Someone's been "making the rounds"!

Anonymous said...

Pope John Paul never strayed from Church teaching on Capital punishment., despite the urban legends of sophomoric converts and the village cranks.

Carol, you're dead wrong:

TTC said...

Joseph, I don't understand why you do not have the respect for me and the religion of people who read here to do as I ask and stop posting your asked you to please stop posting comments on my blog. You exhausted patience and charity when you came out of the closet years ago to declare the Catholic Church as the whore of babylon and posting blasphemous commentary.

No matter how many times I ask you to stop posting your gross misunderstanding, it seems you will not havve the respect for me, even as a woman or human being to stop.

I stopped reading the piece as soon as I saw the individual reaching back to the Catechism of Trent. Nothing about the teaching on capital punishment changed in the new Catechism.

Even if it did, to the best of my knowledge that teaching has not been declared infallible and is therefore subject to refinement by the Supreme Pontiff. The proper channel for a refinement to Church teaching is to make those changes in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Once a teaching is refined through a Catechism or Church law, Christ Himself binds to the refinement of that teaching and law and consequently, Catholics bind themselves to it.

Sede vacanists or those like yourself who struggle with the concept that your own intellect - that is to say human intellect - is limited and that is why Christ put this protocol into place,proceed to enlighten themselves.

Practing Catholics forbear lay their intellect at the foot of the cross in exchange for obedience, to honor the Church Christ sacrificed His Life to leave us.

What practicing Catholics are watching now, is a Supreme Pontiff who puts his own intellect and personal tastes above that of the Deposit of Faith. The dangers and witness could mean a lot of things.

In charity and hope, we give him the benefit of the doubt that he is struggline with his role as Supreme Pontiff and this is a learning curve.

The jury is out.

TTC said...

Janet - what a hoot.

Catechist Kev said...

Happy Easter, Carol! (He is risen!)

Found another over at Fr. Zs which emphasizes what I sent you privately on Thursday afternoon:

frjamesomaha says:

29 March 2013 at 8:59 am

As a priest, I can tell you last night I was sitting with another priest talking about this. I am what many call a Neo-Con, Reform-of-the-Reform type. He is for the most part orthodox but slightly more “open” to some “options”. Anyway, I brought it up, and simply said, “What does this say to us priests about following liturgical law?” He said, “It says we don’t have to.” That in a nutshell is the problem with what Pope Francis did yesterday. He has paved the way for wacko experimental priests to bring in clowns and balloons to liturgy again. And then to use a folk guitar group of musicians? Are we going back to St. Louis Jesuit music? Is he going to dismantle the organs in St. Peters and put in pianos?

I know all of this sounds pretty ridiculous, but hear me out. It’s the same argument I have against same-sex marriage (besides the theological one): where does it stop? If we allow gay marriage, then pretty soon they’ll be petitioning for man/animal marriage, and marriage between siblings, and marriage between adults and children….WHERE DOES IT END?

In the same way with liturgical abuse, where will it end with him? Washing MUSLIM womens feet? How about offering them communion? I mean, you don’t want them to feel left out – you want them to FEEL welcomed. Well, how about having a Rabbi concelebrate with you? After all, we’ve pretty much plagarized their Passover meal and turned it into the Mass, so they might be offended and talk bad about us.

I had so much hope when I saw him bowing before his people asking them to pray for him. I had so much hope when he went to pay his hotel bill. I started losing hope when he refused to live in the Papal apartment and chose to live in a hotel. I now find myself in spiritual despair now that he has broken the law. I wondered last night as I was falling asleep what Pope Emeritus Benedict thinks about all this. Cardinal Burke? Humility is one thing – making the papacy look cheap and above the law is another. God help the Church!

TTC said...

Allelluia, my dear friend Kevin and all readers of TTC blog!

This priest's concerns really captures it.

On the face value of his witness, there are so many things wrong theologically, it is hard to put them into perspectivce succinctly. I think I'm going to work on enumerating them succinctly.

Furthermore, Fr. Cantalemessa's homily on Good Friday - again - perhaps poor syntax - seems to indicate the Supreme Pontiff sees are Liturgies, Rituals and Laws as rubbish that are obstacles to salvation - and must become a thing of the 'past'.

n.b. When a commenter on Fr. Z's mentioned his understanding of Fr. Cantalmessa's homily similar to what I've said above and said 'perhaps I misunderstand', Fr. Z said "I don't think you do".

Fr. Z has hardly been a hysteric. In fact, in my opinion, he has on more than one occasion, in charity, remained silent or tried to put things into the perspective of misunderstanding when it was clear it was time to acknowledge a bishop or person was not acting in good faith.

I want to be clear and state once again that I will never leave the Mystical Body of Christ. Priests for at least the last ten years are solid and there are and will continue to be many refuges which even the witness of a disobedient Pope will not defile.

We have seen this show in Boston under Cardinal O'Malley. Sophomoric theology and disordered understanding of 'love' leads to appoinments of apostates to catechize --- and ultimately demoralize children while he travels to pot luck suppers to collect the admiration of teaching apostasy in gratitude.

Of course, righteous people will never watch the faithful be defiled in silence, and he is miserable that practicing Catholics, though cordial, distance themselves and have no respect for him. We are simply riding out the storm wondering what will be left after a few decades of the disaster. Always confident in Christ's promises and seeking refuges that we know are there and will continue to be there.

Love to al.

TTC said...

n.b. - I am sorry - but I don't know who mutter vogel is,but if Christ called her to a personal avocation never to seek justice and truth and evangelize when priests are victimizing people, that is her personal calling.

I won't let her own calling be used to imply that Catholics need to follow her advice because it runs contrary to the laws and teachings proscribed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Anonymous said...

Re: Mutter Vogl

After reading about St. Philip Neri I'm curious. How does an oratory work? Is it treated like a parish or a monastery?

* If you've ever read the Pieta prayer book you've probably seen excerpts from Mutter Vogel's Worldwide Love. Mother Vogel was a German woman who had many visits from Our Lord and Our Lady. Our Lord supposedly told her many things but the oft quoted words in the Pieta prayer book concerned criticism of priests. A number of people on various blogs have claimed that there's no evidence that Mutter Vogel existed.

I'm a librarian. Looking for stuff is my business so I went searching for Mother Vogel's book for myself. Google is great and I love it but it's not the end of online research by a long shot. After checking WorldCat, the Library of Congress, German Amazon, German books on mystics and a few German blogs I discovered that the Pieta editors spelled Mutter Vogel's name wrong. It's actually Vogl and the book doesn't seem to have been published in English. I then looked for Mutter Vogls weltweite Liebe and learned that her name was Katharina and she was a Franciscan Third Order member. She did not publish the book herself but seems to have reported the details of her visions only to her superior(s). Someone named A. M. Weigl wrote the book so anyone searching for Vogel as the author wouldn't have found a thing. Katharina Vogl died in 1956, and her cause for beatification has been opened.
Posted by Dymphna at 3:57 PM 6 comments:

TTC said...

Very interesting. I do have and refer to, pray some of the prayers in the Pieta but that one, being refuted by the Catechism, I can't spread as a teaching of the Church. I think there may be a great many souls called to this kind of spirituality, just like there are those who would prefer to run to a Chaplet of Divine Mercy. Though I am devoted to the Chaplet of Divine Mercy (and I hope all of you are doing the Novena!), there are many priests teaching immorality and doing great damage to children, families souls. To be silent in the face of that is a great injustice to the victims. But not everyone is called to defend victims against their errors.

I haven't used that book for a while, but there was at least one other prayer I thought was a little off of the reservation. Maybe my memory is not serving me well but I find for the past ten years, it sits more in the drawer than placed within my reach.

You ask a good question about an oratory, which I will have to let my very wise readers teach us as I do not know myself!

TTC said...

Joseph, I'll ask you once again to stop posting your blasphemous comments on my blog.

It's my blog and forcing me to put on comment moderation or babysit my own comments section is manipulative. I have asked you dozens of times to stop. Please stop. You are in a condition that I wish no reader of mine to ever be in - and therefore I do not wish to host your comments on my watch.

You've been doing this now for years and I have had enough.

Consolamini said...

TTC, sorry to rob you of your consolation, but I have lived to see my dream—in the election of Pope Francis people will know the kraziness of the ecclesial neo-cons comes not from the Church but from this supposedly “solid” clergy or which they are so proud with their pharisaical rigidity, their pomposity masquerading as piety, and their false gospel of judgment rather than mercy. I rejoice that Pope Francis has already given us in his example a simpler more robust Catholicism lacking the effete patina of a backward looking restoration of a baroque era to an evangelical future.
Oh—and by the way—I have learned from blogs like yours and that krazy lady from Woodstock that when I see LOL it means that you are not laughing at all, but are really irritated –so LOL all you want, girl. Luke 6:25b

Anonymous said...

If one knows one’s history one knows that Pope Francis did not break Church Law when he—as Pope—included women in the ritual washing of the feet on Holy Thursday. In our Anglo-Saxon legal tradition, as in most modern legal systems, the lawgiver is himself (or in the case of legislative governments, themselves) subject to the Law. Thus in the United States, the President, the members of both houses of the Congress, and the Judiciary are subject to the law, though the legislature can change the law and the courts can decided its legitimacy in terms of its constitutionality. But until such change is made or such ruling is given, the government is subject to the Law as it is codified. Similarly in England the Monarch, the Members of Parliament—both Lords and Commons—and the Judiciary are subject to the Law. This was a long hard process of constitutional development for until the English Civil War one could say that the Monarch, as Lawgiver, was not subject to the Law but rather was the Law. What the Monarch decreed was Law. The same would be true for other medieval and early-modern monarchies but as constitutional forms emerged from absolutism, governments eventually became subject the laws they made. That evolution has never happened in the Church, however. The Law is whatever the Pope “decrees” that it is. And I use the word “decree” in the loosest terms; it does not take a formal declaration. The Pope can change canon law (including liturgical laws) at whim. Moreover, he doesn’t have to do it formally. Whatever he does, is the Law because the Pope himself embodies the Law much as medieval monarchs in England or the great Sun-King, Louis XIV in France or other monarchs. By washing the feet of two young women during the Holy Thursday service, Pope Francis effectively decreed that it is totally permissible for women to be included in this rite. Now it is in the prerogative of a local ordinary to set policies otherwise for his diocese though I imagine few, if any, will do so for fear of “blotting their copybooks” with the current Papal regime. And of course, unless the local bishop decides otherwise, pastors or priest-celebrants of the Holy Thursday Mass can opt to include only men. Of course, unless the local ordinary decrees otherwise, they would also be free to include only women, though that would be rather silly. Part of being Catholic is that we live in an absolute monarchy, at least as the Church is structured at this point in time. Sometimes that works for us; sometimes against.

TTC said...


Vulgar, profanity and narcissism does not irritate. It disgusts. But seeing you clinging to it from the nursing home is definitely a LOL.

What you don't realize is, the Pontificate of John Paul II, whom I absolute adore, was actually a disaster Liturgically. You are a decade late and a dollar short.

We have already been through this dog and pony show in Boston and we know exactly how to send the rats back into the corner. Most of them went through a conversion in ghouls were outside the Church doors calling them peodophiles. The rest we drove underground by exposing and publishing their antics. Placing moles in all the right places and letting their legacy reach the entire populous on the Internet.

Priests are wimps and all we have to do is give them a good dose of putting their foolishness up on a blog and YouTube, jam their email boxes with complaints. Even their pride can be forced to bend the knee and serve God.

I doubt you have seen the inside of a Church for decades or you would know this, but I enjoy recounting it for you.

We made a big poopoo out of this pope's disobedience. Hopefully he has received the message. Just in case he has t, he has not heard the end of it yet. Being a pastoral man, I doubt very much he will continue to scandalize faithful Catholics. He knows we are the ones who give him future priests. Fill his pews.

Just in case he hasn't received the message, we are going to shoot more flares across his bow. Light up the Roman sky.

We shall just have to see what happens s when the dust settles there. But here in our parishes, we know exactly how to keep the priests in tow.

TTC said...

Anon, not sure your thesis gels with Church law...

Consolamini said...

Keep lOL girl, cause as long as you do, I know that you are running scared of what the electio of Pope Francis portends

Catechist Kev said...

For anon March 31st at 11:45:

This is from the Vatican II document Sacrosanctum Concilium (and the Sacred Liturgy).

A) General norms

22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.

2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.

3. Therefore *no other person*, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.


Anon, one does *not* see this statement in said paragraph: "The Law is whatever the Pope “decrees” that it is."

God bless,

TTC said...

Yeah. That must be it, I'm scared of a bunch of old ladies and sissified men.

April fools. I think you are confusing me with the wimps in the chancery.

You must be new around these parts. Better check out the archives. Run a search on fornication Liturgies and/or Fr. Unni and check out this fraidycat. LOL

Just for giggles, what is it you think I'm scared of?

I know the teachings of the Church. I know where the priests are who teach them. I know where the Sacraments of Confession and Eucharist are every day and I have Christ's promise that I'll have it until He calls me home or returns. No plot of the golden girls can rob me of everything I hold dear.

I'm not even sure what victory you claim, other than a Pope who won't genuflect to Christ.

So far, every newspaper carries the image of man kissing and hugging everyone in St Peter's Square above the deafening silence of the sycophants who painted priests as perverts. Bertone and his empire of Caligula and financial corruption that left a man hanging by his neck on a bridge have pink slips. The Pope won't live with them. Who would.

He says he wants to rebuild the structure that fomented the culture of arrogance and corruption and wants better means of communication. Unless you are a sorcerer, you don't know anything more than I do about exactly what he has in mind. We are about to find out though, because we are firing up our engines to send the paper trail of the dirty dozen here in Boston. Calling in our chits to find out if the homoeroticism of our children is going to remain fortified in Rome or meet its end.

But even if his intentions are to build an empire that defiles what is holy, you can take this to the bank, Nebachudessar, we shall decline to follow orders that rob us of salvation and will gladly enter a furnace with the lions he prepares to devour us at every parish in the nation.

Good day to you Madam.

Consolamini said...

keep LOL girl

TTC said...

That the best you've got?

Came up empty on the enlightenment of what I would ever be "running scared" about.

Come back and visit us soon. There is going to be a link on my sidebar of dangerous priests, programs, schools in Boston for butterballino and company. I think you will enjoy.