You know how I've always given Mark Shea the benefit of the doubt?
Well, being semi-immobile, I witnessed an assault in action, from beginning to end, on Facebook and...I..ahhh...um...surrender.
From what I witnessed, Shea's conduct rises to the level of being labeled a dangerous person and quite frankly, is a situation that needs intervention.
I'm not going to get into the weeds of the interaction, but here is the Reader's Digest:
Fr. Peter West posted links to Mark's writings where Mark caricatures faithfully-practicing Catholics as no good bums and 'liars', a validly ordained Catholic priest who flawlessly taught the faith for years but then fell to addiction or sin as a 'fraud' and then alternately, a story Mark wrote about a man living with his lover whom he considered a saint. Mark's theory is when two lovers move in together, we don't know if they are having sex and therefore Catholics must characterize these types of living arrangements as the heroic virtue of celibacy right before our eyes.
Mark goes on in his column to advise the community of the faithful that when two lovers live together, this is the model of virtue and sanctity. We don't know what two lovers are doing shacking up in a place with one bed in it and we shouldn't care.
If they sing in the choir at Church, work in the soup kitchens and are well-trained in the social graces, they are very likely celibate saints.
After centuries of teaching our children that two lovers can't live together unless that relationship has been bound in the Sacrament of Marriage, Mark explains the Catholic Church has had it wrong all these years.
The Catholic Church should presume two lovers who live together are celibate unless they tell you they are not celibate or you see them having sex.
Mark has put the Catholic Church on notice that those who assent to the teaching of the Church are in fact very, very sinful and judgmental people, to think anything about two people shacking up other than "there goes two celibate saints".
A lot of Mark's readers on "Patheos" found this to be very,very refreshing news indeed. What a relief!
Naturally, rational people who know what's happening when two lovers move in together, tried to explain to Mark the problems with his asinine assertions, and dangerous witness and advice to the faithful.
I asked Mark numerous times if his assertions would apply to his own children, should one of them shack up, but he refused to answer. One must presume this is the advice he is bestowing upon parents whose children want to shack up with their lover. You shouldn't care if your children, neighbors, friends and people in the community whom you love, shack up. Presume they are celibate or you are sinning.
He doesn't know if your loved ones living together are having sex and he doesn't care. You shouldn't care. The priests shouldn't care.
If you do care enough to tell people this is an egregious theological error, you are defaming Mark Shea. Forget about defaming truth. Somehow, the theology of salvation has become all about defaming Mark Shea. And, his readers are only too happy to oblige him in this egotistical notion.
How's that for skullduggery.
That's the history.
The current donnybrook with Fr. Peter West happened when Fr. West advised that there is something seriously wrong with Mark Shea's theology and has advised people to stop using him as a source for Catholic theology. A conclusion a multitude of Catholics have (sadly) already reached.
Mark showed up with a sledgehammer claiming Fr. West was 'defaming' him. He made accusations of slander, calumny, blah, blah, blah.
To protect his inane assertions, he dragged the poor dead man out of his grave--who may well have been celibate--and tried to claim that unless Catholics assent that the patheos that two lovers who live together are to be presumed celibate saints by the community of the faithful, we are therefore saying the poor dead man was having sex with his lover. A round robin went on for days. His exit strategy from the bondoogle was to claim we all needed confession and forgiveness and he went off to pray for our illumination of our sins.
Mark went on his own facebook and posted about what a wounded animal he was, that he hoped 'Fr. West's superiors' would take care of the problem with Fr. West.
Everyone loves a victim. Mark put on a good show to wind up the rage of his readers. His fans began threatening Fr. Peter West and HLI. Fr. Peter West is now asking for prayers against the wiles of Mark Shea's fans who are actively threatening him.
Mark's bullying has to come to an end. He is a menace to faithful Catholics. I don't know who is in charge of EWTN, but I believe we should all give accounts of the conduct we have encountered from Mark Shea and ask them to stop providing him a pulpit.
I'll do some digging on who to contact and update this post with contacts.
Enough is enough.
The Tenth Crusade
Showing posts with label Human Life International. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Human Life International. Show all posts
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Update on Fr. Euteneuer's Mysterious Exodus
When Fr. Tom vanished, I presumed his exodus from the public spotlight was predicated upon the spiritual phobias of the feng shui Bishops and priests.
Talking about the devil and acknowledging his influence has been politically incorrect since Peter Paul and Mary convinced the Woodstock generation that all the answers to life's questions were blowing in the wind of their weed.
The vacuum has left people with the belief that if they don't display symptoms of possession, the devil isn't influencing them. But 99.9% of the devil's influence actually takes place outside of a possession of a soul. He can sneak his counsel into the most innocuous statements, as he did when he used Peter's gripping fear and emotions to ask Christ to reject His impending Crucifixion.
Unrepentant sin turns your soul into a magnet for diabolical spirits. The Rosary, the Crucifix and a state of grace is the repellent.
Spiritual people can always see the devil's treachery with priests when a situation like Fr. Euteneuer's crops up.
Still, old habits die hard, and I grow suspicious when the stink of secrecy starts to permeate with Church officials. It would be consistent for Church bureaucrats to yank somebody who is describing abortion as being 'raped by the devil'. Definitely hysterical, but consistent. There was something troubling about their going to the bother of repossessing every copy of Fr. Euteneuer's book.
I heard the speculation about a woman/women but dismissed it as the fruit of speculation. Yesterday, I read Mary Ann Kreitzer's stop the speculation and agreed wholeheartedly with its premise - to quietly pray and ponder these things in our hearts.
I'm struggling with that today after reading THIS and THIS.
It goes without saying that this situation is in need of intense prayer for everyone involved in the matter. But if the allegation that the Sacrament and Exorcism was used to initiate a sexual relationship with hurting and vulnerable women, the situation calls for more than paying the women off and suggesting we sweep what happened under the carpet of unsubstantiated rumors and pray.
That's not good enough for me with these kinds of allegations out there.
In hindsight, we wouldn't say the same thing about Maciel, would we?
These allegations are explosive and Church bureaucrats are never going to tell us unless we demand answers. We don't have to know the details of somebody's personal sin, if that is all it was, but we certainly need to know whether the situation was abusive, what they knew and when they knew it and whether there is a woman holed up in his parents house where a situation is possibly ongoing.
I'm not up for dismissing these allegations. The red flag for me is Matt Abbott's column. Matt is not one to make premature judgments and his faith in Christ's Institution is not weak.
The bureaucrats have to be forced to either confirm or deny whether the context of 'abortion is rape by the devil' was baiting women who had abortions into contacting Fr. Euteneuer as the cure and numerous women were emotionally and sexually exploited.
If this is untrue, Fr. Euteneuer has the canonical right to clear his reputation.
Ordering silence and promoting the culture of silence from the pews when something this explosive gets on our radar is inexcusable. HLI and the Diocese of Palm Beach have to answer our questions - and we have to ask them.
UPDATE - A blogger who says that Fr. Euteneuer was Godfather to three of her children has blog posts up HERE and HERE that indicates she was told the story by an HLI Board member and she had a troubling experience (though not sexual) with him herself.
I am uncomfortable with the nuance and anonymity behind these allegations but my intuition about this is not good and the woman seems to be a faithful practicing Catholic. In December, Matt Abbott reports that he contacted the Palm Beach diocese and asked the simple question as to whether Fr. E was a priest in good standing and they would not respond.
Please also see comments in this post.
The situation appears to be grave and ongoing.
What are your thoughts about a campaign upon the Palm Beach diocese?
Talking about the devil and acknowledging his influence has been politically incorrect since Peter Paul and Mary convinced the Woodstock generation that all the answers to life's questions were blowing in the wind of their weed.
The vacuum has left people with the belief that if they don't display symptoms of possession, the devil isn't influencing them. But 99.9% of the devil's influence actually takes place outside of a possession of a soul. He can sneak his counsel into the most innocuous statements, as he did when he used Peter's gripping fear and emotions to ask Christ to reject His impending Crucifixion.
Unrepentant sin turns your soul into a magnet for diabolical spirits. The Rosary, the Crucifix and a state of grace is the repellent.
Spiritual people can always see the devil's treachery with priests when a situation like Fr. Euteneuer's crops up.
Still, old habits die hard, and I grow suspicious when the stink of secrecy starts to permeate with Church officials. It would be consistent for Church bureaucrats to yank somebody who is describing abortion as being 'raped by the devil'. Definitely hysterical, but consistent. There was something troubling about their going to the bother of repossessing every copy of Fr. Euteneuer's book.
I heard the speculation about a woman/women but dismissed it as the fruit of speculation. Yesterday, I read Mary Ann Kreitzer's stop the speculation and agreed wholeheartedly with its premise - to quietly pray and ponder these things in our hearts.
I'm struggling with that today after reading THIS and THIS.
It goes without saying that this situation is in need of intense prayer for everyone involved in the matter. But if the allegation that the Sacrament and Exorcism was used to initiate a sexual relationship with hurting and vulnerable women, the situation calls for more than paying the women off and suggesting we sweep what happened under the carpet of unsubstantiated rumors and pray.
That's not good enough for me with these kinds of allegations out there.
In hindsight, we wouldn't say the same thing about Maciel, would we?
These allegations are explosive and Church bureaucrats are never going to tell us unless we demand answers. We don't have to know the details of somebody's personal sin, if that is all it was, but we certainly need to know whether the situation was abusive, what they knew and when they knew it and whether there is a woman holed up in his parents house where a situation is possibly ongoing.
I'm not up for dismissing these allegations. The red flag for me is Matt Abbott's column. Matt is not one to make premature judgments and his faith in Christ's Institution is not weak.
The bureaucrats have to be forced to either confirm or deny whether the context of 'abortion is rape by the devil' was baiting women who had abortions into contacting Fr. Euteneuer as the cure and numerous women were emotionally and sexually exploited.
If this is untrue, Fr. Euteneuer has the canonical right to clear his reputation.
Ordering silence and promoting the culture of silence from the pews when something this explosive gets on our radar is inexcusable. HLI and the Diocese of Palm Beach have to answer our questions - and we have to ask them.
UPDATE - A blogger who says that Fr. Euteneuer was Godfather to three of her children has blog posts up HERE and HERE that indicates she was told the story by an HLI Board member and she had a troubling experience (though not sexual) with him herself.
I am uncomfortable with the nuance and anonymity behind these allegations but my intuition about this is not good and the woman seems to be a faithful practicing Catholic. In December, Matt Abbott reports that he contacted the Palm Beach diocese and asked the simple question as to whether Fr. E was a priest in good standing and they would not respond.
Please also see comments in this post.
Matt C. Abbott said...
The reaction of those who are attacking the victims in this situation echo those who defended the late disgraced Marcial Maciel for so long.
Blaming the victim(s). Sickening.
Saturday, January 29, 2011 12:12:00 PM
Tom O'Toole said...
Peter -- There's a difference between "off the record" and "don't use my name." The article had to be written now (remember Watergate?) because while Fr. T gets due process, he is free to have sexual contact with disturbed women ... and by all accounts is.
I cannot let that go by without speaking up either as a journalist, a blogger, a Catholic, or just as a man.
God's grace & Mary's prayers,
Tom
Saturday, January 29, 2011 9:49:00 PM
The situation appears to be grave and ongoing.
What are your thoughts about a campaign upon the Palm Beach diocese?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)