Priest defies Cardinal Cupich, burns LGBTQ flag on church grounds

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victoria33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Canary in a coal mine…
Folks need to wake up out their stupor.
This situation is deadly.


It appears that mainstream cafeteria catholics (notice the lower case c) set up a platform to persecute The Church.
 
Last edited:
Maybe this will teach the priest to uphold his promise of obedience in the future
 
The following is the sort of thinking that people like me and this Chicago priest are no longer subject to.
Maybe this will teach the priest to uphold his promise of obedience in the future
I doubt there will be anymore rainbow flag burning priests.
One canary in a coal mine was enough.

Stay tuned…there will be more.
 
I remain a Catholic in spite of homosexualists in the clergy and laity. It’s all about Christ.
 
Last edited:
The priest should probably not have participated either way in the burning given that he had direct orders to the contrary
The greater picture…
Cardinals and bishops know very well what has happened under their leadership. If they acted upon situations in the past like they squashed on this priest, we wouldn’t be where we are today…discussing this.
Years ago when the very first time rainbow sashers showed up in church on Pentecost, each and everyone of them should have been escorted outside.
Oh no the cardinals, bishops and priests let the sashers ride. Now we know why.
Oh but they can sit all over a simple parish priest that allowed the burning of the gay symbol.

One canary in the coal mine was enough.

Yes, I have been watching this manure path a very long time.
 
Last edited:
Oh, outside the Church it’s like a lavender octopus. Tentacles everywhere. I see it in publishing; I see it in California public education, big time. And regarding the latter, parents aren’t allowed to opt their kids out of the indoctrination. It’s very Orwellian–Christian parents being bullied in the name of “anti-bullying.”
 
Last edited:
Read the Bull of the sainted pope.

The Church’s authority is over the office or rank of the cleric. Just as there are ceremonies to vest one in the various clerical steps to the priesthood and episcopacy, so too, are there ceremonies to strip one of his office.

The state, at that time, deemed death to be an appropriate disciplinary method. Pope St Pius V recommended the guilty party, after having been stripped of the office, be handed over to the state to face justice from them.

Look how far we’ve come……a cleric guilty today of this nefarious crime can be promoted to the ranks of cardinal and advisor to the Vicar of Christ. The whistleblowers are paid off, silenced, and/or discredited.

IMO, the Church has the authority to strip the guilty of their office and should re-introduce the practice. As to handing him over to the state, if a crime against the state was committed- absolutely!

Do you agree?
History has a long history of individuals and groups fighting against unjust laws. In some cases they have even helped people from being prosecuted for unjust laws. For example, in some place Catholics and other Christians are not legally allowed to worship freely. That is an unjust law, and believers are not turning over other believers because the law says their actions are wrong. There are those who have helped slaves and other persecuted peoples from being captured and (in some cases) executed unjustly.

According to Leviticus, as part of God’s unchanging law, those who engage in homosexual acts are to be executed. Who does the executing is not really our concern so much that God said such acts are worthy of a quick death. The subject of this thread, Father Kalchick, agrees wholeheartedly with this position. He is in favor of people getting killed – even though he himself would not be the one doing it. It’s quite possible for someone to say that they are against homosexuality while at the same time stating they have a right to live, but the father doesn’t think so.

Now you didn’t answer my question: If it were completely up to you would you have those who commit homosexual acts put to death?
 
Now you didn’t answer my question: If it were completely up to you would you have those who commit homosexual acts put to death?
absolutely not


Certainly those sporting those sashes or any symbol of rebellion during Mass or on Church grounds should have been ushered out from the start back in 1997.

It is very revealing how this one simple parish priest that allowed parishioners to burn a gay symbol is now hiding from his superiors.

Folks are trying mix this up as a pleasing blend palatable to all but the recipe won’t work. The Church teaching on homosexuality is still true today and won’t be changed by an evil that masquerades behind the purity and beauty of a rainbow.
 
Last edited:
When it comes to Biblical exegesis we Catholics can be schooled by the secular media, atheists, etc. because after all, looking up a few random verses qualifies one as a theologian.
 
Last edited:
Your question has a false premise, “if it were completely up to you….”
It could never be up to me. Laws of the state are set by the state. If the laws of the state are unjust, the citizens can and should disobey those laws (I.E. turn in others for worshipping God or helping slaves or helping persecuted people).

Leviticus allowing for civil authorities to put sodomites to death was to teach the Chosen People the grievous nature of such a sin practiced by the pagan nations surrounding them. This was prior to the revelation of the fullness of truth in the Person of Jesus Christ, God made man.

Putting homosexuals to death is God’s unchanging law- the Church has never taught this!

Kalchick agrees wholeheartedly with the position that homosexuals should be put to death? He doesn’t think homosexuals have the right to live? Good grief! That’s quite an interpretation!

You didn’t answer my question. 😐 Do you agree the Church has and should use Her authority to strip sodomitical clerics of their rank and turn them over to the state if they’ve broken any laws of the state?
 
It is not unheard of for priests to be forced to submit to “treatment” by their bishops or superiors as a form of punishment (although the archdiocese would like not refer to it as “punishment” if you asked them). Sometimes they are even medicated as part of the process. Whether it is true or not in this circumstance is debatable, but I would not be surprised either way.
 
Last edited:
Your question has a false premise, “if it were completely up to you….”
My question is definitely not a premise. It’s a hypothetical. We often consider different social, moral, and political questions – many of which may never come to fruition. My question to you is no different. If you are unwilling ponder these questions that is a far cry from saying the question is false.
It could never be up to me. Laws of the state are set by the state. If the laws of the state are unjust, the citizens can and should disobey those laws (I.E. turn in others for worshipping God or helping slaves or helping persecuted people).
Now that the can has been kicked down the road, let me rephrase: Is a law that would have someone killed for engaging in homosexual acts just?
Leviticus allowing for civil authorities to put sodomites to death was to teach the Chosen People the grievous nature of such a sin practiced by the pagan nations surrounding them.
It’s far more accurate to say what Leviticus said on the matter was to kill homosexuals.
This was prior to the revelation of the fullness of truth in the Person of Jesus Christ, God made man.
  1. Jesus doesn’t say homosexuals should not be killed.
  2. Even if he did that would mean God the Father and God the Son were in disagreement.
Putting homosexuals to death is God’s unchanging law- the Church has never taught this!
  1. The Church teaches that the Bible is true.
  2. The Church teaches that God is to be obeyed.
  3. The Church teaches that God is unchanging.
  4. In the Bible God says homosexuals were to be executed.
To say that God no longer wants homosexuals to be executed violates one or more of the above facts (the number depending on the rationalizing given).
Kalchick agrees wholeheartedly with the position that homosexuals should be put to death? He doesn’t think homosexuals have the right to live? Good grief! That’s quite an interpretation!
His words were that he treats Leviticus “quite literal” with no exceptions or qualification. It’s crystal clear.
You didn’t answer my question. 😐 Do you agree the Church has and should use Her authority to strip sodomitical clerics of their rank and turn them over to the state if they’ve broken any laws of the state?
The Church as a private organization can strip clerics of their rank as they see fit. If they exist in a time and area when the government says homosexuals are to be executed, then they have a legal obligation to turn in those people. The big difference is that they have a moral obligation to not turn those people in. Again, even if you are against homosexual practices what it says in Leviticus about killing homosexuals is morally bankrupt. The father stating he has literally for Leviticus speaks poorly of his moral compass.
 
And regarding the latter, parents aren’t allowed to opt their kids out of the indoctrination. It’s very Orwellian–Christian parents being bullied in the name of “anti-bullying.”
What I’ve realized is that one group is always one top in this world. You had better hope and do what you can to make sure that is your group. Your group can be fair to others on the outside, but the chances of any other group being fair to you and yours is slim to none.
 
Particularly when one’s group believes in, knows the truth of, natural and Divine law, in these times.
 
Regarding the history of one of the priests sent by Cupich to remove Fr. Kalchik…a Fr. Jeremy Thomas:

2007_11_26_Patterson_ChurchOfficial.htm

(The link works, but you have to copy and paste.)
 
Last edited:
Our beliefs are too different for us to have a meaningful conversation about this topic.
May God bless you and may you find peace in His love!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top