Scandal-Ridden USCCB Brings Pro-abortion, LGBT Rights Activists To Speak At 4-Day Event
- Status
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
i am trying to sign the petition but unable to. it select code, i dont understand.Thank you wisdomseeker!
Here is a one stop shopping location for all the videos from RealCatholicTV on this topic. Please note that this page is being updated regularly as new news becomes available.
At the bottom of the page is a link to view all the content on this subject.
realcatholictv.net/usccbscandal/
~Liza
L
lizaanne
Guest
The “select code” button is only if you wish to put it on your website.
You only need to click the button inside the box where you type in your information.
There is maintenance taking place on the site right now, please check back later to sign the petition. It should be back up and running later today.
Thank you!!!
~Liza
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
thank you, i will check later.The “select code” button is only if you wish to put it on your website.
You only need to click the button inside the box where you type in your information.
There is maintenance taking place on the site right now, please check back later to sign the petition. It should be back up and running later today.
Thank you!!!
~Liza
P
PeterMuz
Guest
Well just FYI, I do share your outrage with the Paulist priest and Saul Alinsky.
J
JacktheCatholic
Guest
Disband? Not going to happen. Too many so called “Catholics” believe that abortion and/or gay marriage and/or women ordination and/or contraception are in the Church’s best interests. I think these people actually believe they are doing good. They do not realize and will not accept the possibility that they are in fact serving Satan and are hurting the Body of Christ.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_28931.php
Oh brother!!!
It seem the shepherds are cooperating with the wolves, instead of protecting the flock.
It seems to me that the USCCB should be disbanded. This organization is responsible for an outrageous amount of financial support to the wolves. The smoke of satan has entered the church.
The other night, Saul Alynski was praised on EWTN. Then the exposure of all of their (USCCB) financial support to Pro-Abortion, Pro-Gay, organizations over the years. Sheeessshh
DISBAND THEM!! It’s to late to clean house, they are infected beyond belief. When gangrene sets in, then it’s time to amputate.
All that can be done is to make people aware of these things so that those trying to live a True Catholic life can do something about it.
S
sgt1133
Guest
“Jesus did share meals with the worse sinners of the day. Remember His words, those who are well do not need a doctor.
We can certainly listen to opposing views. If our faith is strong enough, we can confront evil without turning to it.”
Would you sit down and share a meal with Satan? Those sinners Jesus ate with wanted the Truth; they didn’t scheme to undermine His ministry and destroy His Church. Inviting these heretics and apostates to speak at a national Catholic forum is tantamount to allowing Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to run for prime minister of Israel.
Remember, Jesus didn’t give the Pharisees and Sadducees a forum to spread their poison – he called them a brood of vipers, hypocrites, liars, deceivers, etc. We should do the same to today’s enemies of Christ’s Church.
We can certainly listen to opposing views. If our faith is strong enough, we can confront evil without turning to it.”
Would you sit down and share a meal with Satan? Those sinners Jesus ate with wanted the Truth; they didn’t scheme to undermine His ministry and destroy His Church. Inviting these heretics and apostates to speak at a national Catholic forum is tantamount to allowing Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to run for prime minister of Israel.
Remember, Jesus didn’t give the Pharisees and Sadducees a forum to spread their poison – he called them a brood of vipers, hypocrites, liars, deceivers, etc. We should do the same to today’s enemies of Christ’s Church.
M
massak
Guest
I understand that we should pray for these Bishops. With regard to a previous post stating that even some of the apostles denied Christ until the Holy Spirit fell upon them, aren’t Bishops supposed to be Holy Spirit filled? I am confused. I simply don’t understand how the group hasn’t been denounced. Moreover, this has to promote disunity within the conference because not all the Bishops are participating in these activities. I feel like either they have been posessed by a demon spirit and need to be exorcised or they are part of the grander picture of trying to bring down the Catholic Church…which shall prevail, despite their efforts.
J
JReducation
Guest
Actually, none of the above are the case. Let’s calmly look at the Church’s history. Since its founding the Church has been “blessed” with challenges to overcome sin. We have had heresies, abuses of power, promiscuity, abuse of money, linghing, unjust prosecution of the innocent, sexual abuse of men, women and children, even wars between the Church and the wrold around her. No one would say that the popes and bishops of the past were posessed or deliberately sabbotaging the Church. The scandals and sins are not going away. They are simply replaced by new ones.
The challenge is to confront a sin and move on, but always be ready to face the next one that crops up. Until the coming of Christ, confronting sin and human weakness is the greatest blessing to the Church. It provides the Church the opportunity for on-going conversion. Because of Original Sin, we are never going to be a “sin-free” Church. The greatest sin in the Church is not what is happening at the USCCB. The greatest sin in the Church is the division that exists between Christians.
The current issues at the USCCB are important and the bishops have to appoint the right people to deal with these issues. The greatest grace for which we can pray is for the grace to face the challenge of change and for the grace to be ready for the next challenge.
The beauty of the saints is a holy indifference. They were wise enough to know that as long as the Church is human, there would be many sins; therefore, they did not despair or give in to the temptation to bash the Church or give up. One of the best examples of this was Francis of Assisi. The Church of his time had heresy, sexual abuse in larger numbers than today, theft, violence, wheeling and dealing between hierarchy and monarchs, oppulence coupled with a disdain for the poor.
When Francis walks into St. John Lateran to get the approval for his rul from Pope Innocent III, he practices holy indifference. He’s not concerned with the sins of the leadership, the oppulence in the face of human misery and the abuse of power. He see only one thing. This was Peter and he needed Peter’s blessing upon his newfound mission.
He did not bury his head in the sand and pretend there was nothing wrong. Instead, he preached conversion to whomever would listen, including clergy. But what made him such a charismatic and successful figure was that he spoke the truth without the anger. He acknowledged that man was sinful and was in need of on-going conversion.
Today, we tend to focus on the problem, but we become angry and fearful that the Church is going to be hurt or that our faith is going to be damaged. This is the difference between us and the saints. They did not live with this fear. Someone like Mother Teresa conquered the hearts of millions and converted many, not with anger and condemnation, but with evangelization. The same is true about John Paul II. What made him such a holy man was his ability to trust that the Church would find its way out of each situation that presents itself. He never feared that the Church would lose ground or be hurt. The Church cannot be hurt. True faith will withstand the storm. The message of John Paul was exactly that, “Do not be afraid.” Let’s face the issues as they come along and not fear. There will be more issues in the future and we’ll overcome those too.
The wrong thing to do is not to work on overcoming sin, even if it’s one at a time. The wrong thing to do is to forget that the bishops, are human and faliible, but this does not change the fact that they are the Apostles. Without them, there is no Church. They are essential and indispensable. An angel is not essential for the Church or for salvation, because angels cannot consecrate or absolve from sin. Even a heretic bishop can absolve from sin and consecrate. The mark on his soul is permanent.
We must remember that the infrastructure of the Church is not the same as that of the Sate. Bishops have a duty to correct problems as they arise. But they do not have an obligation to share with anyone what they are doing, how and why. We belong to a clerical church. Despite everything that has been said about the laity and about religious and our roles, there is one thing that has not changed and cannot change. The clerics govern and they have certain duties and rights. One of those rights is the right to silence. As long as they are working on a problem, that’s all that the Church requires of them. They have to report to the Holy Father. But even the Holy Father does not require that they report to the faithful. I understand how we want to hear from the bishops. But that is an option, not an obligation. I’ll give a simple example from religious life.
Let us pray for the gift of wisdom to overcome the challenges that confront us today and for the grace to bear up in the next storm.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Oh, I think some bishops know, but I know some don’t. But that’s beside the point. Ever see a chancery “cleanout” when a new bishop is appointed to a Diocese, particularly a younger one? Now, somebody was right and somebody was wrong in those events. Some of those diocesan bureaucracies simply ran themselves as they wished. In my own Diocese, it was, for a time, absolutely impossible to get past the Director of Education to get rid of a scandalous catechism series, until the K of C threatened to picket the chancery itself. Some of those people really are out of control, and use their positions to promote their own agendas.
But also, not a single week goes by that I do not receive in the mail a plea for funds from some strapped diocese or parish or religious order or missionary group. I believe their situations are as dire as the claim. I am also aware of all the school closures because there just isn’t the money to run them. I am also aware how desperately poor some of the foreign dioceses and seminaries are. So, with all that, why does USCCB contribute to political groups, particularly groups with which many Catholics would have a lot of objection? One is tempted to think, and prefers to think out of charity toward the bishops themselves, that USCCB people are promoting their own political agendas.
A
Adeodatus
Guest
Ah, but that document is somewhat deceptive!
Look at this document, on page 10 (12th page in Acrobat):
usccb.org/jphd/csmg/docs/2010-reg-book.pdf
You will see that Diana Hayes (complete with People’s Glorious Revolutionary Mugshot) was a presenter at the Sat, Feb 6 Roundtable about “Reclaiming God’s Covenant”. That is located in your document on page 3 (5th page in Acrobat)… but there none of the roundtable speakers are actually listed.
T
Tigg
Guest
This is what we are seeing - deceptiveness! Just like all mention of the CCC was removed from the USCCB web page after news began to emerge about John Carr.
Holy Cow…look at the names of some of these talks. These are the progressives “leading” the American Church away from orthodoxy and truth:Sounds like social engineering to me!
J
James924
Guest
I can’t believe you. It’s NOT ridiculous. It’s exactly what’s happening.
Let’s paint a picture of what may be the case:
The USCCB’s actual paper-pushers, the people who schedule conferences, hire speakers, make phone calls, recommend funding, etc, are largely non-clergy. A great many of them are liberals (which isn’t surprising seeing the number of Obama or pro-choice bumper-stickers at your average Catholic parish today).
The liberal non-clergy staff (who we’ll abbreviate LNCS) smile and nod when the general agenda is set by the actual Bishops who do very little of the actually phone-call and paper-pushing work (if any).
The LNCS then proceed to allocate funding, hire speakers and pursue agenda’s fitting their own leftist world-view. Every now and then, when something like funding needs to be submitted for approval, the LNCS gives a vague description of an organization…using words similar to yours “feeding the hungry, clothing the naked” making sure not to mention any of the organizations’ initiatives and activities that are evil (gay rights activism, abortion, contraception). The Bishops, of varying age, who apparently have no expectation or suspicion of being hoodwinked simply trust the description given by the LNCS and give the measure their approval. Possibly one of a million pieces of paperwork that goes across their desks.
Do you see how easy this is?
My suspicion is that one of the reasons the Bishops themselves have, individually, been so silent is that they are gaping open-mouthed in disbelief at what they’ve been unknowingly funding for who-knows how long and are currently trying to do a damage assessment and figure out what action to take.
Thats what is meant when people here are saying that this is not an attack on the Bishops. Its an “attack” (I prefer simply the phrase, holding accountable) on a bureaucratic organization called the USCCB.
A Catholic lay-person has the right to challenge clergy if they harm them in a personal way or are guilty of wrong-doing towards the lay-person. This is the case with sexual abuse, for example. This is also the case with a Bishop asking me to give my money to a “good cause” in a second collection and then turning around and putting MY MONEY into an initiative that is contrary to Christ.
I’m with Bishop Fulton Sheen on this one:
“Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, and the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops, and your religious act like religious.”
D
DOShea
Guest
I don’t think anyone is specifically asking for any Bishops to give an account of what they are doing with the problems. People are asking 1)Are they even aware of some of the events going on at the conference, 2)IF they are aware, do they see it as a problem (as most of us asking about it do), and 3)for an open accounting of where the charitable donations are going and how.We must remember that the infrastructure of the Church is not the same as that of the Sate. Bishops have a duty to correct problems as they arise. But they do not have an obligation to share with anyone what they are doing, how and why. We belong to a clerical church. Despite everything that has been said about the laity and about religious and our roles, there is one thing that has not changed and cannot change. The clerics govern and they have certain duties and rights. One of those rights is the right to silence. As long as they are working on a problem, that’s all that the Church requires of them. They have to report to the Holy Father. But even the Holy Father does not require that they report to the faithful. I understand how we want to hear from the bishops. But that is an option, not an obligation.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
You made an important distinction between the Bishops being obligated to act in correcting a wrongdoing and explaining in details what they did. From what I am reading, everyone is interested in the part about the obligation and no one is really asking for a list of who’s heads were rolled by the Bishops. Right now, we are in the third year of problems with money going where it shouldn’t, and this after TWICE being assured that the donations problems were fixed. They were not fixed, and that means by definition the Bishops either didn’t fulfill their obligation to correct the wrongdoing, the people they tasked with fixing it (did they task anyone?) didn’t do it right twice, OR the means of correction were not as advertised, they weren’t enough.
I don’t really care to know the Bishop’s personal interactions with the folks who have either misdirected money or hired inappropriate public speakers, but I WOULD like to know the Bishops recognize the problem and are working on it. Silence, while an option, doesn’t give that. So how are we to know if they are working on meeting their obligation or not unless they tell us OR unless they open the donations records for review?
You can’t have it both ways.
The basic issue is, are our donations being used (partially) to fund intrinsic evil, or not. That is the main question. It appears by documentation, web page promotions, and who is being paid to speak at the conference that our donations not only were, but still are being used for these purposes.
It doesn’t seem at all right in any sense to me that it would be a sin for me to pay for someone’s abortion directly, but I don’t need to be concerned with what God thinks about it if I funnel the money through the USCCB first. That would make me complicit in sin, particularly if I knew full well they had a history of doing this, despite promises to fix it. Last I checked, Apostles were given the task of preaching Jesus’ message and forgiving sin, and so are the Bishops today. That is why it seems confounding to know faithful Catholics are asking them about this, with sin as the pivot point, and not getting any answer at all. I can’t imagine someone in an early middle eastern Catholic church writing to St. Paul about a boiling issue in the Church, and St. Paul ignoring them or saying “I’ve no obligation to tell you what I’m doing.”
J
JReducation
Guest
I don’t work for the USCCB, so I think that I can speak very objectively here. Bishops don’t work at Bishops’ Conferences in any area of the world. They work in their respective dioceses. Each bishop usually serves in one or more committees within the conference. They become quite familiar with their committee. But they are not familiar with every committee. When they attend general meetings they receive briefings from each committee and they discuss what has to be discussed and vote if there is a vote needed.
The committees create departments and people are hired to run these departments. I always compare a bishops’ conference to the Federal Government. The structure is similar. You have Congress with its two houses and many committees, departments, etc. Then you have the other branches of government. The same is true within the Church. You have the dioceses, the Conference, which would be like the Congress and the branches of Church government which are the Sacred Congregations in Rome. At the top you have the Pope. In large countries such as the United States you also have bishops’ conferences within the larger conference. Some states have enough dioceses and bishops to have State Conferences.
When you have such a large infrastructure, with so many people working for it, there is never going to be perfection. There is always going to be room for human foible. Sometimes you do have individuals with their own agendas. God forbid that we should try to deny this. That would be like trying to cover the sun with a dime. But my experience has been that often the mistakes and violations occur when some of those people who work for our Church think that they can make a decision that won’t have repercussions or won’t do harm. For the most part, the people who work for our Church are good people, even if they are mistaken in their thinking or their judgments.
Given the size of the infrastructure of the Church in a country as large as is our own, there are going to be many hands in the kitchen. Most of them are not bishops, clergy or religious. They are lay men. This is not a condemnation of the laity. These lay people are hired because they know how to do a job that the rest of us do not know how to do. For example, when a financial officer is hired, he or she is hired, because the clergy and religious are not accountants, economists or financial experts. The Church depends on the expertise that these people bring to the table. She trusts their expertise. They come with references like everyone else to any other job. They come through a hiring process like anyone else in any other large organization.
Will they always get the job done right? For the most part they do, but not always. There are going to be surprises. When these occur, the bishops are as baffled as anyone else. Finding solutions is as difficult for the bishops as it is for anyone else who is involved in a large governmental organization. I believe that Bishop Sheen had the right of it. The laity is key here. The lay employees certainly keep the Church running, not only at the USCCB, but also at the Vatican and at many other levels. There are not enough bishops to cover every job. Nor are there enough deacons, priests, brothers and sisters to fill every position in the daily operations of the Church. Even if there were, we wouldn’t want to place every deacon, priest, bishop, brother or sister behind a desk. This is not what they are called to do or how they are called to live. This is what I call the secular side of the operation. It is proper for that side of the operation to be entrusted to the laity. Therefore, as Bishop Sheen would say, it is up to the laity, especially those who work within the infrastructure to get the job done and to help the clergy and religious do their own jobs.
At this point in the venture, we have to realize that there are mistakes. Mistakes have to be fixed. But the Church cannot promise that there will never be more mistakes in the future. This is humanly impossible. This is the branch of the Church that is not protected by infallibility, because it is the administrative branch. The best that the laity can do is to make good suggestions on how to fix a problem, rather than get angry at the bishops. Getting angry at them is not going to fix a problem. When problems surface, they are as baffled as the rest of us. They are priests and theologians, not rocket scientists. They don’t have immediate solutions for every problem. They depend on the help of professionals like anyone else does. And they are not on location. They come and go through the USCCB. I don’t know for a fact of any bishop who is a full-time employee of the USCCB in Washington. There may be hand-full, if any.
I’m always consoled and enlightened by a comment that Blessed John XXIII made once. He was asked, “How many people work at the Vatican?” He responded, “About half.” He was joking, but there is truth here too. Who can keep tabs of all this? I don’t think that anyone can. The bishops need ideas on how to face issues as they come up and they welcome suggestions, even if they cannot use every suggestion that they receive. Criticizing them, charging them of conspiracies to bring down the Church, calling for their replacement or to disband the conference is not going to help. First, the conference cannot be disbanded. That’s illegal. Second, you can only replace one bishop with another bishop. We’re talking about replacing one human being with another human being. Each brings to the table his faith and gifts, also his weaknesses. On the other hand, good suggestions and offers to help can do a great deal for the Church. Finally, there is always the power of prayer for solutions to the problems and strength to whether the next storm.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
The committees create departments and people are hired to run these departments. I always compare a bishops’ conference to the Federal Government. The structure is similar. You have Congress with its two houses and many committees, departments, etc. Then you have the other branches of government. The same is true within the Church. You have the dioceses, the Conference, which would be like the Congress and the branches of Church government which are the Sacred Congregations in Rome. At the top you have the Pope. In large countries such as the United States you also have bishops’ conferences within the larger conference. Some states have enough dioceses and bishops to have State Conferences.
When you have such a large infrastructure, with so many people working for it, there is never going to be perfection. There is always going to be room for human foible. Sometimes you do have individuals with their own agendas. God forbid that we should try to deny this. That would be like trying to cover the sun with a dime. But my experience has been that often the mistakes and violations occur when some of those people who work for our Church think that they can make a decision that won’t have repercussions or won’t do harm. For the most part, the people who work for our Church are good people, even if they are mistaken in their thinking or their judgments.
Given the size of the infrastructure of the Church in a country as large as is our own, there are going to be many hands in the kitchen. Most of them are not bishops, clergy or religious. They are lay men. This is not a condemnation of the laity. These lay people are hired because they know how to do a job that the rest of us do not know how to do. For example, when a financial officer is hired, he or she is hired, because the clergy and religious are not accountants, economists or financial experts. The Church depends on the expertise that these people bring to the table. She trusts their expertise. They come with references like everyone else to any other job. They come through a hiring process like anyone else in any other large organization.
Will they always get the job done right? For the most part they do, but not always. There are going to be surprises. When these occur, the bishops are as baffled as anyone else. Finding solutions is as difficult for the bishops as it is for anyone else who is involved in a large governmental organization. I believe that Bishop Sheen had the right of it. The laity is key here. The lay employees certainly keep the Church running, not only at the USCCB, but also at the Vatican and at many other levels. There are not enough bishops to cover every job. Nor are there enough deacons, priests, brothers and sisters to fill every position in the daily operations of the Church. Even if there were, we wouldn’t want to place every deacon, priest, bishop, brother or sister behind a desk. This is not what they are called to do or how they are called to live. This is what I call the secular side of the operation. It is proper for that side of the operation to be entrusted to the laity. Therefore, as Bishop Sheen would say, it is up to the laity, especially those who work within the infrastructure to get the job done and to help the clergy and religious do their own jobs.
At this point in the venture, we have to realize that there are mistakes. Mistakes have to be fixed. But the Church cannot promise that there will never be more mistakes in the future. This is humanly impossible. This is the branch of the Church that is not protected by infallibility, because it is the administrative branch. The best that the laity can do is to make good suggestions on how to fix a problem, rather than get angry at the bishops. Getting angry at them is not going to fix a problem. When problems surface, they are as baffled as the rest of us. They are priests and theologians, not rocket scientists. They don’t have immediate solutions for every problem. They depend on the help of professionals like anyone else does. And they are not on location. They come and go through the USCCB. I don’t know for a fact of any bishop who is a full-time employee of the USCCB in Washington. There may be hand-full, if any.
I’m always consoled and enlightened by a comment that Blessed John XXIII made once. He was asked, “How many people work at the Vatican?” He responded, “About half.” He was joking, but there is truth here too. Who can keep tabs of all this? I don’t think that anyone can. The bishops need ideas on how to face issues as they come up and they welcome suggestions, even if they cannot use every suggestion that they receive. Criticizing them, charging them of conspiracies to bring down the Church, calling for their replacement or to disband the conference is not going to help. First, the conference cannot be disbanded. That’s illegal. Second, you can only replace one bishop with another bishop. We’re talking about replacing one human being with another human being. Each brings to the table his faith and gifts, also his weaknesses. On the other hand, good suggestions and offers to help can do a great deal for the Church. Finally, there is always the power of prayer for solutions to the problems and strength to whether the next storm.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
N
Nec5
Guest
Well said. The inability to recognize evil or even acknowledge its existence in its myriad forms is a major weakness with today’s society.
J
JReducation
Guest
We must always recognize sin or we’re in deep trouble, if we don’t… Treating the sinner with great love and respect for his human dignity is also part of the Christian tradition. Christ never called on us to treat sinners with disdain.
His speech to the pharisees has been misused too many times. His speech to them has to be understood in its proper context. First of all, Christ is sinless. Therefore, he can throw the first stone. We cannot. Second, the early commentaries by St. Jerome tell us that they were engaged in a debate and that this type of speech was a common form of metaphore employed at the time, which the Pharisees and the Jews understood in a very different light than we would today, if someone were to say those things to us. They understood that these were not words meant to hurt or offend, but they were analogies that had a meaning in their culture and language. According to the Jerome Biblical Commentary, Christ was speaking to them in language that they understood and his purpose was to help them understand and to convert, not to shame them. The belief that Christ was verbally bashing the Pharisees is a very Protestant interpretation of this passage, not the Catholic interpretation.
An excellent example of someone who understood Christ’s mode of speaking and treating people in sin, from a truly Catholic perspective, is Mother Teresa of Calcutta. She too used language that was easy for people to understand, without causing them to feel that she was trying to shame them or experience condescension from her. What they experienced from her was someone who understood them and spoke their language, someone who shed light on their misunderstanding and on the error of their ways, but always in the most gentle manner, never with fury. Her lanaguage was tough, but not rough.
Jesus never spoke or treated people with fury. He treated people and spoke to them using what was easy for them to understand. We too have to learn the language of correction that is easiest for people of today to understand, leaving out the fury and the condescension. Otherwise we run the risk of becoming our brother’s judge. St. Paul warns us about that. He speaks very clearly about those who judge their brothers. He reminds us that this is not what we are to do. We are to speak the truth in a manner that is understandable. If we are not understood, we must continue to try to find a way to make ourselves understood. This takes patience and time, also a great deal of prayer. None of us gets it perfect on the first try.
I have served people who have committed horrible sins: abortion, pornography, infidelity, violence, and other things too. The list is long. My experience has been that when I speak to people in a language that they understand, while keeping my cool, being gentle, smiling, and recognizing before them that I too am capable of great sin, they begin to change. But this takes time, patience and prayer. I have never been able to break through sin and its effects in a single conversation with a person who is broken by sin.
My heart breaks for these people, because I can see Christ as he is portrayed for us in the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary, beaten, bloody, abused, exhausted and weighed down by sin. Like my father St. Francis before me, I find that staying with them is the only way that God can work. Feeding them, providing food for their children, clothing, training them in the duties of Christian parenting, marriage and self-care is the means that Goid uses to pour the grace of conversion on people who, if spoken to uncharitably, harshly, condescendingly, would simply walk away. I for one am not willing to lose a soul, because I don’t take the time to chip away gradually and wait for the grace of God. If we are to be true brothers and sisters of life, we must be willing to invest a life-time in the sinner.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
Brother.We must always recognize sin or we’re in deep trouble, if we don’t… Treating the sinner with great love and respect for his human dignity is also part of the Christian tradition. Christ never called on us to treat sinners with disdain.
His speech to the pharisees has been misused too many times. His speech to them has to be understood in its proper context. First of all, Christ is sinless. Therefore, he can throw the first stone. We cannot. Second, the early commentaries by St. Jerome tell us that they were engaged in a debate and that this type of speech was a common form of metaphore employed at the time, which the Pharisees and the Jews understood in a very different light than we would today, if someone were to say those things to us. They understood that these were not words meant to hurt or offend, but they were analogies that had a meaning in their culture and language. According to the Jerome Biblical Commentary, Christ was speaking to them in language that they understood and his purpose was to help them understand and to convert, not to shame them. The belief that Christ was verbally bashing the Pharisees is a very Protestant interpretation of this passage, not the Catholic interpretation.
An excellent example of someone who understood Christ’s mode of speaking and treating people in sin, from a truly Catholic perspective, is Mother Teresa of Calcutta. She too used language that was easy for people to understand, without causing them to feel that she was trying to shame them or experience condescension from her. What they experienced from her was someone who understood them and spoke their language, someone who shed light on their misunderstanding and on the error of their ways, but always in the most gentle manner, never with fury. Her lanaguage was tough, but not rough.
Jesus never spoke or treated people with fury. He treated people and spoke to them using what was easy for them to understand. We too have to learn the language of correction that is easiest for people of today to understand, leaving out the fury and the condescension. Otherwise we run the risk of becoming our brother’s judge. St. Paul warns us about that. He speaks very clearly about those who judge their brothers. He reminds us that this is not what we are to do. We are to speak the truth in a manner that is understandable. If we are not understood, we must continue to try to find a way to make ourselves understood. This takes patience and time, also a great deal of prayer. None of us gets it perfect on the first try.
I have served people who have committed horrible sins: abortion, pornography, infidelity, violence, and other things too. The list is long. My experience has been that when I speak to people in a language that they understand, while keeping my cool, being gentle, smiling, and recognizing before them that I too am capable of great sin, they begin to change. But this takes time, patience and prayer. I have never been able to break through sin and its effects in a single conversation with a person who is broken by sin.
My heart breaks for these people, because I can see Christ as he is portrayed for us in the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary, beaten, bloody, abused, exhausted and weighed down by sin. Like my father St. Francis before me, I find that staying with them is the only way that God can work. Feeding them, providing food for their children, clothing, training them in the duties of Christian parenting, marriage and self-care is the means that Goid uses to pour the grace of conversion on people who, if spoken to uncharitably, harshly, condescendingly, would simply walk away. I for one am not willing to lose a soul, because I don’t take the time to chip away gradually and wait for the grace of God. If we are to be true brothers and sisters of life, we must be willing to invest a life-time in the sinner.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
thank you for your patiente with us.
i know that Jesus loved and treated the sinner well. but if you notice Jesus also was not so nice to those who reject His Teachings. the is the difference. do you really believe that Jesus is pleased wiht this kind of thing going on in His Church? do you really believe that Jesus approves of the Church inviting these people to speak to His people? i hope not. remember Jesus said. a Kingdom divided will be destroyed. do you remember when exactly He said that? the Church cannot in anyway promote good and evil. it has become a big thing today, that everytime an evil is exposed, the advice is let’s all love one another, it is all about love and being nice to one another. the problem with this is that in the meanwhile evil is taking over while we get busy being nice to them.
blessings.
D
DOShea
Guest
Well I apologize if I’m misunderstanding what’s been written, but the sense I’m getting from it is some sort of admonition to not ask any questions and just go home and pray and do nothing more. I’m not buying that.
First, I don’t like the characterization that because a conference with the Catholic Bishops’ name on it hires gay marriage and women’s ordination promoters to be keynote speakers and I simply ask why, that somehow translates to me NOT loving Bishops or praying for them, or somehow blaming them directly for the problem.
Same thing for the assurances of no funds going to support abortion or its promotion. That issue has to do with diligence in checking out other organizations before funding them, as would be expected. We were assured twice that they did/did it more thoroughly. As it turned out, not only did they NOT check thoroughly, but some of those involved were members of that organization that got the funds. Now when an average person can, still today, go to that group’s website and read what they support, and you read it promotes the identical causes PP supports, it’s difficult to accept the excuse that it was mere oversight.
Then, the same people who tell you it’s an oversight go to Washington DC for a conference they help set up and the keynote speaker they hire (with donated Catholic money) is one who goes around promoting liberation theology, gay marriage, and ordaining women.
Well I might have been born at night, but it was not last night. It would seem most every other organization understands the concept of “appearance of impropriety,” but not this group. It would raise a red flag for me to know someone is promoting giving money to a group they personally belong to because that could be abused. We don’t get to see or know the process, so what we’re left with is trusting the credibility of the people involved. That credibility has been severely damaged by the actions of those people involved, leaving little to base that trust upon.
I think it’s a sad mistake to not address these concerns and work to repair them because the unintended effect is that it hurts every other good cause that gets funded with these same funds. But perhaps it is the better alternative to completely shut off one’s donation to the USCCB and give the funds directly to groups you can be assured will not fund PP or abortion or hire speakers who promote an anti-Catholic message.
First, I don’t like the characterization that because a conference with the Catholic Bishops’ name on it hires gay marriage and women’s ordination promoters to be keynote speakers and I simply ask why, that somehow translates to me NOT loving Bishops or praying for them, or somehow blaming them directly for the problem.
Same thing for the assurances of no funds going to support abortion or its promotion. That issue has to do with diligence in checking out other organizations before funding them, as would be expected. We were assured twice that they did/did it more thoroughly. As it turned out, not only did they NOT check thoroughly, but some of those involved were members of that organization that got the funds. Now when an average person can, still today, go to that group’s website and read what they support, and you read it promotes the identical causes PP supports, it’s difficult to accept the excuse that it was mere oversight.
Then, the same people who tell you it’s an oversight go to Washington DC for a conference they help set up and the keynote speaker they hire (with donated Catholic money) is one who goes around promoting liberation theology, gay marriage, and ordaining women.
Well I might have been born at night, but it was not last night. It would seem most every other organization understands the concept of “appearance of impropriety,” but not this group. It would raise a red flag for me to know someone is promoting giving money to a group they personally belong to because that could be abused. We don’t get to see or know the process, so what we’re left with is trusting the credibility of the people involved. That credibility has been severely damaged by the actions of those people involved, leaving little to base that trust upon.
I think it’s a sad mistake to not address these concerns and work to repair them because the unintended effect is that it hurts every other good cause that gets funded with these same funds. But perhaps it is the better alternative to completely shut off one’s donation to the USCCB and give the funds directly to groups you can be assured will not fund PP or abortion or hire speakers who promote an anti-Catholic message.
C
Chipper
Guest
I think you need to be reminded of the followinga The belief that Christ was verbally bashing the Pharisees is a very Protestant interpretation of this passage, not the Catholic interpretation.
[John 2:14] He found in the temple area those who sold oxen, sheep, and doves, as well as the money-changers seated there. He made a whip out of cords and drove them all out of the temple area, with the sheep and oxen, and spilled the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables, and to those who sold doves he said, “Take these out of here, and stop making my Father’s house a marketplace.” His disciples recalled the words of scripture, “Zeal for your house will consume me.”
In Jesus case, they were only abusing money. In our case they are abusing our faith, the very heart of our souls. How much more Zeal should be shown, when our faith is abused.
Jesus, (obviously very angry), told them to stop making my Father’s house a marketplace.
It seems to me Jesus would demand that our USCCB stop making his Father’s house a house of sin, a house of abortion, and a house of Gay activisim.
- Status