Defense of The TRUE Church or Why an Episcopal Bishop "consecration" shouldn't occur at a Catholic Church

.
This information was sent to me and several others:

Katharine J. Schori

Consecration of the 8th [Episcopal] Bishop of Alaska will take place Saturday, September 4, 2010, 2 p.m., at Our Lady of Guadalupe, 3900 Wisconsin Street, Anchorage, Alaska.
...
Following the Consecration ceremony, a reception will be held at the Lunney Center, next door to the church. This is an opportunity for all to meet and greet both the new Bishop Mark Lattime and the Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori. (Source)

····•····

...the consecration and ordination is scheduled for September 4 at Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church in Anchorage. Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori will be the chief consecrator. (Source)

The following are pertinent parts of the Archdiocesan Vetting Policy:

This is a "Clarification Memo" (Source)

This is the page that is linked under Vetting, on the main page of the Archdiocese of Anchorage's website. If you notice the 3rd bullet-point on this memo it says (Original Emphasis) (My Emphasis in red):

This policy is applicable to anyone sponsored by or using any Archdiocesan or Parish resources.

Seems like a pretty clear statement and policy. So why then is Our Lady of Guadalupe being rented/loaned/used by a Christian Denomination whose principal leader speaks contrary to the teachings of the Church? Here are some quotes by the woman that will be "consecrating" a new bishop at Our Lady of Guadalupe:

Anglicans should be led by local communities rather than powerful clerics, Jefferts Schori argued in a Wednesday (June 2) letter to her church’s 2 million members. And, after 50 years of debate, the Episcopal Church is convinced that gays and lesbians are “God’s good creation” and “good and healthy exemplars of gifted leadership within the church, as baptized leaders and ordained ones.” (Source) 

The Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori derided individual salvation calling it 'the great Western heresy: that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God.' 

In her opening address to the church's General Conference in California, Jefferts Schori said it was a "heresy" to believe that an individual can be saved through personal faith and trust in Jesus Christ acknowledged in a prayer of repentance.  (Source)

How are these teachings acceptable for a person that will be leading a religious ceremony at Our Lady of Guadalupe?

°•°•°

There are two major problems that I see with this situation:

1. You are inviting in a religious denomination and a "bishop" that espouse teachings that are directly contrary to those of the One True Church - not only in their construction but in their essence.

2. The double standard that this creates is mind-numbing. I know of several groups, apostolates, speakers, and events that have been denied time and time again in their requests to use facilities, advertising and resources; while this group seems to have full use of OLG.

Does this have everything to do with procedure and the vetting process? Yes, there is a vetting process, and YES it should be followed. In fact, I applaud the Archbishop in taking a stand to ensure that the faithful are safeguarded against heresy, dissident teaching, and heterodoxy. What I cannot understand is how in pursuit of this goal there are good, pious, devout, orthodox, doctrinally sound persons that are not permitted to speak for "procedural reasons." Again, I understand the need for the vetting process, and I understand the necessity in being obedient and following rules and procedure - I work in the legal field; what I can't understand is how procedure is king. How form trumps substance. 

How is it that this Episcopal event will occur inside a Catholic church, while some Catholic groups and people are shunned to homes and restaurants to have their events, ones that adhere to the teachings of the Faith? Why are some events which are approved not given space in bulletins, at announcements, or talked about by parish staffs? These questions may have answers, unfortunately no one seems to know what those answers are.

Other Questions linger:

Will the Eucharist be removed from the Tabernacle during this ordination?

Will the Altar be used?

Will the Consecrated Vessels of OLG be used in any Episcopal ceremonies?

Will the the Sanctuary of OLG be used for this "consecration"?

Will anti-Catholic teachings be allowed to be uttered from the  Ambo?

Does this not give Scandal?

I do not take pride or joy in posting about such things. Some might say that this is gossip or rumor. They would be incorrect. This situation is public and posted on multiple websites. The entire world is free to see that a Woman, pro-gay/lesbian, Episcopal bishop will be "consecrating" a new Episcopal priest in a CATHOLIC church. Simply posting about it, and asking questions should be completely acceptable. All of these questions must have answers... I am simply asking the questions.

It hurts so bad to know people that have been denied access to their own church facilities and resources because there is a safeguard procedure in place that is used in a manner which seems to be against them and for outside anti-Catholic groups. As recently as a month ago I saw a parish bulletin with an advertisement for a local Labyrinth. Yet, some people are forced to email me their events and info in an effort to get the word out, as they have been denied access to and the ability of using parish bulletins and resources to disseminate their approved information.

I pray that there are good explanations to all my questions... I think we would just like to hear them. If our churches are used as platforms for distortion and heresy, but not as sources of Truth and Doctrine, what chance do we have to give the Faithful proper formation? If the area where the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is celebrated is used by those opposed to the true teachings of the faith, what does that say about our belief and our understanding of what occurs in the Sanctuaries of our churches?

I trust in our Archbishop. He is a holy, holy man, that has show recently how he is willing to put the true teachings of the faith, and the protection of his "flock" as his first priorities. I know that in the end the right thing will happen. Therefore we must continue to pray for him, for wisdom, courage, understanding, and fortitude.


Please leave comments, but be charitable. I would love to hear others opinion of this, but I don't want this to descend into attacks against persons. Ideas are open for any criticism, people and the judgment of their souls is for God alone. It is important that we use the internet as a place of intellectual debate, and not to pile-on against people. Please prayerfully consider your words before posting. 

If the Modernists & Media ran the Church...

This is all Marcel over at Aggie Catholics... I had to re-post it because it is pretty dead on.

• 25 - Women priests (but they must always wear approved vestments).
• 24 - Gay Marriage is fine as long as only one bride's mother is involved at a time
• 23 - Abortions are only approved in cases of rape, incest, teenage pregnancy, and if you are a woman who is pregnant
• 22 - Contraception suggested for married couples (and required for non-married couples)
• 21 - The Eucharist now comes in Honey Wheat, Whole Grain, Avocado and Rice flavors
• 20 - No more need to confess your sins just receive counseling to overcome guilt
• 19 - Pope is elected - never mind - no more Pope. But, Bishops are elected by popular vote after the final episode of "So You Think You Can Run An (Arch)Diocese?"
• 18 - Simple majority decides doctrine and all doctrine is optional
• 17 - The Bible is now officially interpreted by the Magisterium of Me
• 16 - No more talk of the fiery abode of demons (i.e. Hell). No more talk of that "bad guy with a pitchfork"
• 15 - The only sin is telling someone they have sinned (oops, I sinned, my bad)
• 14 - Bishops now dress in suits (or pant-suits), priests in Dockers (or skirts), and the congregation can "come as you are - on a beach after sweating all day"
• 13 - Jesus was a super-nice guy, though he bought into some cultural lies of his times, but he ain't God
• 12 - Latin Schmatin
• 11 - Who needs tax exempt status? Not the Catholic Church...
• 10 - All theology professors are now allowed to make it up as they go
• 9 - Justice, however the United Nations defines it, is now the main thrust of the Catholic Church
• 8 - Canon Law will now be called "Canon Advice"
• 7 - In order to make Parishes more welcoming, we will call them "Centers of Loving Care and Hope"
• 6 - The preferred music at "worship services" includes songs from Creedance Clearwater Revival, U2, Billy Joel, and Marty Haugen
• 5 - Church buildings will now resemble movie theaters and be called "Supplication Stations"
• 4 - Religious Education is to focus on self-esteem, crafts, and the environment. It will now be called "The Art of Being Ready for Encountering That Which May or May Not Be"
• 3 - The Roman Collar is to be replaced with the Butterfly Collar
• 2 - Father, Son, and Spirit are now Parent, Child, and Essence
• 1 - Catholic Schools will now be called "Inclusive Pods of Re-education". They will use the Pelosian-mandated Model of Edumacasion

If you don't think this is real... you are dead wrong. The modernist, "Spirit of Vatican II", "WE are church" folks would want this list instituted in total, TODAY, if they could get it "passed." This is the oppositions battle plan, this is what we must fight against.

If you think this is just silly over-exaggeration, you are wrong!The modernist, "Spirit of Vatican II", "WE are church" folks would want this list instituted in total, TODAY, if they could get it "passed." This is the oppositions battle plan, this is what we must fight against.

If you think this is just silly over-exaggeration, you are wrong! We must recognize that these are the goals of the modernists, we must realize that heresy is a threat and that it slithers in through all sorts of seemingly harmless heterodoxy. We must LEARN our Faith, PRACTICES our authentic Faith, and SHARE our faith with our children, family, and friends. We must become warriors of the faith and defend it at all costs.

Don't believe there is an Anti-Catholic bias in the media?

Think again!

The sex abuse scandal that is currently in the news is a horrible thing. I know that. We as Catholics have to endure this and endure the struggles against our Church perpetrated by evil desires and some evil people. What we must do is call for the truth. Truth in the accusations, truth in the way things are handled by the Church, and truth in the reporting about these incidents.

Unfortunately, there is a HORRIBLE Anti-Catholic bias in the media. They are attempting to use these scandals to mar and destroy the Church. If you don't believe that, and think I am exaggerating let me use an example from ABC News Online story: Pope Benedict Cannot Be Fired.

It is a silly headline to begin with, but I understand the outrage. I also understand many people have a very primary understanding of the Church and the position of Pope.

What I cannot understand is how ABC News can and will blatantly misinform and lie about the facts of this ordeal. Or how they allow things to be printed that are not only wrong, but also use the source of that misinformation as a credible analyst on this issue.

Let me show you some examples of what I am talking about:

"He is really accountable to no one, and that is the history," said former priest Richard Sipe, author of the 1990 book, "A Secret World" about the priesthood. "There have been a pope or two who have resigned, several hundred have been murdered, but it's a very stable organization from the top down. What other monarchy do you know that's lasted for 2,000 years?"

"He is untouchable, there is no question about that," Sipe said.

This is a small point, but it shows the lengths to which ABC and other media outlets will go to harm and taint the view of the Church and the Papacy. So let me go through the problems with this blurb.

1. This is a former priest. So they are pushing him as some sort of AUTHORITY on the Papacy. What they don't tell you is WHY he is not longer a priest. They instead allow the reader to assume why. Most people will infer that he left because of some displeasure.
2. He wrote a book in 1990. It doesn't say how long he was a priest, when he left the priesthood, or what the books was about. Again they leave it to the readers to infer what it is about based on the title and the theme of this story. Wonder what they want us to assume? 
3. The book, "A Secret World", isn't about the secrecy of the priesthood or the Papacy. In fact, a quick browse of its Amazon Page shows that it is instead a book about the celibacy of priests. Ahh... the whole "this wouldn't happen if we let priests marry" angle... is that really where ABC wants to go?
4. So what does Mr. Sipe say? Well first he says that a pope or two have resigned. In actuality easy and quick research shows that it was more than that. The number is around 7 but there is a lot of disagreement about the actual number, and it depends on what you count as a "resignation." Regardless, I don't think Sipe was trying to be accurate here, instead I think he was trying to make it seem as if few men WILLINGLY relinquish this "power."
5. Then comes the statement that blew me away... "several hundred have been murdered..."?!?!? What? No. That can't be right? Of course not, but let's see how BAD of a misstatement this was.
1. There have been 266 Popes*. Now, granted this number is debatable or arguable for various reasons. For argument sake, let's go with this number, since it is used by Newadvent.org
2. The term several is highly ambiguous. Yet, it often means to be more than 2 or 3 but "not a lot." Again let's err on the low side and by several he meant between 300-400.
3. The problem is already evident.
4. Wikipedia lists 8 official "Murdered Popes." Generally I won't use wikipedia for "research" but I figure that at the VERY least the editors and writers at ABC know how to use google and can click on the wikipedia article. (They also list 11 "suspicious deaths" of Popes.
5. So 7-10 resignations = "a Pope or two" while 8 Murders = "several hundred."
6. Monarchy. Do I even have to explain how wrong this is? Ok good.

So how does this show bias? I think it is pretty evident. ABC clearly didn't check the facts, nor did they explain Mr. Sipe's comments. They left too much to the imagination of their readers. These are professionals. They get paid to work hours a day doing JUST this. I mean, this writer probably worked on this article for days, and didn't fact check these things? Why? 

I'll tell you why. They want to paint the Church in the worst possible light. There isn't another explanation. If there is one... tell me, and I will easily tell you how that explanation is an excuse and not an explanation. Sure a media source can write a story with any slant they want. Yet ABC purports itself to be an objective news source. It is clearly Anti-Catholic. So... if in just that one paragraph they are willing to allow so much misinformation and Anti-Catholic sentiment through... imagine how much more exists in the rest of this story, and the rest of the stories out there by other outlets with an even larger anti-Catholic and anti-Christian agenda? Be careful what you read.

-Posted by: Joe

Michigan Judge Accused of being...CATHOLIC - equated to being Racist

So here is another shocking example of Anti-Catholicism in US Courts... which involves an Ave Maria Law professor:

The Catholic Leauge has sent out a press release explaining how a Michigan Attorney has accused Circuit Court Judge Dan Ryan of being too Catholic, and how that attorney attempted to get Ryan removed from the case.

What kind of case, you ask, would an attorney feel is problematic for a Catholic judge to preside over? How about a mother who smothered her newborn child? Why? Because it involves the murder of a newborn? What is even more horrifying is the fact that the attorney equated this situation to a racist Klan member Judge presiding over a trial involving an African-American defendant.

Here is a section from the press release:

What happened on March 1, however, was much worse. [The attorney] was angered over the fact that [Judge] Ryan was taking vacation time to teach at Ave Maria on Mondays (the fact that Ryan rearranged his Monday schedule this past week to accommodate [the attorney] undercuts his complaint). In any event, on p. 10 of the transcript from Monday’s hearing, [the attorney] is quoted as saying, “This is the equivalent to an African-American man being on trial and the judge taking Mondays off to attend Klan meetings.”

Read the entire press release over at The Catholic League:
Anti-Catholicism in a Michigan Court

Really? A Catholic judge is the equivalent of a Klan Member, when that judge is adjudicating over a case involving life? How does life equate to racism? Is the Catholic faith the equivalent of racist hateful bigotry?

If you would like to email the Area Court Administrator for the Circuit Court upon which Judge Ryan presides, their email is:
Contact Executive Court Administrator Ronald R. Ruffin: Ronald.Ruffin@3rdcc.org

For those that are unfamiliar with Judge Ryan, here are some links regarding his bio:
Judge Dan Ryan - DOJ Resume
Judge Daniel Ryan - Judgepedia
Judge Ryan Profile - Ave Maria Law Website






-Posted by: Joe

The Shame at Notre Dame - Daily Observer Wimps Out On Dr. Rice Column - Answering Why...

So the University of Notre Dame periodical "The Observer" has again brought shame down upon the University by their decision to nix a column written by Law Professor Dr. Charles Rice. [You can read about that here: ND Observer Refuses Dr. Rice's Column On the Churches Teaching Regarding Homosexuality]

As we reported yesterday, a Dr. Rice wrote a regular column for the Observer. Dr. Rice is a distinguished member of the Notre Dame Law faculty, and his influence reaches far beyond the hallowed halls of their law school. [Read about Dr. Rice at his Law School Info Page] His column was never short of poignant and was always firmly rooted in the intellectual and spiritual teachings of the Holy Catholic Church. So then why would the new editor of the "Observer" refuse to print his column?

Well the answer may lie in cowardice. Harsh words you say? I disagree, in fact, the reasons given by the editor show that cowardice is most likely the exact reason why the column was denied. One must follow the a trail though, which starts at the reasons given for the denial of publication and leads back to the incident that supposedly created the "reason," or need to deny the column by Dr. Rice.

First, there was an incident a while back where the Observer printed a pretty horrible cartoon. It was hateful and crude; it dealt with homosexuals and created quite a stir. There were protests, apologies and resignations. Here are some links:
The Observer Cancels the Comic Strip "The Mobile Report"
The Mobile Report Apologizes
All of this occurred just over a month ago in Mid-January. Between then and now there was quite an outcry for a "change" at the Observer. That is exactly what happened.

Second, the Observer started to change their course. They changed editorial staff, and actually decided to "Right" their "Wrong" by going to the other extreme and "embracing" the homosexual causes on campus. They supported and promoted a change to the anti-discrimination policy to include sexual orientation. This showed their agenda, it also highlighted the course in which they were going to be taking over the next few weeks and months.

Finally, the new EIC and editorial staff came on board. The campus was all buzzing over this controversy and there was a perfect opportunity for the paper of the flagship Catholic University in America to lead the way in the Catechism of the Church. Instead, they punted. Actually, they didn't even show up to the game. Instead they ran and hid from the opportunity.

This is why I say it was cowardice. Not on the part of Notre Dame, but on the part of the Observer. This was what some call a "teachable" moment, but instead the Observer decided to push its liberal anti-Catholic agenda. Hopefully the independent paper on campus the Irish Rover picks up on this situation and runs with it! I'd love to seem them print the original Rice article and make the Observer irrelevant. I suggest you all take a look at the Irish Rover and see that there are good things going on at Notre Dame and that there still are students committed to keeping Notre Dame Catholic... even if none of them work for the Observer.

Please take some time to check out the Rover, and possibly support them. They run off of donations and the generosity of their readers. I once was the EIC of a paper just like the rover. In fact, when the Rover was starting up so were we. I know how hard it is to keep independent conservative papers like that going, especially on the campuses of major universities; funding is only one of the many problems they face. So if you are looking for something positive to support and a way to help "the good" consider a donation to them. If you can't afford that, check out an issue and write them some email of support. In the very least, pray for them.


-Posted by: Joe