Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Push For Greater Acceptance of Homosexual Unions Continues in German Church

Since the beginning of this year, there seems to be an intensification of progressivist activity within the Catholic Church in Germany in order to liberalize the Church’s teaching on, and assessment of, homosexuality. As if a dam has broken, one initiative rapidly follows another. It seems as if Germany might become the guiding country with regard to this issue, just as the Amazon region might become the leader of reform with regard to married priests, in the sense of a “decentralized Church” as recently outlined by the progressivist theologian Father Paul Zulehner. The near future will tell us more. Let us for now recount some of these new German statements here.

In the January issue of the German Catholic journal Herder Korrespondenz, there is an interview with Cardinal Reinhard Marx. As the President of the German Bishops’ Conference and a papal adviser, Marx proposed that the Catholic Church rethink her teaching on sexual morality in which case he argued against “blind rigorism.” For him, it is “difficult to say from the outside whether someone is in the state of mortal sin.” Marx applied this statement not only to men and women in “irregular situations,” but also to those in a homosexual relationship, saying that there has to be “a respect for a decision made in freedom” and in light of one’s “conscience”; he added that one also has “to listen to the voice of the Church.”

Not long after this piece of news broke (already a few days before the new year started, on 27 December 2017) – and after the German Bishops’ official news website immediately reported on this statement by Marx – there came the now-widely-discussed call for a blessing of homosexual couples which had been issued in an interview, on 10 January, given by the Vice President of the German Bishops’ Conference, Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, of Osnabrück. Bode then stated that it would be important to discuss this entire matter, adding:

We have to reflect upon the question as to how to assess, in a differentiated manner, a relationship between two homosexual persons. […] Is there not so much positive and good and right so that we have to be more just?

Only three days later, on 13 January, the German bishops’ website Katholisch.de published an interview with Professor Benedikt Kranemann who is a liturgy scholar at the Catholic Theology department at the University of Erfurt. Kranemann is also an adviser to the German Bishops’ Conference. In that 13 January interview, this German professor bluntly stated that, thus far,

there has not yet been a real theological discussion in the Catholic Church about in what ritual form such a salvific promise [sic] from God – because that is what a blessing stands for – could be expressed for these [homosexual] couples.

Kranemann added that “I find it theologically problematic if one makes a blessing dependent upon the moral assessment of human conduct.” To support his argument, he referred to the blessing of cars “where the drivers receive a blessing independently of their way of driving.” According to Kranemann, the blessing of a homosexual couple is not not necessarily a first step which then leads to a sacrament. “Blessings are manifold; some lead to sacraments, others not.”

As if speaking about a “human right to a blessing,” Kranemann further explains:

I consider it to be theologically problematic if one denies such a blessing to people  who consider it to be necessary for them. People also have the right that the grace of God should be extended to them, as the pastoral theologian Ottmar Fuchs has explained in his recent studies.

At the end of this interview, Professor Kranemann lauds Bishop Bode for his own initiative, saying: “And I think it is good that Bishop Bode – no less than the Vice President of the German Bishops’ Conference – is pushing this topic now.”

Just four days after this Kranemann interview, on 18 January, Professor Stephan Goertz raised his own voice in support of homosexual unions in the Catholic Church. Writing for the religion section of the prominent German newspaper Die Zeit, Christ&Welt, Goertz entitles his article: “Praise the Luck, Brothers!” As is to be expected, Katholisch.de published a report about this new article, and even presented it one day before the official publication date.

Goertz is professor of moral theology at the University of Mainz and is a known supporter of relaxing the Catholic Church’s teaching on sexual morality. Already in 2015, he wondered whether homosexual unions could not have a “sacramental character.” He had just then published a book which is entitled: Who Am I to Judge? Homosexuality and the Catholic Church. Now, in 2018, Goertz sees much (progressive and favorable) movement within the Catholic Church with regard to this topic. He highlights the three recent statements by Cardinal Marx, Bishop Bode, as well as Archbishop Heiner Koch of Berlin (who stated in 2017 that “same-sex cohabitation can be valued through other institutional arrangements without opening up the legal institute of marriage”); and says that they have “attracted attention.” Goertz sees that it is “legitimate that the Catholic Church comes in the 21th century to a new assessment of homosexual relationships.” Too long, he adds, the Church has had a “rigoristic attitude” toward homosexuality. “Now, under Pope Francis, there has been a change.” The Church now trusts more in the moral competence and judgment of the the people, according to Goertz. “The scope of freedom is being carefully widened.” With a hopeful outlook, he predicts that, were the Church to change her views in this matter, and recognize “the good and the right” in homosexual relationships, “the crampedness in dealing with homosexual caregivers (male and female) would come to an end.”

As one German Catholic observer put it, so far not one German bishop has come out to resist any of these recent liberalizing initiatives as promoted by the German Bishops’ Conference.

It is important to note here that there are links between these new progressivist initiatives concerning homosexuality and those concerning contraception. As Edward Pentin recently showed, two of the speakers at a series of talks about “re-thinking Humanae Vitae” hosted by the Gregorian University in Rome – Father Maurizio Chiodi (who now claims that contraception might sometimes be required) and Father Miguel Yanez – both also participated at a presentation of a book edited by Professor Goertz (together with Caroline Witting). As Pentin keenly puts it, in this new Goertz book “it is argued that Amoris Laetitia represents a paradigm shift for all moral theology and especially in interpreting Humanae Vitae.

Let us also recall here that it was at that same Roman university – the Gregorian University – that, in May of 2015, the controversial “shadow council” or “Day of Study” took place which, organized among others by the German bishops, seems to have prepared the way for Amoris Laetitia, as well as for the change of other areas of the Church’s moral teaching. One of the speakers of that event, Professor Anne-Marie Pelletier of Paris, France, had in the meantime received the honor of being asked by Pope Francis to write the Meditations for the 2017 Stations of the Cross in Rome.

Thus we shall continue to bear truthful witness in the face of the complete destruction of the moral edifice of the Catholic Church, as it has been both encouraged by Pope Francis in his post-synodal exhortation Amoris Laetitia, and as it has been also discerningly criticized by Professor Josef Seifert as a potential “moral atomic bomb.”

139 thoughts on “Push For Greater Acceptance of Homosexual Unions Continues in German Church”

    • Also a hotbed of Church Tax money for decades. As the Germans are passing a lot of their loot onto the Vatican and financial and sexual corruption go hand in hand….I am sure that sexually and financially corrupt Vatican officials will listen to the Rhine Maidens.

      Reply
    • They always were trouble makers weren’t they? And I actually like the German people-or used to before they allowed the Muslim invasion of their country. I hope Austria doesn’t follow suit.

      Reply
        • In 1400 years they have not changed. I’m sorry for what’s happening in Germany. It’s a beautiful country and culture and will be extinct in 20 years if they don’t stop the Muslim invasion.

          Reply
  1. Please God let the pope retire and have a new Vicar of Christ Faithful to You come in and clean the vile stench brought from within the high ranks of Your Church!

    Reply
    • There would have to be a massive housecleaning, with every disinfectant you could gather.
      And then, an exorcism of the evil within the walls.

      Reply
      • No, the Lord would readily do it without the least difficulty…just pray the Psalms….everyone’s sins have contributed to this Purification of the Beloved’s Justice, no one excepted….let us become perfectly holy as the Beloved is Perfectly Holy…..

        Reply
        • Indeed Padre, but as you know there is significance attached to “degrees of sin”. To boldly champion
          what is mortally sinful and encourage it’s practice thus corrupting our young people in particular IS
          sin of much greater magnitude then our personal weakness’s.

          We who refuse to comply to such promotion of EVIL and actively counter it are not complicit in the
          sense of “contribution”. That is wrong. An important distinction has to be made.

          Reply
          • Thanks Barry, you read my mind…..I was thinking a bit about it and came back to post and found yours.

            Well said. I tire of the moral equivalency stuff.

  2. “It seems as if Germany . . just as the Amazon region might. . .”

    Designed. Executed in planning implemented as events. Design, execution, implementation – indicates that each dot lining up is carefully constructed from goals, objectives, and forward movement.

    While those opposing, mostly, flail about winging it, mostly, as reactions to their hauling “the narrative” further down the road remapped by their goal’s GPS.

    Reply
  3. “same-sex cohabitation can be valued through other institutional arrangements without opening up the legal institute of marriage”

    Don’t anyone kid themselves they will have sodomites being married in the Church in a few short years.

    Reply
  4. Maike your article confirms Amoris Laetitia is the Pontiff’s Ultimate Weapon of Moral Mass Destruction. A work of subtle genius [the Pope is no bumbling fool] intended to convince the unwary that “concrete circumstances” permit us to perform inherently evil acts without responsibility for grave sin. Aquinas demonstrates that the three components of a moral act intent, circumstances, and object must all be good. Circumstances can make a good act evil. Circumstances cannot make an evil act good. What ultimately determines an act’s moral character is its object. What the act does. You’re sadly correct that the German Bishops led by Conf Pres Cardinal Marx are the likely vanguard for implementing the “New Paradigm” announced by Vat Secretary of State Card Parolin. Ever since my youth my conviction was that if a behavior so vile and opposed to God’s natural order were to be universally accepted, especially by the Church it would indicate End Times. This may pass. Although we’ve never had a ‘doctrine’ that radically affects all moral doctrine even matters of faith. You and I all of us who suffer this infliction on the Church are given the opportunity for greater sanctification and salvation of the unwary.

    Reply
    • Situation Ethics is, and has always been, about making what is evil subjectively good despite it’s objective nature. And all learned proponents of Situational Ethics know this and this is why they advocate for it, Pope Francis included.

      By the way, I am reading your book, Ascent to Truth, and it’s excellent. I encourage all 1P5 readers to get it.

      Reply
      • Yes Pope Francis’ appeal to “mitigating circumstances” (AL 302), and the use of “concrete circumstances” fits Joseph Fletcher’s Situation Ethics. Josef Seifert noted that following his firing from his seminary teaching post in Spain. The Pontiff cited 2352 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church in support of the mitigating circumstance doctrine. The Catechism upholds a long standing theological position never fully developed particularly insofar as degrees of culpability. I’ve held that there are no mitigating circumstances that remove responsibility for committing grave sin in an act of intrinsic evil. Except pathological mental deficiency. Although alcohol or drug use does not exempt from grave sin committed while mentally impaired because we assume responsibility knowing we place ourselves in danger of grave sin.

        Reply
        • Christ is born!

          Dear Fr. Morello:

          I made the comment (pasted below) already in relation to this article, but wanted to share it with you personally, as it also touches upon what appears to be a deficiency in the current 1992 version of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Fr. RP may wish to review this as well:

          “We have to reflect upon the question as to how to assess, in a differentiated manner, a relationship between two homosexual persons.”

          The groundwork for the morally ambivalent statement above was set in the current version of the Catholic Catechism from 1992, which uses the phrase “homosexual persons”, suggesting that there are certain persons who are, by nature, homosexual. The Catechism also says of homosexualism that “its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained”, which leaves open the possibility that it could be naturally occurring, or inborn, and not necessarily conditioned by external and societal forces. But this section of the Catechism does not mention the moral evil of this sexual perversion, nor is there an explicit statement of moral culpability for sin imputed to those who engage in such unnatural and abominable behaviour. The result, 25 years later, is that German clergymen are seeking to “assess” the sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance in a positive light, and Fr. James Martin wants the Church to replace its description of homosexualism as “disordered” with his own preferred formulation of “differently ordered”, or words to that effect.

          On a global level, with morally corrupt clergy like the ones mentioned above, we see how powerless the Church has become in effectively identifying and condemning the world-wide spread of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) — a pedophile’s dream curriculum/grooming program that systematically molests and pollutes the impressionable young minds and imaginations of little school children with homosexualist and transsexualist fetishism, so as to draw some of them into the practice of these diabolical perversions.

          A notable exception to the Catholic Church’s ineffectual response to the sodomizing of the world by CSE and the entire complex of Sexual Transhumanist legislation has been the official statement of the Synod of Bishops of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, whose December 2016 Encyclical on the threat of so-called Gender Ideology describes this cancerous phenomenon as “anti-human”. Read the entire Encyclical letter here:

          http://news.ugcc.ua/en/arti

          With these things in mind, it becomes clear that innumerable souls are being dragged toward hell because of unnatural, devilish sexual perversion that seek to erase the very image of God in man, and this is happening with the complicity of many powerful and worldly clergymen under the current Vatican regime.

          Well did St. Peter Damian describe the relentless, all-pervasive, no-stone-unturned omnivorism of the demons of sodomy in his prophetic 11th Century treatise of the subject, entitled The Book of Gomorrah:

          “This vice (sodomy) is the death of bodies, the destruction of souls, pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the intellect, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, introduces the diabolical inciter of lust, throws into confusion, and removes the truth completely from the deceived mind…

          “For it is this (sodomy) which violates sobriety, kills modesty, slays chastity. It butchers virginity with the sword of a most filthy contagion. It befouls everything, it stains everything, it pollutes everything, and for itself it permits nothing pure, nothing foreign to filth, nothing clean.”

          Nothing pure. Nothing foreign to filth. Nothing clean. Nothing!

          As with abortion and euthanasia, which are its life-and-family-destroying co-conspirators, the only way to deal with the dragon of Sexual Transhumanism is to put it to death, not to enter into a “dialogue” or an “internal forum” with it:

          “Put to death, therefore, the components of your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience.” – Col. 3-5-6

          Therefore, homosexualism and all its LGBTranshumanist outgrowths must be relisted in the catalog of psychological disorders as serious personal and societal pathologies, and these perversions must also be re-criminalized — along with abortion and euthanasia — as Crimes against Humanity. Truly, that is what these anti-human evils are.

          May the Lord give us the love and courage (these two always go together) to fight against this assault on the Human Race and on God’s will for His children.

          Holy Family, pray for us!

          St. Peter Damian, pray for us!

          Reply
          • You’re comment of concern on the Catechism’s reference to homosexual relationship is certainly warranted. Also “Persona Humana, Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics, by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1975). The document acknowledges that there are ‘homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable'”. While it seems true there are rare cases of a disorder that seems irreversible, insofar as the predilection. However the document advises such persons involved in a relationship should be treated with special consideration. Though requiring confession. Nonetheless the statement as written is misleading as is the Catechism reference.

          • The Catechism referenced should be used carefully if at all. Consider who wrote the thing and who promulgated it…there are lots of gaps between perennial Church teaching, and the more “merciful” interpretations is this tome. There are other, older, Catechisms and so much writing about these important topics over the past centuries that there is no need to rely on one book. I grant you that many are too lazy to look up older books, but that’s their fault, not the fault of scarce resources.

          • You make a succinct point Barbara. My impression is too much attention has been given to ‘findings’ by psychologists that too frequently mirror even if unintentionally presupposition. The best reference are the Gospels and the Apostolic Tradition. When we read The Apostle in Rom 1 there is little room for absolution of homosexual behavior.

          • Thank you for this most helpful response, Fr. Morello!

            I found this citation especially arresting:

            “Persona Humana, Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics, by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1975). The document acknowledges that there are ‘homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable'”.

            Reading this is incredible to me. On what basis does the author of the above cited passage of the Congregation’s document make his assertion? And by whom is any case of homosexualist obsessions “judged to be incurable”?

            The implication seems to be that there is, indeed, a sub-species of the human race called “homosexuals”, and that their sexual fixations are “incurable”.

            This strikes me as a contradiction of traditional Catholic anthropology. Furthermore, the passage does not address the fact that human beings are subject, due to Original Sin, to the “demonic fantasies” with which the demons tempt us, as St. Hesychios the Priest describes these in his writings (some of which are recorded in the Philokalia).

            If all human beings are sinners for whom Christ died and to whom He offers salvation, then the nature of the sins we commit cannot be “incurable”, but must be subject to the power of Christ’s sanctifying grace. The apostolic affirmation “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” (2 Cor. 5:17) can only be true and applicable to all people if we acknowledge that the Physician of our Souls can never be stymied by an “incurable” condition, but only by a lack of faith.

            It seems to me, then, that those ecclesial authorities who have, in recent decades, formulated propositions relating to homosexualism that seek to present it merely as a condition or a characteristic of a person, rather than what it is — a relentless demonic persecution-campaign against a person’s God-given sexual nature and identity — are betraying the very people who are thus afflicted, and implicitly (indeed, now explicitly) denying that God has created humans definitively as males and females who are always properly sexually ordered toward each other.

            The current appalling state of affairs in the Church regarding homosexualism is indicative, perhaps, of the triumph of the scientific materialism of the soul: modern psychology.

            I pray that Our Lady, Undoer of Knots, will help extricate Our Lord’s Church from the labyrinth that entraps Her whenever Her leaders start speaking the world’s language and thinking like evolutionists and godless men.

            “But Jesus turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me. For you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.’ Then Jesus told His disciples, ‘If anyone would come after Me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me.'” – St. Matthew 16:23-24

            Yours in Christ and the Holy Family,

            Clinton

    • Why am I not surprised that Brendan Byrne is a) Australian and b) a Jesuit? Given the rampant sodomitical child abuse in Australian dioceses and the long time Jesuit ability to justify just about anything…..

      Reply
  5. ???????????? ???????????? ???????????????????????? ???????? ????????????????????, ???????????????? ???????????? ???????????????????????? ???????? ???????????? ????????????????????????!

    Reply
  6. One has to wonder why these Prelates are so lenient when it comes to sexual morality. I would think that since they have to live a life with no sexual relations they would have an attitude more like: “hey, don’t complain to me about all the sexual problems you get yourself into, I have to live a life without it.” Instead they seem to bend over backwards to justify any sexual impropriety that comes down the pike. It doesn’t make sense that they fight for everyone’s sexual desires (even immoral ones) when they themselves are supposed to live a life of celibacy.

    Reply
  7. It’s all about Sodomy, all of the progressive evil of the modernist Churchmen is all about the glorification of Sodomy.

    One has to wonder (no, one doesn’t really) if it’s because a large number of them are themselves practicing sodomites? I would say, that that is the most obvious conclusion one should reach considering that that is what the modernist’s fruit has clearly demonstrated. It is clearly all about surrendering to the vilest passions of the flesh that can be imagined.

    Furthermore, given that the horrors of the sexual abuse crisis largely encompass sodomite sexual praxis, and the bishops refusal to address the cause of the problem (Bishop Bruskewitz, who raised the issue, was shouted down at the infamous Dallas Bishops Conference during the peek of the ‘pedophilia crisis) despite the John Jay report clearly indicating that the problem was Sodomites practicing sodomy, one can only conclude that they are, at minimum, complacent when it comes to addressing Sodomites practicing Sodomy within their ranks.

    And Pope Francis is giving them cover because they are his base. Period.

    Reply
    • From a church-political viewpoint I consider the sexual abuse scandal as an excellent opportunity for the remaining faithful hierarchs in the Church — a small group, I acknowledge — to organize a coup against Bergoglio. On this issue the masses are now in a process of becoming angry and turning against the Pope. Perhaps the moment can be seized to bring about change and to bring down this terrible pontificate.

      Reply
    • The clergy is objectively filled with sodomites, and you are right, it is the issue for the NO church. The double speak in the catechism is proof claiming that same sex attraction is not sinful only the act is. BS! What is same sex attraction anyway other than disordered lust? I am told as a married straight male that sexual desire for my bride is an affront to purity and sinful yet by church “law” the same desire for one sodomit to another is not? This wicked church hates marriage and pushes sodomy.

      Reply
        • Countless church prelates and saints have said this equating it with lust. We can argue semantics all we won’t, but the teaching of marital chastity, before V II, and after with extreme wing of the trad crowd and even neocon NO Catholics are rife with it. The church, heavily influenced by Augustine, considers the marital act a “necessary” evil for procreation only (Augustine in his essential sermons said that the marital act is venially sinful). Only St. Chrysostom teaches beautifully that the sacramental aspect of marriage is for the salvation of souls, and St Peter teaches the unitive aspect of the act is not only good but necessary and right not to be denied except by mutual consent and during times of fasting. The eastern churches emphasize the unitive act as primary over the procreative act.

          By the way this is not some veiled disagreement over birth control it is an observance of a soft anti marriage bias that runs through the church. The church is now in the open about its loathing of marriage, as evidenced by easy annulments and the heresy concerning the divorced and remarried having access to holy communion as they follow their faith journey. Lastly, they have lowered the bar on sodomy claiming it to be just another sin, with sodomites a special gift to the church.

          Reply
          • “There are no sexually active married saints in the Church before JPII.” No, you are in error. St. Bridget comes to mind and there are others. You seem to be upset because you think sex within marriage is sinful, and you think this is what the Church teaches.

            There are subtleties here that can be missed depending on who you read, and what you bring to the discussion personally.

            Chastity is not abstinence. Sex within marriage is not even venially sinful: PROVIDED that sex within marriage has ‘due limits.’ This is a discussion for another time perhaps, but in marriage a man, or a woman, who demands sex to the degree that “lust” is the most important thing is definitely doing wrong.

            Most people marry. God HImself told us to prosper and multiply. Therefore sex within marriage is God’s Holy Will. How, what, when, etc. all count.

            Those saints (couples) who decided to forgo sex within their marriages would have only done so with the permission of their confessors or spiritual advisors, and there are not very many of them. They did this usually after having families. This was not “a sign of their holiness” but a sign that they were doing penance because they gave up something SO GOOD.

          • Barbara I do not think sex in marriage is sinful, St Augustine said it was. I understand the difference between Chastity in marriage and abstinence. However, I do not understand the concept of lusting after your wife as long as you are not turning her into an sexual object(lets face it, this is hard to do after a few years of marriage). I also my be inflicted with too much exposure to the ultra so called trad crowed on this but their teaching is right from the magisterium, if you have read enough of it you recognize it.

            In reading the lives of the Saints I have never seen a St. before JP II and the NO era, that were not martyrs( I should have clarified this point above) who were living in the marital union before their death. The emphasis on their perfect chastity at some point in their life is always emphasized.

            My point, which is maybe not well stated, is the Church has a hostility to marriage that is now fully on display. From easy annulments to the soft pedaling of sodomy, to pederasty, it is clear to see for those willing to pay attention. Our Lady said that the last war will be one against the family and the church is leading the charge along with Satan on this issue.

            In 47 years as a Catholic I have never heard one homily that explains that marriage is for the salvation of souls. Not one. In my marriage prep class, you know the churches obsession with these, this was not discussed. We talked about money and NFP but there was zero theology. In the traditional sermons on this all you hear is the emphasis on child birth and that marriage is a remedy for concupiscence. This sterilizing of marriage is disturbing and the one thing I struggle with most in church teaching. If marriage should be sterile then why not make the sterile sodomy act a gift to the church? I mean after all, the so called “popes” clack of homos says they are a special gift.

          • I found out with amazement some years ago (and long after being married) that an angel is assigned to sacramentally married couples, so they’re not just two people with two G. Angels, but a married “one-flesh” couple with a third angel to guard and help them.
            And as you-all can guess, I didn’t find that out in any official Church venue.
            RC

          • If that is true about the catholic saints they renounced sex so that they could devote all of themselves to serving Christ. You can’t do that if you are married because your spouse comes first. You may not like this but all of those saints had free will and they did what they did because of their devotion to our lord. It is also important to note that St. Paul advised married people to come together regularly do that they wouldn’t burn as in suffering. Sexually. My priests have never said that sex was sinful in the confines of marriage.

          • Chesterlab again you did not read carefully because I agree with your point. However, Augustin said in his essential sermons that the marital act is a venial sin. The Church has always taught that sex within marriage is only for children and only as a remedy for concupiscence. They ignore the unitive aspect to it. In fact Humanae Vitae is criticized because it was not in conformity with church teaching when it placed the unitive act as primary with procreative act as secondary.

          • That’s funny because my Baltimore catechism says that sex is also for the comfort of the husband and wife bond. With all due respect st Augustine had some pretty serious lust issues too so he probably isn’t a very good example to use.

      • No that’s not true. Your marriage vows say that you are to love and cherish your spouse. Desire in a married heterosexual couple is not the same as list. It is a gift from God for married couples and an expression of their love so that they will grow families. Same sex marriage is a disorder and in my opinion an abomination. If you want to live in your civil union go ahead. Just don’t call it marriage.

        Reply
          • Obviously you can’t. I want citations in catholic doctrine that claim homosexual inclinations are not disordered.

          • Notice that only the “act” is considered disordered? Also notice the inference that maybe sodomy might be genetic or biological? Notice no mention that the inclination is disordered? If you can’t see it you do not know how to read modernist double speak and you have not noticed that the so called “pope” surrounds himself with sodomite prelates. You also did not notice the draft language of the statement on the family that said that sodomites were a special gift to the Church.

            From the current catechism set forth below from the Vatican.va website.

            2357
            Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience
            an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.
            It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different
            cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself
            on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave
            depravity,140 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts
            are intrinsically disordered.”141 They are contrary to the natural
            law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a
            genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

            2358
            The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not
            negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it
            is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.
            Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These
            persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are
            Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they
            may encounter from their condition.

            2359
            Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that
            teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship,
            by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely
            approach Christian perfection.

            LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF
            THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
            ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

            3. Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this
            Congregation’s “Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual
            Ethics” of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to
            understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being “intrinsically disordered”, and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, $4).

            Homosexuals a gift to the Church:

            https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/earthquake-vatican-synod-mid-term-report-suggest-emphasizing-positive-aspec

          • Its one thing to “have tendencies.” It’s another to act on them. And remember what St. Paul said. If you lust in your heart it’s the same as doing the acts same for a home mosexual or heterosexual. . I am not a Vatican 2 catholic so I have more traditional views than the modernists do. But my understanding of traditional church thinking is that homosexuality was considered a mental illness until the 1970s. So believe what you want. I suspect you are probably gay so you are going to believe what you want no matter what I say.

          • I am arguing that sodomy is a mortal sin and the inclination is also sinful, not just disordered, as it is lust. So how exactly do you conclude I am gay? I can certainly conclude you objectively have no reading comprehension.

  8. The German bishops who push sodomy are either sodomites themselves, or are guilty of perpetuating some other grave and unrepented personal sin (often involving the sixth commandment).

    Any holy bishop who loves his sheep will lay down his life to save them from eternal damnation.

    Reply
    • I remember a woman in 1994 telling me that her uncle priest told her the church is finished in Belgium because all her priests are homos.

      I said no way.
      I was sooooooooo wrong!

      Reply
      • What’s the Church attendance in Belgium now? 3 or 4% at most, as is obvious from the massive church closures. With “shepherds” like Daneels, it is amazing that it is as high as 3%.

        Reply
        • I was so stupid not to believe her.
          I met her on the March for LIFE.
          She told me that her aunt, a Dominican nun, was always ridiculed by her fellow sisters just because she wore a religious habit!

          Reply
          • I was watching something on EQTN one day about some modern order of nuns. They didn’t look like nuns or dress like them and when they began a prayer they didn’t wven cross the themselves in the name of the trinity. Even when I was anglican we crossed ourselves. Geez……

        • What’s church attendance in catholic or Protestant Churches anywhere in Europe now? They are a post Christian continent, with the exception of Poland, Hungary and a couple of other Eastern European nations.

          Reply
          • The Anglican Church of England has an average attendance of well under 1 million out of a nominally Anglican population of maybe 25 to 30 million. When it comes to “church attendance” and “membership”, both Catholic and Protestants arithmetic is more creative than a Hollywood studio’s tax accountancy. Catholic church attendance in England is maybe 900,000 out of 5 million “members”. Membership has been boosted by East European immigration since 2004, but even that unearned increase will only postpone decline to fringe status. Other west European countries are no better off.

          • I’ve wanted to go to England and Germany and Austria for a long time but finances prevented it. But what I’ve heard from friends who’ve been to those places is that they only people atttending their beautiful churches on Sunday are American tourists. That’s sad.

          • St. Ludwig in Munich is ususally rather filled on Sundays. In Berlin (Protestant by tradition) the churches would be empty. Probably also in Cologne (Catholic by tradition).

    • Look at the bishop Bling
      Spending money on his luxurious home!
      Instead of being shipped to a monastery he was promoted in the Vatican!

      Reply
  9. The heretical faggots in the church want approval for all the other faggots like them. They conveniently forget that sodomy like murder is a sin crying out to heaven.

    Reply
    • As one English wag asked years ago after a prayer service for people with gay problems: “When are we having a service for murderers? Or for people who defraud labourers of their wages? Or for those who oppress widows and orphans?”

      Reply
  10. Absolutely no surprise at all. Timothy Radcliffe, former world wide Master of the Dominicans, explained a few years ago how tender and wonder full gay sex can be and how it is an example of the self-giving of Christ. This did not stop him being appointed to a Vatican post, so we can only presume that his views are within the range permitted under PF.

    So, as after Sandro Magister’s article where PF is apparently blessing the idea of Universal Salvation, we can only ask: “When do we get our money back?” If sodomy is OK, plainly the Catholic Church is a ludicrous fraud with zero moral credibility.

    Reply
    • Indeed. When can we expect a news conference in which the bishops issue a rebuke to God for Sodom and Gomorrah and the Flood?

      Either the Bible is not the inspired, inerrant Word of God or we’re being led astray by a bunch of apostates (if they were ever truly part of the Church) and heretics. There’s no room any more to call these people sincerely wrong or confused. They are saying heretical things and may be leading souls to damnation.

      Reply
  11. All of this is a temptation to leave the Church immediately and join up with SSPX or the sedevacantists. We cannot expose our children to these scandals lest they begin to believe homosexual sex is permitted. Big question: When is enough, enough???

    Reply
    • The SSPX has never left the Catholic Church, archbishop Lefebvre was very clear on this. He has always remained faithful to her but he refused to follow the modernists on their wicked path. It is the modernist prelates that have separated themselves from the Catholic Church not the priests of the SSPX.

      Reply
      • Thanks. You are quite correct though the Opus Dei folks and Michael Voris would disagree. I should have said Novus Ordo Church.

        Reply
        • Don’t worry about it. It’s just that I’ve seen quite a few posters both here and elsewhere who’ve been under the impression that the SSPX is in schism or some kind of irregular situation. I can only assume that these untruths have been fed to them by modernist priests and bishops who have a distinctive abhorrence for all things Catholic. It saddens me to know this because it means that there are Catholics out there who deprive themselves of the proper mass and proper Catholic doctrine by avoiding the SSPX through fear of being schismatic. But the truth is exactly the opposite. The real schismatics, heretics, and apostates are the modernist clergy and their false teachings.

          Reply
          • You are totally correct. And the Catholic Family News is a great newspaper, the best we have. Opus Dei is opposed to SSPX for reasons not clear to me. I think they are behind the times.

          • Look at BISHOPS that belong to Opus Dei…..
            GOMEz
            Barnes
            Their responsible for all their heretical pastors !

      • Same thing Luther, the Orthodox, et. al. have said. On whose authority are we to believe that the SSPX is legitimate? If I’m going to read an article condemning–rightly–so many bishops and archbishops. why would one believe that Bishop Lefebvre was correct?

        Do not leave the Church. We have to accompany the Church to her cross just as the Blessed Mother and Saint John accompanied Christ.

        Reply
        • On whose authority? On the magisterium of the Catholic Church. The SSPX has preserved not just the sacraments but also Catholic doctrine untarnished by modernist errors. There’s no doubt about this. I’ve received through the SSPX the same doctrine that Catholics received before the Second Vatican Council. But it’s not possible to compare Catholic doctrine with what the modernist clergy is preaching, it is like an entirely different religion. I also think that the fruits of this new religion should be quite obvious to anyone by now. From the lack of priestly vocations(except from sodomites who’ve filled the ranks) to the falling attendance rates at the Churches. Not to speak of the modernist prelates and popes who have caused enormous scandal.

          So what would you have Archbishop Lefebvre do? Should he have done nothing? Remained quite? Should he have let modernist prelates control his priestly fraternity? Should they dictate what he can do and what he cannot do? No, all those things would just amount to another victory for the enemies of the Catholic Church. He did the only right thing he could have done. And thanks to his actions there are still Catholics and Catechumens such as myself who can receive the Catholic faith in its entirety.

          Reply
          • He should not have left the Church. Ever. Priestly ordinations and the installation of bishops are by the authority of the pope: SSPX has been told by the popes that their marriages are not valid, that their confessions are not valid.

            The fact that they claim to have the wholeness of truth and that they are the true Church does indeed sound just like every other schismatic group.

            Believe me, I think the modern Church is in the midst of her ascent to Calvary if not on the cross. The mistakes are mounting, faithless churchmen abound. BUT, BUT we are not to leave Her. We’ve had faithless bishops since Christ was crucified: nine went into hiding, one denied him thrice and then went into hiding, one committed suicide and one, ONE, stayed with Him to the end. One. But Christ didn’t condemn the ten who hid. He didn’t call Peter to him and say “Well, guess I need a different rock” or “Look’s John is now the rock, is now Peter”.

            Remember that.

          • Archbishop Lefebvre never left the Church, as he said himself:
            We adhere, with all our heart, with all our soul to
            Catholic Rome, guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions
            necessary for the preservation of that faith, to Eternal Rome, teacher
            of wisdom and truth.

            On the other hand we refuse and have always refused to follow the
            Rome of the neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendency that clearly
            manifested itself in the Second Vatican Council and after the Council in
            all the reforms that resulted from it.”

            He remained faithful to the Catholic Church but not the modernist prelates that have occupied many of the visible positions in the Church since Vatican II. Nor is a Catholic, as far as I know, bound to obey heretics or apostates who try to damage the Church and the faithful. In fact you have a duty to resist such attempts. Even if a bishop were to ask you to commit a mortal sin you are in no ways obliged to do that. God comes first always.

            This claim of yours that the SSPX claims to have the wholeness of truth and that they are the true Church is again no true. In fact from this FAQ by the SSPX on the new religion instituted by the Post-Conciliar Church there’s a clear admission that the SSPX does not attempt to make any claims on being the only Catholics left or by extension the only true Church.

            Likewise, we must admit that many Catholics in good
            faith still retain the true Faith in their hearts, believing on the authority of God, Who reveals divine truth through the Catholic Church, although it is often tainted to varying degrees by the principles of the new religion. Consequently, it does not at all follow from the fact that the Vatican II religion is truly a new religion, that we should maintain that we are the only Catholics left, that the bishops and the pope have necessarily lost the Faith, and that we must not
            pray for them or respect their position in the Church.

            Link is here: http://archives.sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/post-conciliar_church_a_new_religion.htm

            Again I repeat the SSPX has not left the Church. The priestly fraternity has been with her all along.

          • Do you understand the problems with your contentions? You have moreover denied the legitimacy of the Petrine Office. Therefore you’re now out-of-step with Catholicism at any point. If there were a group who rejected everything before the Council of Trent and claimed they were the pure Catholics, wouldn’t you, by your logic, have to join them and leave SSPX?

            I think VII is an ongoing disaster. But I’m not in charge. Peter seemed to think Christ going into Jerusalem was a bad idea, too. What did Christ say to him?

            Again, claiming to have maintained or to be upholding purity puts one on the same camp as Luther, Calvin, SSPV, etc.

            What would I do? FSSP or ICX.

          • In what way have I denied the legitimacy of the Pope’s office?

            If there were a group who rejected everything before the Council of
            Trent and claimed they were the pure Catholics, wouldn’t you, by your
            logic, have to join them and leave SSPX?”

            ^^There’s your problem. You seem to deny the magisterium of the Catholic Church and Catholic tradition. SSPX’s opposition to Vatican II isn’t arbitrary, it’s because the Council represents a clear break with Catholic teaching. As I’ve written several times now. And this is not something that is impossible to know. This is not an issue of claims, it is an issue of what is Catholic teaching and what is not Catholic teaching. Vatican II recognises that a person has a right to religious freedom. This has always been condemned by the Church before Vatican II. Let’s not forget about all these common religious services with heretics and pagans which were expressly forbidden before Vatican II because they imply that there is truth to those false faiths. These errors are all quite clear, they are not impossible to know and neither are they impossible to oppose.

          • Did VII deny that Catholicism contains the fullness of truth or did it simply recognize that there is some element of truth in other religions, which there is undoubtedly. There was obviously error in the thinking of Aristotle, Plato and Socrates: does this make Aquinas a heretic because he mined for the truths in their thoughts?

            Again, you’re dodging a question: would you have split off when the Assumption was declared doctrine? How about turning tail after Trent? Vatican I? Surely there were doctrines added or truths recognized at those times and surely there were prelates who took those too far and had to be reigned back in or declared anathema, right? So….you’ve separated yourself from the Church, you don’t have a pope. Do you see the problem with that?

          • Did VII deny that Catholicism contains the fullness of truth or did it
            simply recognize that there is some element of truth in other religions,
            which there is undoubtedly.

            No the council went further than that. Vatican 2 claims that other religions are ways to salvation and this new teaching can clearly be seen in all the different works of false ecumenicism and how conversion to the Catholic faith has been discouraged. This teaching goes against all the past teachings of the fathers, the saints, the theologians, and the Popes. But that doesn’t seem to bother you too much.

            Why should I split off when the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin was declared dogma ex cathedra by Pope Pius XII? It has infallibly been declared dogma, there’s nothing more to be discussed. It must be obeyed otherwise you’re a heretic. Why should I oppose the Council of Trent or the first Vatican Council? Did anything which was declared in any of those councils go against the teachings of the church fathers, the theologians, the saints, and the popes? The answer is no.

            Look it’s as simple as this if the saints, theologians, the Church fathers, and the past Popes have taught a certain thing then someone cannot suddenly come along and teach something that is the complete opposite. Because that would mean that the Church has taught error which in turn is impossible. Vatican 2 has several new teachings which are a clear break with what the Church has always taught, and they center primarily around secularism, religious relativism(false ecumenicism), collegiality, and the liturgy. These new teachings must be opposed.

  12. MALI SVETNIK PROTI VELIKEMU ZLU
    Molitev k sv. Leopoldu Mandiću proti Satanu

    Sveti Leopold Mandić je bil pogosto predmet šal in roganja, včasih celo med svojimi sobrati. A ta mali – veliki svetnik, se je z Božjo pomočjo boril proti največjemu sovražniku vseh ljudi, Satanu in ga s svojim pobožnim in svetniškim načinom življenja premagal mnogokrat v svoji mali sobi v kateri je spovedoval. Mnogi pričajo, da jim je sv. Leopold Mandić v času svojega življenja zelo pomagal in naj bo tudi vam v pomoč v trenutkih skušnjav.
    Molitev k sv. Leopoldu Mandiću proti Satanu
    Sv. Leopold, ti si polnih 40 let preživel v hudem boju proti Satana, izganjal tega prebrisanega zapeljevalca iz človeških duš. Tudi danes je Satan po grehu zasužnjil mnogo duš, jim otrdel srce, jih ločil s sovraštvom in prepirom, jim otopel vest, odvrača jih od spovedi, da odlagajo svoje spreobrnjenje, a toliko jih umre v grehu.
    Sveti Leopold, pomagaj slabotnemu človeku in ga brani pred hudičevimi zasedami. Izprosi mu spreobrnjenje in vrnitev k Jezusu Dobremu Pastirju. Naj v Jezusovem imenu, odstopi drzni Satan in naj preneha zavajati in varati duše.

    Kesanje
    Od vsega srca obžalujem , ker sem užalil/a Boga, največje in najbolj usmiljeno dobro. Sovražim vse svoje grehe in trdno sklenem, da se bom poboljšal/a in ne bom več grešil/a.
    Jezus, usmiljenje in neizmerna dobrota, vate zaupam!
    Varuj mene in mojo družino! Gospod moj in moj Bog!

    Litanije svetega Leopolda Bogdana Mandića
    Gospod ,usmili se!
    Kristus, usmili se!
    Gospod, usmili se!
    Kristus sliši nas!
    Kristus,usliši nas!
    Bog,Oče nebeški, usmili se nas!
    Bog Sin, Odrešenik sveta,usmili se nas!
    Bog Sveti Duh, usmili se nas!
    Sveta Trojica en sam Bog,Usmili se nas!
    Sveta Marija,prosi za nas!
    Sveti Leopold, častilec Matere Božje,
    Sveti Leopold, ljubitelj Evharistije,
    Sveti Leopold, skromni služabnik Božjih služabnikov,
    Sveti Leopold, hrabri služabnik sprave,
    Sveti Leopold, varuh ekumenizma,
    Sveti Leopold, tvorec mnogih čudežev,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor duhovnikov ,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor spovednikov,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor redovnikov,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor molilcev,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor spokornikov,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor poslušnosti,
    Sveti Leopold, vzore ponižnosti,
    Sveti Leopold, vzor potrpežljivosti,
    Sveti Leopolde, vzor pobožnosti,
    Sveti Leopold, poznavalec ljudskih src,
    Sveti Leopold, poznavalec prihodnosti,
    Sveti Leopold, voditelj mnogih duš,
    Sveti Leopold, razboriti svetovalec,
    Sveti Leopold, prijatelj vseh ljudi,
    Sveti Leopold, tolažnik trpečih,
    Sveti Leopold, tolažnik žalostnih,
    Sveti Leopold, tolažnik bolnikov,
    Sveti Leopold, dobrotnik siromašnih,
    Sveti Leopold, zagovornik nedolžnih,
    Sveti Leopold, miritelj zavedenih,
    Sveti Leopold, ljubitelj svojega naroda,
    Sveti Leopold, naš nebeški zaščitnik ,
    Jagnje Božje, ki odjemlješ grehe sveta, odpusti nam o Gospod!
    Jagnje Božje, ki odjemlješ grehe sveta, usliši nas, Gospod!
    Jagnje Božje, ki odjemlješ grehe sveta, usmili se nas, Gospod!

    Prosi za nas sveti Leopold,
    da postanemo vredni obljub Kristusovih!

    Molimo. Bog, zaščitnik in prijatelj ponižnih, ki si povišal svojega služabnika Leopolda Bogdana, ga napravil za orodje svojega usmiljenja v zakramentu sprave,ponižno Te prosimo,daj ,da bomo vredni z enostavno potjo vere priti do gledanja tvojega obličja na nebu. Po Kristusu Gospodu našemu.Amen.
    Bitno.net / prevedla iz Srbskega jezika/
    ( za kakšno morebitno napako se iskreno opravičujem)

    Reply
    • The content of this comment is perfect, but the fact that it is in Croatian and is quite long suggests a sort of mental illness/oppression in the commenter. Like multiple postings of trite images, I find it a little off and think it upsets the tenor of the comments section. Forgive me if this sounds abrasive, I say it sincerely and gently, as to a friend.

      Reply
      • kapim-razum-förstår-allez clar brother I never upset nuns never do big faith i got irritatateed but NOT for long FRA RP call himself Gods Man very long nose even on google ũpset at Others Me ????????????????????????❣????????????????????????????

        2018-01-20 19:47 GMT+01:00 Disqus :

        Reply
  13. The worst of every house have colluded in this Papacy. Their words are insidious and their actions perversely calculated. “A paradigm shift for all moral theology” means the destruction of the Roman Catholic Church by an organized group of renegades who take advantage of the faithful’s humble submission to the Papal potestas.

    For how long are we going to accept this scheming?

    Reply
  14. Now Mrs Hickson we need to be concerned about the Polish Bishops Conf, “The Conference of Polish Bishops is gearing to finalize guidelines for implementing Pope Francis’ exhortation Amoris Laetitia that allegedly adhere to perennial Catholic teaching of refusing Holy Communion to remarried Catholics living in adultery” (LifeSiteNews). The concern among Laity and clergy are several delays in offering guidelines interpreted as conflict within the Conference and fear of permitting communion for D&R and perhaps openness to the homosexual issue being discussed in Germany.

    Reply
    • This should make for some interesting border disputes – if not quite on the 1939 scale. In 2016 I walked across the bridge over the River Niesse from Gorlitz in Saxony into Zgorzelec, which was the eastern part of Gorlitz until 1945. So the Church guidance on Communion for divorced and remarried changed 180 degrees in less than 100 yards.

      This level of idiocy is obvious across the world. The bishops of Malta are very keen on the most liberal interpretation of AL. My own bishop here in the south of England maintains the traditional line. We have a divorced and remarried lady who lives in our diocese for half the year and in Malta for the other half. So she can have Communion in Malta, but not in Portsmouth diocese.

      Reply
      • William that describes the crumbling of Church unity under this Pontificate. Where do we find one faith, one baptism? If not among the faithful in Portsmouth and scattered here and there. What I’m starting to perceive as The Mystical Body of Christ v a Body of Apostates.

        Reply
        • We must be careful to avoid the “invisible Church” doctrine of the Calvinists. It is so tempting to think that the “true Church” is out there but impossible to identify, known only to God. This notion was condemned by Trent.

          We have the good and the bad mixed in with the separation a known date {roughly…} as the Scripture tells us they will be separated at the end into wheat and tares.

          In the meantime, we desperately need sweeping disciplinary reform; laicizations, excommunications. Probably interdicts.

          Is that possible?

          Not at present, but the “bad” within the Church I believe will ultimately be frustrated in their efforts in altering the Church and will leave, no doubt a la Luther et al, declaring themselves the “True Church”. Certainly they must be very impatient indeed right now as they are so close to achieving their goal that if that goal is not achieved in the next 20 years {and one good Pope could severely damage it} they will leave.

          Let’s not forget those others who have left in the past, Orthodox, etc, always claim “the Church left THEM”. Same thing the sodomite/Communist lobby will claim when they bolt.

          So what else is new?

          Fr Micelli’s book on the Antichrist has powerfully altered my understanding of the Church and the war she has faced and what the Church has ALWAYS looked like to those contemporaries living at any given time. We are headed for real trouble, but God is sifting His Church right now. As He has done over and over throughout history. The Remnant remains and will remain.

          Something is coming. Maybe this year.

          Bergoglio will die and the war will go on.

          In saecula saeculorum…

          Reply
    • The last I heard was that the Polish bisops we’re not going to allow Communion for D&R Catholics in Poland. I doubt the Polish people will ever be open to homosexualism as Germany is.

      Reply
    • A bunch of large, empty churches attended to by, in some instances, grafters calling themselves Catholic who are living off of German taxpayers.

      Reply
  15. Either “the complete destruction of the moral edifice of the Catholic Church” in Germany will continue, and the Church in this country will ultimately disappear, or these errors will be corrected by a good and decent pope, and the Church will be preserved.

    Reply
  16. In the prophecies concerning the Papacy from Saint Malachy of Ireland, he prophecies Peter the Roman, after which, he says, “The seven hilled city will be destroyed…..” We know the Catholic Church is the city and the seven hills are the seven Sacraments. These seven hills seem to me to be under attack and near destruction.
    Ora pro nobis, peccatoribus.

    Reply
  17. “People who feel it’s necessary for them…”

    proverbs 14:12 “there is a way that seems right to man, but it’s end is the way to death.”

    Reply
  18. If the Church wishes to halt its ever-liberalizing march toward homosexuality, the Church will need to remove homosexual priests and bishops. There is really no other way.

    Reply
    • Yes, that is it at its core.

      Yes, with sweeping laicizations, excommunications and likely interdicts as well.

      I just do not see any other way that doesn’t lead to “Anglican Communionizing” the Catholic Church. We are just about there right now.

      Reply
  19. “We have to reflect upon the question as to how to assess, in a differentiated manner, a relationship between two homosexual persons.”

    The groundwork for the morally ambivalent statement above was set in the current version of the Catholic Catechism from 1992, which uses the phrase “homosexual persons”, suggesting that there are certain persons who are, by nature, homosexual. The Catechism also says of homosexualism that “its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained, which leaves open the possibility that it could be naturally occurring, or inborn, and not necessarily conditioned by external and societal forces. But this section of the Catechism does not mention the moral evil of this sexual perversion, nor is there an explicit statement of moral culpability for sin imputed to those who engage in such unnatural and abominable behaviour. The result, 25 years later, is that German clergymen are seeking to “assess” the sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance in a positive light, and Fr. James Martin wants the Church to replace is description of homosexualism as “disordered” with his own preferred formulation of “differently ordered”, or words to that effect.

    On a societal level, with morally corrupt clergy like the ones mentioned above, we see how powerless the Church has become in effectively identifying and speaking our against the world-wide spread of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) — a pedophile’s dream curriculum/grooming program that systematically molests and pollutes the impressionable young minds and imaginations of little school children with homosexualist and transsexualist fetishism, so as to draw some of them into the practice of these diabolical perversions.

    A notable exception to the Catholic Church’s ineffectual response to the sodomizing of the world by CSE and the entire complex of Sexual Transhumanist legislation has been the Synod of Bishops of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, whose December 2016 Encyclical of the threat of so-called Gender Ideology describes the cancer-like phenomenon as “anti-human”. Read the entire Encyclical letter here:

    http://news.ugcc.ua/en/articles/encyclical_of_the_synod_of_bishops_of_the_major_archbishopric_of_kyivhalych_of_the_ukrainian_greek_catholic_church_concerning_the_danger_of_gender_ideology_78367.html

    With these things in mind, it becomes clear that innumerable souls are being dragged toward hell because of unnatural, devilish sexual perversion that seek to erase the very image of God in man, and this is happening with the complicity of many powerful and worldly clergymen under the current Vatican regime.

    Well this St. Peter Damian describe the relentless, all-pervasive, no-stone-unturned omnivorousness of the demons of sodomy in his prophetic 11th Century treatise of the subject, entitled The Book of Gomorrah:

    “This vice [of same-sex activity] is the death of bodies, the destruction of souls, pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the intellect, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, introduces the diabolical inciter of lust, throws into confusion, and removes the truth completely from the deceived mind…

    “For it is this which violates sobriety, kills modesty, slays chastity. It butchers virginity with the sword of a most filthy contagion. It befouls everything, it stains everything, it pollutes everything, and for itself it permits nothing pure, nothing foreign to filth, nothing clean.”

    Nothing pure. Nothing foreign to filth. Nothing clean.

    As with abortion and euthanasia, its life-and-family destroying co-conspirators, the only way to deal with the dragon of Sexual Transhumanism is to put it to death, not to enter into “dialogue” with it.

    May the Lord give us the love and courage (these two always go together) to fight against this assault on the human race and God’s will for his children.

    Holy Family, pray for us!

    St. Peter Damian, pray for us!

    Reply
  20. On the one hand, we see the wholesale betrayal of the Church by the German episcopacy and large numbers of the clergy and religious. The Church is voluntarily surrendering all moral authority. And on the other hand, we see the wholesale capitulation of the German politicians and ‘politically correct’ German lawmakers and police in the face of the Islamic take-over of Germany, also zealously facilitated by the media. Am I imagining things, or does anyone else see a connection?

    Reply
  21. Stewart Davies. Someone wants the eradication of the German nation, be it through homosexualisation, contraception or bred out by immigration. White genocide. The Catholic Church seems to be becoming complicit… The Rhine will flow into the Tiber and pollute the entire Western European watertable… thus poisoning the inhabitants who drink from it thereof…

    Reply
  22. “People also have the right that the grace of God should be extended to them…”, wow, the Devil’s sock puppets never cease to amaze with a stupidity so profound as to embarrass even the local village idiot imp.
    RC

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...