Cardinal Christoph Schönborn continues to make news with various heterodox and equivocal messages coming out from his Diocese of Vienna, Austria. Not long ago, we reported on his website’s promotion the gender theory; now the Parish Bulletin for his Cathedral of St. Stephen in Vienna contains an article presenting a homosexual couple with their adopted son.
As the Austrian Catholic website Kath.net reported on 30 September 2016, this official Church bulletin has an article with a picture showing a celebrity (a media man), Georg Urbanitsch, together with his male “partner” and their adopted son. Under the title “We Are Family,” he himself describes in glowing ways the life of his “family.”
Kath.net reports, as follows:
He [Urbanitsch] lives together with the Viennese restaurant owner Bernd Schlacher. At the end of 2012, they entered a civil union. In 2014, they adopted a boy from South Africa. They have had him baptized at the Parish of the Cathedral of St. Stephen. The Parish priest, Toni Faber – who, according to the weekly magazine profil, himself had also earlier participated at the celebration of their civil partnership – administered the Sacrament [of Baptism].
The 48-page-long official Parish Bulletin of St. Stephen’s Cathedral, which also contains many articles concerning aspects of Amoris Laetitia, can be seen here. On page 17 of this bulletin, the author Urbanitsch says the following:
Rainbow family, modern family, unconventional family…. There are many descriptions for our fine nest of security. But, we do not feel that we are something unusual or “different.” We – that means Daddy Bernd, Papi Georg and Son Siya.
Cardinal Schönborn has thus effectively given further scope and support to the undermining of the Catholic moral teaching – whose very aim and meaning is to bring souls to heaven. It thus gives further doubt as to whether this cardinal is, indeed, the right man to help the pontiff of the Catholic Church move in the right orthodox direction. In this context, it might be worthwhile remembering what the courageous prelate, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, said to me in an interview in 2015:
Practicing Homosexuals are persons who, in a grave manner, sin against the will of God the Creator, because, by their acts, they reject the fact of the Divine Order of the sexuality. However, the order of the sexuality consists now only of two sexes, the male and the female, and this order has been created and declared as being good by God’s infinite wisdom and goodness. If someone revolts consciously in his acts against this order, then he revolts against God’s wisdom and love and finally rejects the Will of God in a very important area. If someone rejects God’s Will in an important area, he then replaces God with his own will, his own insights and with his own passions. Such a person thereby excludes himself from the eternal community with God, from eternal beatitude, and he chooses eternal damnation. Practicing homosexuals, just like any sinner with a mortal sin on his soul, find themselves in a most dangerous spiritual situation – as if standing at the edge of an abyss – because they run the danger to lose their soul for ever. Christ suffered and shed his Precious Blood at the Cross, so that no one may get lost eternally, but, rather, will convert, i.e., will, instead, fully accept the Will of God in everything, and his soul may thereby be saved. Christ can not save and forgive anyone who does not convert (see Mk 4: 12).
I just have one question-WHO would eat at that restaurant…lava sus manos if you do. It’s time for a fracture in the Church, throw out every last Schonborn even if it is a violent revolution.
A-PARTY-OF-TWO
There are some couples
O, so nice
As nice, as nice
Can be.
They have their weddings
Roses, rice
And plan forever
“We”.
Everyday
A-party-of-two
A-party-of-two
No more.
They know the latest
Things to do
That pleasure their skins
And pore.
“What need for seeds
And eggs take space
We desire to be
In lust –
Our lives are erotic
Never neurotic
In cholesterol-free
We trust.”
Some of these couples
Are Bob and Rick,
Some are Michael
And Sue,
No matter their genders
Each has his trick
Of blending secretions
Like stew.
Much money they’ll save
On themselves these few
From their vows ’til their graves
They’ll live well…
But because their INTENT
Was a-party-of-two…
Alone they’ll be seated
In Hell!
As we are now seeing, the vows don’t last to the grave. And two often becomes three or more, at least with the fellows, following the nature of their hyper-expressed male tendencies.
And there was a rumor he was going to be the next Head of the CDF?
“Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity. ”
Pray and do penance
Does their conscience really tell them that this is the Will of God? Don’t stop praying!
Is it me, or is there some real theological, dogmatic, faith filled, God mandated rift going on here that has escaped a teachable moment. By this I mean, how do we as Christians/Catholics love our brothers and sisters without endorsing their sin (which we all have), how do we welcome and include the sinner without accepting their sin as being inconsequential? There seems to be a rather large chasm/rift/disconnect in how we as Christians respond to issues such as this. What are we being asked here with Schonborn’s attitude? Is he celebrating this family even though it is sinful? Does he consider it sinful anymore? Are they committing acts of sin, to be forgiven when confessed, or like a tote board with every click of the second hand they are sinning (discrete v. continuous)? What does this issue say about other forms of sins, just as serious, that people have committed/committing who practice/enjoy the full community of their faith without consequence? What does our faith/church/God/Jesus say about the little boy who was adopted? Is he not entitled as a child/person/human being to have a loving home with people who care for and about him? I never hear any of these issues addressed and instead hear the extremes of both end of this issue. Why is it so difficult for the church to actually teach what is the proper response, or does it even know, or is it up to each of us to determine that for ourselves? I refuse to reject/hate/shame/marginalize people (any people) as that goes against our Lord’s mandate to love one another and yet not endorse anything people do that is considered sinful?
Well, for starters, the Church teaches that children are entitled to a mother and father, not a dad/dad or mom/mom combo. It is immoral to place a child in a home that is disordered at its foundation. I believe you are being disingenuous by saying you “never hear any of these issues addressed.” They are addressed in the CCC for one thing, and Catholics have been conditioned for a good long time now to be not only tolerant, but accepting of the sin of sodomy. How is that love? How does that reflect God’s love, Who is Love? Was St. Paul being hateful when he said in 1 Corinthians 6 that “fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals” will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven? Or was he being loving by pointing out the sin and warning them of eternal damnation? Please let us know what you believe is the proper response. Perhaps we could learn something.
The church does not speak clearly about the nuances of our faith and how we are to respond to people in what ever state they are in, and your response continues that trend. I am not denying the mother/father dynamic, but am wondering if having a child languish in an orphanage/foster homes does more damage than having some form of “family”. Your comment, “Catholics have been conditioned for a good long time now to be not only tolerant, but accepting of the sin of sodomy” still does not answer my question of how to respond. You will have to be more specific. Then there is still the issue of those who commit other grave sins who are allowed to continue as a respected member simply because their sin is not so obvious. What is to be said for those who come to church even though they are sinful in the hopes that they will see the presence of God/Jesus through the welcoming, charitable, caring community in the hopes of conversion. If we could look at this issue in the light of any other behavioral change/conversion with the tight grip of recurrent sinfulness, it often takes a while for people to surrender to God/Jesus and how do we as Christians walk with people to guide them. Your comment seems so concerned with condemning homosexuality that it fails to offer any Christian charity/faith sharing for people to even want to approach God/Jesus for conversion. So you really have not answered my original questions ” By this I mean, how do we as Christians/Catholics love our brothers and sisters without endorsing their sin (which we all have), how do we welcome and include the sinner without accepting their sin as being inconsequential”
You obfuscate. An orphanage is a form of “family”, right? I mean, right? So what makes a homosexual “family” any better than an orphanage “family”? No, you be specific. I asked you several questions and you attacked me for “condemning homosexuality.” I do, as my Father in Heaven and Christ’s Church teaches, condemn the sin of homosexuality. I do not condemn the individual dealing with that sin, just as I do not want to be condemned for my many sins. If you are a Catholic, you should know that we all come to Church as sinners. The bottom line is the intent to STOP sinning, regardless of the kind of sin. A priest and the parish community should be of great aid in that spiritual endeavor. However, as we can see with Schonborn and his “poster family”, he would rather help the individuals continue in their sin, and confuse the rest of us about what is right and wrong. What he does is great spiritual violence to those who suffer same-sex attraction and yet do not sin, and to those who would warn of the eternal consequences of the sin of sodomy. Now, you answer my questions regarding St. Paul and what it means to truly love.
I am not trying to start a fight here, perhaps you misunderstand my tone. In answer to your question,
” An orphanage is a form of “family”, right? I mean, right? So what makes
a homosexual “family” any better than an orphanage “family”
Orphanages in the traditional sense does not give much if any personal attention to children. Everything is done as a group which is great on some levels, but not so on others. There is no parental figure that is watching out for them intimately, but workers who take care of basic needs. Would any child flourish in a perpetual school/daycare environment? Then there is deprivation of children to have anything of their own, whether it is toys, supplies, privacy. It is institutional in dynamic. Foster homes are better, but it is still not a home in all its meanings. Children can be put in several foster homes for whatever reason the foster parents no longer can care for the child. This instill a sense of unwantedness, rejection, and can cause life long damage even with the best intentions. If a child can be adopted, given a loving home where parental figures love and care for them, be the foundation of family whether irregular or not what is the problem with that. Even if the parents were husband and wife, would they not have private marital intimacy ensuring even then that the child is not exposed to what is going on? Same sex couples, which must go through the same rigorous screening as any couple, would need to have the same decorum with their child. I am not saying that children should be adopted by people who engage in swinger type lifestyles, exposing children to a hypersexed inappropriate lewd environment either. There are some homosexual couples who value traditional family lifestyles, and I don’t see how that is worse than orphanages/foster homes.
You certainly have an agenda, though. Sodomitical lifestyles may have some of the attributes of a normal nuclear family; however, in the end they always model homosexuality and leave the child with a severely disadvantaged upbringing. In an orphanage they would not be continuously subjected on an intimate level to same-sex sexuality, whether it be displays of affection or actual sexual acts. In this particular situation, this child is being deprived of mother-love and the right to live in a normative home where a husband and wife model a healthy relationship. Two men, sexually active with one another, can never provide what is needed for the normal development of a child. There are some children who do not have and will never have a loving home with a mother and father. Yet they survive and often thrive in foster and institutional settings. Is it ideal? Of course not. But to place children in homes where the “parents” suffer from a gravely disordered understanding and practice of normal human sexuality is an abuse. It places the selfish desires of adults before the needs and rights of the child. Additionally, you assiduously avoid commenting upon St. Paul’s admonitions regarding sexual sins. Why, I wonder?
You are naive. Putting a child in a home where perversion regularly occurs is profoundly evil.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Why should any child intentionally, by design, be denied a mother and father? The Church, in her past wisdom would never allow gays to adopt. Do you think the Church is evolving? If you do, in this regard, I fear for your immortal soul. You have been corrupted by the world.
So Elton John and his rent boy, now divorced, underwent “rigorous” screening? All the celebrity gays with adopted children undergo rigorous screening, right? My, you are delusional. It’s all about $$$$.
“‘homosexual couples’ who ‘value’ ‘traditional’ family lifestyles!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
They are living in mortal sin and they do not value God’s law.
Leviticus 18 & 20
An ABOMINATION!!!
There seems to be a Troll lurking around here!?!
See 2 Timothy 4:1-5
The Church may not speak clearly, but the “nuances of our faith” are best found in those who are living it. An excellent resource to increase understanding of the struggles of same-sex attracted men is the Joseph Sciambra podcast on this website – it’s at the top of the Podcast Archives. For more information about the loving Catholic response to persons with same-sex attraction, there is the website for the ministry Courage, couragerc.org, which also includes support for family and loved ones (EnCourage).
What’s it like to be a “gay” Catholic? It’s hard, according to blogger Steve Gershom, who wrote in “Gay, Catholic and Doing Fine”:
“So, yes, it’s hard to be gay and Catholic — it’s hard to be anything and Catholic — because I don’t always get to do what I want. Show me a religion where you always get to do what you want and I’ll show you a pretty shabby, lazy religion. Something not worth living or dying for, or even getting up in the morning for…Being a Catholic means believing in a God who literally waits in the chapel for me, hoping I’ll stop by just for ten minutes so he can pour out love and healing on my heart. Which is worth more — all this, or getting to have sex with who I want? I wish everybody, straight or gay, had as beautiful a life as I have.” http://www.stevegershom.com/other-writing/
Re “those who commit other grave sins who are allowed to continue as a respected member simply because their sin is not so obvious” – please consider that this person will also take Communion unworthily and thus bear the consequences of that act in his soul. However, this is between him and God because his sin is hidden from the Church, who can only assist with healing what is known to us. A person whose sin is in the open and who demands to partake of the sacraments unworthily tries to involve the Church in his sin. If the Church relents out of false compassion, self congratulation and virtue signaling to please its members and the culture, then the Church is no longer following Christ. This is the difference. The person in your example who gains the respect of men but loses his salvation is to be pitied, not used to justify the sins of others.
A household in which two men regularly sodomize each other (besides felching, taking golden showers, etc.) and the entire narcissistic sub culture homosexual men inhabit is an enormously toxic, depraved, environment in which to raise children. I dare say that a child is more likely to save his or her soul growing up in an orphanage than to be exposed to years of disordered erotica. Don’t kid yourself about “loving home”. These children are often just trophies to feed the couples’ disordered egos.
I don’t know the two terms you mentioned, and I think I don’t want to know…
“I refuse to reject/hate/shame/marginalize people (any people) as that goes against our Lord’s mandate to love one another and yet not endorse anything people do that is considered sinful?”
This is a sincere question. What does it mean to love one another? To will the good of the other, as other.
I take this to mean being truthful with someone who is engaging in activity that is threatening their soul, their body, and the common good. Sharing this truth with them, or with the culture at large, will make me uncomfortable because I don’t want to be disliked, or called names. But that’s what the “as other” part of St. Thomas’ definition implies – I will their good even when it contradicts my own desires. No matter how charitably this is done, some – perhaps most – will not want to hear it. Still, you may be planting a seed. Our obligation is to be faithful, not successful (i.e. the other person has free will to choose).
Thank you for understanding my intentions of bringing up questions about this issue in light of our faith and the disconnect in how we are to respond. I do my best to love my neighbor where they are knowing full well I am imperfect, have weaknesses, everything that makes us all human. I also fully accept that God’s Law is above us all and as Jesus said ” I have not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it.” He also did not spend His ministry going around condemning everyone which would be a full time job in and of itself. What was His response to the people who were also steeped in sinfulness? He lived among them, He spoke to them, He was gentle and loving, respectful, He listened to them and spoke not in platitudes or cast them away. He was not a gate keeper to God, but a door opener that allowed people in not through degradation, public shaming, but by showing us all that we are loved by God always. That no matter what the sin, we can return to Him. Is it not through this combination of Law and Love that we are to show our commitment to our faith? It is this perspective that I don’t believe the church is addressing. Jesus gathered the sinful (aka everyone) together to hear him preach. Did He go around discerning the state of sinfulness of all the people present sending away those deemed with grave sin before He fed the multitude with fish and bread? Am I not bound by faith and love for God/Jesus to consider that as just as important expression of my obedience to Him?
I don’t think there will be many successes in converting people if our faith is just about rejecting people because of their sins no matter how grave they are. In some ways it is similar to those today who throw labels (-isms) around thinking they are doing civil rights/social justice a service. What they end up doing is dividing people, entrenching people against unwarranted and most times false attack. It repels rather than engages. I am not presenting my views/concerns here as being right/wrong but to come full circle here, these are the issues that go through my head/heart and I have yet to hear our church speak about this in this light. All I hear is the polar opposites of the issue where everything is ok devoid of what the Law states, or everyone with sin should be avoided and loathed devoid of God’s love.
Erica: “Did you all see the video “Forbidden Love” out of the diocese of Rottenburg?”
Sounds like that particular diocese is aptly named.
Diabolical. Consider that these two men are sodomizing each other regularly while a little boy sleeps in the next room. The Church is celebrating this. Let that sink in.
Worse than that. Most gay relationships are open. Listen to this interview about the horrors of being raised by a gay couple from a girl who lived it.
https://youtu.be/MNsIRDFJWC0
Schonborn is just as slimy as Bergoglio. They
present these sins without any moral context. Just completely excluded. As though they were pointing out some natural circumstance. An interesting point which we should sympathize with. This has been the approach of PF and his gang for the past 3+ years. And every now and then he throws a bone to faithful Catholics. Some pious sentiment on the need for stable families, even as he endeavors to destroy family and true marriage.
Many perhaps most Catholic hierarchy are cafeteria in respect to scripture ( Romans one in this case) and Aquinas and the Fathers were consciously adherent to every single bible verse…what Christ told Satan was “every word that comes forth from the mouth of God”….and in another place…” and the scriptures cannot be broken”. The very loose school of Fr. Raymond Brown won out over all opponents in the seminaries for years. Scripture became something optional as to affirming it
while up til Pius XII, it was sacrosanct. Pius XI insisted on wifely obedience in sect.74 of Casti Connubii as does six NT verses. St.JPII twice used a phrase from Ephesians only to effectively confuse even the CDF office into not broaching the topic at all in the catechism. Benedict in section 42 of Verbum Domini insinuates that the herem massacres were sins and not ordered by God and St. JPII did the same in EV sect.40 on the Pentateuchal death penalties. Portugal has a 68% divorce rate and the Amish probably have less than 1%. Scripture rocks. Pope Francis on his most recent plane interview insinuates that Christ had mercy on Judas….not based on Scripture but based on an art work he saw. Newman asserted that in the 4th century, there was a suspension of the ecclesia docens…the teaching Church. We are in that condition again in certain areas of morals and the sacraments’ reception and permanence because scripture is just a passenger now.
We would never see these things so bold under pope Benedict. I fear the scandals will tear apart the church if we continue to have this Pope. God help us.
For sure satanic. Abandon this dwelling because when the muslims attack they will level this one.
There will never be an experience of “mother” for this boy, or for thousands of children like him. What a horror to be visited upon children so that we can dance and sing in the presence of homosexuals. By supporting this madness, inflicting such damage upon poor children, what have we brought on ourselves every time we “cheer this progress”. How many “Catholics” have said the vulgar words, this is a good thing, and thereby supported the sodomy, rape, and subjection of children to homosexual predators. God help children everywhere caught in this horrible trap. Stories of how it really is living in these sodomite homes are now becoming more common. But they will be ignored by the intelligentsia, and definitely by, our clerical sodomites, who are only too easily detected now.
Notice how gay men always adopt boys. I wonder why…
I am afraid that we are going to see more and more of this open type of dissent. Pope Francis appears to be creating a Church culture that not only tolerates open dissent from Catholic doctrine, in particular regarding the family, but also encourages it. More and more, dissenters will not be afraid of making their dissent public. God is in control, so God will draw benefit out of this evil. More and more we will be confronted with the option of being faithful to the Gospel or rejecting the Gospel. More and more it will become clear where each Catholic, whether clergy, religious, or laity, stands.
False church , false pope.
There is no division in The Body of Christ. A false pope is an anti Pope.
One can only have a Great Falling Away from The True Church, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
The Church’s ultimate trial
“675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.574 The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth575 will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.576″
This sad situation was enabled no doubt by the incompetent leadership of Bergoglio – a weak and foolish pope opens the door to the heretical.
For heaven sake can SOMEBODY document the FACT that Card. SHABOOM is a free mason? It almost seems silly to be concerned about anything that comes out the heretics mouth. Perhaps there is a former legionary seminarian up to the task?
Denying the Divinity of The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, is apostasy, not heresy.
When the Catholic church goes, so goes the World and our church is certainly on a downward spiral. As Pope Benedict XVI once stated that in the future there will be a Remnant of the Catholic church but it will contain the ‘True faithful.’ I consider myself one of the remnant…..
Schonborn wouldn’t think of taking these positions without the full support of Francis. There have been troublesome bishops before and the Vatican has moved against them. When you deal with Francis, assume silence is assent.
Ironically the latest modernist heresy comes from countries where the church leaders have done an excellent job of destroying the institution in the last fifty years. In areas where the Church is growing, ideas like this are thought of as sin. How can Francis missing something that obvious? And at what point do we begin thinking of schism?
Francis, who prior to his election had excommunicated himself from Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, by condoning certain same-sex sexual relationships, and thus same-sex sexual acts, on page 117 of his book, On Heaven And Earth, and thus by denying that God Is The Author of Love, of Life, and of Marriage, denies The Divinity of The Most Holy and Undivided Blessed Trinity, rendering onto man, what Has Always Belonged to God.
It is we, who are missing the obvious.
Our Call to Holiness, has always been a call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds.
what the hell is wrong with the former Prussian empire it seems like every other day there an article about something a modernist did out there. I say the Pope Consecrates “Germany” under the virgin, or cleans house.
Does Paul’s admonition to slaves that they should “be obedient to your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ” (in the 6th chapter of his letter to the Ephesians) mean that Catholics believe in slavery?
This is out of control! They would have never flaunted this when Bennedict was Pope. Shows what the can get away with and what does it say about this Pope????
God help us!