Tag Archives: Catholic Sentinel

The Remedy For Cafeteria Catholicism

Former Protestant, now newly ordained Catholic Priest from Oregon coast reveals antidote to doubt concerning Catholic Truth…

salzilloraphael_2007b

Signs of Springtime…

EDITOR NOTE: Archbishop John G. Vlazny will ordain seven men as priests for the Archdiocese of Portland on Saturday, June 13 at St. Mary’s Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception. This will be the largest ordination class for the Archdiocese since the early 1970’s. But, there’s another newly ordained priest from Oregon, Dominican Father Raphael Mary Salzillo, and his conversion story below is excellent in revealing the constant work of the Spirit of Truth within our lives, our families, and the Church…

H/T AND STORIES : Catholic SentinelWestern Dominican Province 

I was born in Eugene, Oregon in 1976 and spent most of my life in a small town called Florence just an hour west of Eugene on the coast. My family raised me with a strong Christian faith and a very clear sense that Christ should be the most important thing in my life. Through the influence of my mother (who was actually raised fundamentalist) my family became Catholic in 1991, when I was about fifteen. I was old enough to know clearly what I was doing, and to choose to be Catholic, but my faith nevertheless remained very Protestant and generic so to speak. I was not fully open to the truth that the Catholic Faith has to offer.

Dave Visit III 018At sixteen, I had a spiritual experience in Mass that gave me the very strong feeling that God was calling me to the priesthood or religious life (at that time I didn’t know the difference). This was something I was not open to at the time and so I put a good deal of time and energy into convincing myself that it was my imagination (never fully succeeding).

I went to college at Caltech in Pasadena, earning a Bachelors degree in applied physics. Then I went on to graduate school in that field, although I wasn’t really sure if that was what God wanted for me. I enjoyed graduate school very much and it was there that the Lord started to work on me to bring me into the center of His Church, and make my vocation clear to me.

I wrestled for several years with my Cafeteria Catholicism. I believed very strongly (as many do today) that my own intellect and judgment should be the ultimate criteria for what I would believe and not to believe. It was later that I learned that the word heresy comes from the Greek word to choose. I wanted to choose my own religion rather than accepting the Catholic one as a coherent whole. In a way, choice had become a God for me, as it has to so many in our society. It was through my study of Church History and theology and through a deepening prayer life that my own intellect and judgment finally brought me to the conclusion that they alone could not get me what I yearned for. On my own I could not know religious truth with certainty and could never have more than an egocentric personal (and seemingly very subjective) confidence in the truth of my beliefs. It should have been no wonder to me to discover this since God would not have needed to reveal Himself to us had we the ability to derive divine truth on our own! That is why He gave us the Bible and established His Church, so that we might know the essential truths of the faith with certainty. It was through submission of my power of choice in matters of faith, that I came to know Jesus Christ in a much deeper way.

The final part of my faith that I finally accepted (though not without a fight) was Mary, the Mother of God. Having been raised Protestant, and mildly anti-Catholic, it was a hurdle just for me to accept the Church’s teaching on Mary’s maternal intercession. Taking it to heart and making Mary a part of my life was something else altogether! And yet, eventually I did, and that (more than any thing else in my life, save the Holy Eucharist) taught me to love Jesus. It was Mary who brought me to finally accept my vocation, and it has been her that has sustained me in this life for the past few years, with all its joys and challenges. As a wise priest once told me, when we say Hail Mary she says Hail Jesus and she can say it quite a bit better than we can!

Once I knew that God was calling me to a religious vocation and started doing research on different orders, the Dominicans with their emphasis on doctrinal preaching and study, as well as their strong community life with a streak of monasticism appealed to me immediately. After spending a year checking out other orders, and doing a lot of discernment with a spiritual director, I finally became confident that this is where God wanted me. And all I can say is that His grace has gotten me this far, so I continue to trust.

Bishop Vasa on Human Experimentation

Human embryonic stem cell (gold) growing on a layer of supporting cells (fibroblasts). Stem cells are derived from very early embryos and can be either grown to stay in their original state or triggered to form almost any type of human cell.
     Human embryonic stem cell (gold) growing on a layer of supporting cells (fibroblasts). Stem cells are derived from very early embryos and can be either grown to stay in their original state or triggered to form almost any type of human cell. Photo Credit: micrograph by Annie Cavanagh and Dave McCarthy

Experimentation, if it leads to death, cannot be justified

By Bishop Robert Vasa

Catholic Sentinel– I have written before of Catholic hospitals and Catholic healthcare and my most recent trip to Hood River for the blessing of an expansion of Providence Hood River Memorial Hospital affords an opportunity to reflect once more upon the topic.

     There has been much in the news about healthcare and health insurance and medical research and this is necessary, for the topic is a very important one. It is a very important one for Catholics. It is very important because it has very serious moral and ethical ramifications.

     The president’s recent expansion of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is one example of how important it is to operate from sound moral principles. President Obama seems to recognize that human embryos are human beings. I draw this conclusion from his own remarks. In the speech he gave at the signing of the executive order he said: “I can also promise that we will never undertake this research lightly.” This is interesting. If it is not at all immoral and if it does not involve a human being’s life then why this caveat? He continues: “We will support it only when it is both scientifically worthy and responsibly conducted. We will develop strict guidelines, which we will rigorously enforce, because we cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse.” Certainly there is good reason not to tolerate misuse or abuse in any scientific research but why make special “strict guidelines” for embryonic stem cell research? Because he knows, and science verifies, that this is deadly human experimentation.

     To further add to the dishonoring of life, while ostensibly showing a hint of respect, the president notes: “And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society.” Lest we be deceived, we need to look carefully at exactly what he said and more importantly what he did not say. He will never allow “cloning for human reproduction.” If you recall some years ago there were “cloning” discussions and a lot of wordsmithing took place. Cloning, in one argument, was defined as the creation of a genetically identical human being with the intention of bringing that individual to birth. Thus, a lot of what would be understood as cloning would not be considered cloning at all and thus not prohibited. Rather than simply stating an unvarnished truth that human “cloning” is dangerous and profoundly wrong, the president qualifies his opinion. Thus cloning for human research is not perceived as wrong, only cloning for “human reproduction.” Based on his reasons for supporting human embryonic stem cell research, which justifies the killing of an innocent human being for the sake of some vague and undefined future scientific good, we would have to conclude that cloning would be permitted for those same reasons. Provided, of course, that we did not mean to bring a cloned child to full term birth.

     Included in my comments at Hood River were the following sentences: “What does it mean to say that a particular style of medicine is ‘Catholic’?” Most obviously we note that Catholic medicine is not a different brand of medicine with its own unique prescriptions and surgical procedures. It is not a medical system set aside solely for Catholics. It is not an excessive reliance on miracles and supernatural interventions. It is not a semi-superstitious reliance on chants and incantations. Then again Catholic medicine is a different brand of medicine with its own unique prescriptions which call for a deeper reliance on God. It has some unique surgical procedures that try to excise sin and evil while not failing to treat a cancer or an infection. It is a medical system not solely for Catholics but for the treatment of the entire human person as understood by Catholics. It does not rely excessively on miracles or supernatural interventions but it does rely on these things. Central to a Catholic health system is a profound appreciation for the dignity of every human person, no matter how small. As I noted: “When the concept of a person’s worth or dignity is based on some external factor, however noble that external factor may be, there will come a time when that motive for respecting the worth or dignity will fade, diminish and disappear. As Catholics we know that personal dignity is not based on anything external to the person but based on the person himself.” This is something that the president of the United States should readily understand and respect. Sadly, while seeming to understand it, he fails to respect it. Instead, he puts scientific utility and purported medical pragmatism ahead of respect for human beings and this is unconscionable. There are things which simply should never be done, sanctioned or allowed and human cloning for any reason and embryonic stem cell research are among them. I am deeply saddened and grieved by his statements and his executive order.

     There can be a perception that I am a bit too rigorous in my insistence that Catholic healthcare needs to be significantly different from secular healthcare, not only in why we are involved in the provision of healthcare, but also in what we provide. The Catholic Church’s involvement in healthcare is certainly based on the message of Christ and his healing ministry. This is basic and fundamental. Why we are involved in healthcare needs to impact, in a very direct way, on what we do under the title of Catholic provision of care. For this reason, there are certain things which we ought never do in Catholic healthcare facilities. Certainly abortion falls into this category. This is rarely disputed. However, sterilization operations are contrary to human dignity as well and have no place in Catholic healthcare facilities. The unacceptability of assisted suicide is not at all disputed but dispensing contraception likewise dishonors the human person. Human experimentation, especially if it leads to certain death, is impossible to justify. These things may be seen by our society as either good or at least tolerable but Catholic moral principles see them for what they are, attacks on human dignity. If these things are done or condoned in Catholic healthcare facilities then a serious examination of conscience is in order.

‘The Fish Rap’ by Run CCHD: Bait and Switch by Diogenes

img_2444.jpg     Editors Note: I was tipped by a friend to this article “Bait and Switch” by Diogenes found over at Catholic Culture. I’ve been personally struggling with my Archbishop’s column in the Catholic Sentinel this week entitled ‘Self-sufficiency for the poor’. I believe as so many concerned Catholics do that the CCHD is in need of serious reform (now) and I steadfastly promote such here… I also invite fellow Catholics to join me in “The Great ACORN Rebellion of 2008″.

Here’s the article:

Bait and Switch by Diogenes

Yes, it’s that time of year again. Thanksgiving is coming, and on the Sunday before the feast, Catholic Americans will be asked once more to contribute to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), the bishops’ project to change the world through citizen activism.

Well, that isn’t exactly how the bishops would describe it. Nor is it the description you’ll hear before the collection baskets are passed. It’s more conventional to refer to CCHD as an “anti-poverty program.” But let’s make the pertinent distinction here. There are anti-poverty programs that ease the suffering of needy people through the altogether laudable exercise of Christian charity. Then there are other programs, more political in nature, designed to change society so as to abolish poverty. As I have explained earlier,the CCHD falls into the latter category; the program’s literature announces that it is “working to overcome poverty,” not alleviate it.

That’s a harder sell, in terms of fundraising. You might reach deep into your pockets to help feed a hungry family down the street; you’re less likely to pony up for their campaign to elect officials who, they argue, will raise the economic standards of society at large.

So the bishops have to work hard to keep the funds flowing into the CCHD coffers. This week, out in Portland, Oregon, Archbishop John Vlazny is doing his best.Along the way, the good archbishop acknowledges that there are cynics out there questioning the value of the CCHD approach:

Some of our fellow Catholics, sad to say, debunk the work of CCHD. They are quick to fault CCHD if one of the grantees unexpectedly and inexplicably strays from one of the sacred principles of Catholic social teaching. These things can happen when you offer someone help. They may misuse the gift.

Good point. We shouldn’t criticize CCHD if a recipient “unexpectedly and inexplicably strays” from Church teaching. But what of their straying is completely predictable? What if a recipient of CCHD funding has, say, endorsed abortion and same-sex marriage in the past, and allied itself with other organizations wholly dedicated to legal abortion and same-sex marriage? It’s one thing to give $5 to a panhandler, hoping that he’ll buy himself lunch, and learn with disappointment that he promptly spent the money on booze. It’s quite another thing to hand him the money as he stands at the doorway of the tavern.

The list of CCHD recipients is pockmarked with leftist groups whose aspirations clash with the basic principles of Catholic morality. The conflicts are inevitable. But that’s not the only problem. Because it was designed to promote social change– “a relic of early-1970s social activism,” as I put it recently,CCHD’s activities raise political questions even when there are no clear moral principles at risk.

When he cites “success stories” to illustrate the value of the CCHD program, Archbishop Vlazny mentioned minimum-wage increases and adjustments to the Earned-Income Credit– in other words, successful lobbying campaigns.

Citing an old adage, the archbishop summarizes the wisdom of the CCHD approach:

“Better to teach a young man how to fish than give him a fish.”

Good advice, that. But it’s not really an accurate description of the program. The CCHD is founded on the understanding that if you teach a young man to lobby the government, he won’t need to go fishing.

Hat/Tip: Diogenes, Catholic Culture, and J

“Harvesting and Voting” by Fr. John Cihak, S.T.D.

25th Sunday in OT (A)
Sacred Heart-St. Louis Parish, Gervais, Oregon
September 21, 2008

Fr. John Cihak, S.T.D. 

      It seems that now most of the harvests are in. Since this is my second summer as pastor here in French Prairie, I am beginning to learn the order of the crops. Something that has impressed me about the harvest is the beautiful technology that is the combine. As I understand it, a combine has a series of sieves, the first of which eliminates the largest and most obvious refuse, kicking the chaff back onto the field for baling. The rest goes through the other sieves until you have mostly seed. Now I also understand that even after combining the seed still needs to be taken to a plant and cleaned until there is a certain percentage of pure seed. The combine is truly a marvelous, though expensive, invention. (I’m also amazed at the sheer amount of cash that goes into farming. One farmer recently told me that during harvest has was spending $1,000/day in diesel fuel!) Well the harvest season is over, yet we find ourselves in the midst of another season, an election season. This is a season where we find people yelling at their televisions and it’s not some sporting event. In this election season, I think the image of the combine can help us sift through the issues and candidates of the complex political field, to help separate out the issues and candidates in order to produce good seed.

      Today St. Paul tells us, “Conduct yourselves in a way worthy of the gospel of Christ.” In everything we think, say and do, we are to conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ – in how we live, how we spend our money, how we raise our children, and how we vote. We are about to cast our vote for a new president. As Catholics, our allegiance to Jesus Christ and His Church is always first, yet because we love our country, we seek to enflesh His law in the laws of our country. Such a task reveals the heart of a true patriot – that our republic, this great experiment in democracy, would be enbued with the truth of natural law revealed through human reason and the revealed law revealed through faith.

      The first thing we should be doing for the election is engaging in the necessary spiritual work. In other words, this is a season where we Catholics should be praying and fasting for the good of our nation. We can accomplish no good deed without the help of divine grace, and prayer and fasting help to open up channels of grace in the world. We Catholics can obtain many graces for the good of our country. Because we live in a democratic republic, our vote is also important. It may not seem like much, one vote among so many millions, but it is our exercise of political power and it is a sacred duty – not one to be taken lightly. This exercise of political power is not for ourselves or for special interest groups, but for what is objectively good for our country. Therefore, we don’t vote according to our pocketbooks, and we don’t vote simply based on party affiliation. We vote according to the Truth as thinking human beings who follow the dictates of reason (natural law) and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (revealed law).

      As thinking Catholics we approach a political scene which does not completely reflect the Catholic position. Moreoever, two very prominent Senators who identify themselves as Catholics have greatly misrepresented the Church’s teaching in the media. And the bishops of the United States have responded to these misrepresentations in a statement by Cardinal Rigali of Philadelphia and Bishop Lori of Bridgeport. The Supreme Knight, Carl Anderson, has also published an open letter in many secular newspapers across the nation to one of those senators calling him to task for his position on abortion. How are we to navigate through the issues in voting for a new president, and how as your pastor can I help to clarify some of the political issues? Well, I think the image of a combine helps us. Through human reason, we can set up some “sieves of logic” which can filter the issues and candidates, and help to identify a candidate who most closely resembles the truth of the natural law and our Catholic faith for this would be what is objectively good for our country. There are two basic sieves, or categories, of issues. Not every issue holds the same weight as others.

      The first sieve screens the candidates on issues having to do with life itself; the second sieve screens the candidate on issues having to do with the quality of life. The first and most important category contains those issues having to do with life itself: that human life has an inherent dignity given by God from the moment of conception until natural death and would receive equal protection under the law. We cannot begin to talk about the quality of human life until we have first established life itself. To disregard the issues regarding life itself and to go directly to issues concerning the quality of life doesn’t make any logical sense. It is also important to remember that the issues that form the filter of the first sieve come to us from the natural law and are reinforced in the revealed law. In other words, we can know the truth of these matters through our human reason. It doesn’t matter whether we are Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, agnostic, humanist or even atheist. If we exercise our rational capacity, we can come to know these non-negotiable issues having to do with life itself, and in the current political scene they are five: 1) Abortion; 2) Euthanasia; 3) Embryonic Stem Cell Research; 4) Human Cloning and 5) Homosexual “Marriage”. Why are they non-negotiable? Because they involve intrinsically evil acts that are never, under any circumstances permissible.

      So the issue of abortion is part of the mesh of that first sieve. Abortion is the deliberate killing of an innocent human life. In this country on average, more than 4,000 children are killed everyday by abortion. At the risk of sounding dramatic, I must tell you that even Hitler and Stalin cannot claim such numbers. Just to give you an idea, every day more children are killed in this country than in the 5-year war we’ve had in Iraq, as terrible as it is (about 4,200 US lives lost to date). War is always terrible, and I think most everyone believes we should be seeking a way to end it as justly and safely as possible. I have a stake in the war myself. I have a friend who just finished his third tour in Iraq; I know of another who in his first tour was clearing mines for a civilian area and things went terribly wrong. He never came home. War is terrible, but sometimes it can be justifiable, especially to stop on unjust aggressor. Abortion, euthanasia and the destruction of innocent children in the name of research (embryonic stem cell research) is never justifiable. Without the first category of life itself, we cannot guarantee any of the issues having to do with the quality of life. That first sieve must clear out the obvious stuff before reaching the second sieve. Life must first exist and receive protection by the law before any other rights are guaranteed. 

      The second sieve has to do with issue of the quality of human life, sometimes called “social justice issues” (although we should recognize that the right to life is the first right and issue in “social justice”). Once there is human life, then we talk about the important issues that help human life to flourish. These are important issues like immigration, health care, education, employment, fair trade, economic exploitation, the environment and other similar issues. Notice, however, that they have to do with the quality of human life. They flow from the first category; they presume that life already exists and is protected. Logically these issues cannot supercede the issues of the first sieve. As a thinking human being and as a thinking believer, these are the two logical sieves to help us sort through the issues as a thinking person and as a follower of Jesus Christ. With these sieves we can help to identify the candidate that most closely resembles the truth of the natural law and the revealed law among the available choices.

      The USCCB has issued voting guidelines in a document called Faithful Citizenship which is available online, and will be provided in the back of church. Like any document, it is open to interpretation. Recently the other bishop in Oregon, Bishop Robert Vasa, gave a talk at the national Catholic Leadership Conference in Charlotte, North Carolina, in which he clarified two important aspects of Faithful Citizenship. He noted that according to the document, a pro-abortion stance would disqualify candidates from consideration by faithful Catholics. He said, “When we were working on the document ‘Faithful Citizenship’, and the issue of whether or not a person’s adamant pro-abortion position was a disqualifying condition, the general sense was ‘yes that is a disqualifying condition’.” However, during the discussions mention was made of the letter written to the US Bishops by then Cardinal Ratzinger just prior his elevation to the pontificate which noted that Catholics may in good conscience vote for a politician who supports abortion in the presence of “proportionate reasons”. Bishop Vasa explained the notion of proportionate reasons. He says, “The conditions under which an individual may be able to vote for a pro-abortion candidate would apply only if all the candidates are equally pro-abortion.” He added: “And then you begin to screen for the other issues and make a conscientious decision to vote for this pro-abortion candidate because his positions on these other issues are more in keeping with good Catholic values.” In that case, he said, “It doesn’t mean that you in any way support or endorse a pro-abortion position but you take a look in that context at the lesser of two evils.” Notice, however, how a “proportionate reason” works. It only comes into play if the candidates are equally pro-abortion.

      But what about the relationship between abortion and another important issue like the war in Iraq? Let us reason it through with Bishop Vasa. “If we had a candidate in favor of a war in Iraq in which we decimate the entire population and we kill as many civilians to impose as much terror on everybody as possible, if that was in opposition to a pro-abortion person then we would have a real conflict of conscience. Why? Because you would have a direct and intentional killing of innocent persons on one hand and the direct and intentional killing of persons on the other hand. But we do not have that issue with capital punishment, and we don’t have that issue with the war in Iraq. In this election we do not have candidates with equally pro-abortion positions.”

      Through this logic, the logic of reason and the logic of faith, the first sieve would eliminate pro-abortion candidates from our consideration. Their position would not make it through the first sieve because these non-negotiable issues have to do with intrinsically evil acts. Abortion is always the direct killing of innocent human life. It is the defining issue for a rational person who understands the natural law; it is the defining issue for a Catholic who knows Jesus Christ and His revealed law. Certain acts and political positions are always wrong, and no one may deliberately vote in favor of them. Those with a direct vote (legislators) may not support these evils in legislation or programs. Those who elect politicians (citizens) indirectly support these evils if they vote in favor of candidates who propose to advance them. Abortion is the taking of innocent human life, and to support that and to vote for those who support it and promote it means that one takes at least indirect responsibility in the deaths of those children.

      Back in the last election in 2004, our own Archbishop Vlazny also clarified the issue of pro-abortion candidates and the reception of Holy Communion. He writes, “Let me say this. Catholics who publicly disagree with serious church teaching on such matters as abortion or same sex marriage should refrain from receiving Holy Communion. These women and men need to understand that what the reception of a sacrament means in the life of the church. The reception of Holy Communion is a sign that a person not only seeks union with God but also desires to live in communion with the church. Such communion is clearly violated when one publicly opposes serious church teaching.  Reception of Holy Communion by such public dissenters betrays a blatant disregard for the serious meaning and purpose of the reception of the Eucharist.” If you are struggling with these words, pray for illumination; pray for conversion.

      So we have our two basic “sieves of logic” to help us sort through this election and every election. We are rational persons who can know and follow the natural law, and we are Catholics who know, love and strive to follow the Lord Jesus. We have our rational combine to cut through and sort the political landscape. Jesus tells us today that it doesn’t matter whether we come to the harvest at the very beginning or in the twilight of the day. He wants us working there nonetheless, and will reward us with the “daily wage” he longs to give us, eternal life.

      I think we now live in a time when we have to choose. We have to choose between being a Catholic in communion with Christ and His Church and supporting a pro-abortion position. This I know is difficult for some people because some Catholics have never before been explicitly asked to choose. But now we have to choose between those two. We cannot adhere to both. St. Paul tells us that there is nothing in common between Christ and Belial. Now the request that we choose is an invitation to conversion. I don’t know about you, but the pro-choice position will not bring me to heaven. Jesus Christ will bring me to heaven. When we go to vote in November, I would ask that you think of final judgment that will determine our eternal destiny. We will be judged according to our deeds in this life. How do I want to stand before God and the millions of little children in His arms? I know when push comes to shove, I want to be where Jesus Christ is because for me “For me life is Christ.”  

Sources:

Cihak, John, excerpts from a previously preached homily at St. John the Baptist,

      Milwaukie (23 May 23 2004).

Vasa, Bishop Robert. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091203.html

Vlazny, Archbishop John, “Public Dissenters Should Themselves Refrain from

      Communion,” Letter of May 6, 2004 [ecolumn@sentinel.org].

Vlazny, Archbishop John, “Political responsibility among Catholics”, Catholic

      Sentinel, 15 August 2008 (http://www.sentinel.org/node/9327).

Intentional Disrespect of the Sacrament of Holy Orders: Roman Catholic Women Priests Sect Says Two Women Ordained in Archdiocese of Portland

They’re Back…    

     On August 23rd, 2007, Archbishop John Vlazny of the Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon, responded within the Catholic Sentinel to a news story found in the Oregonian reporting that a Catholic woman, Toni Tortorilla, was ordained the first Roman Catholic woman priest within the state of Oregon. In his statement, Archbishop Vlazny assured Catholics within his diocese that “there was no ordination of a Roman Catholic priest at Zion United Church of Christ in Gresham on July 28” , nearly one month earlier.

Well, there was another non-ordination of a Roman Catholic priest (reportedly) at the same Zion United Church of Christ in Gresham, Oregon, on June 7th, 2008. Ten days ago…

     Same sect member Bridget Mary confirmed the illicit protestant ceremony on her blog in which Ruth Boeski joined her partner Toni Tortorilla as now excommunicated former Catholics. The same couple also made news following their same sex marriage in 2004 as recorded here by the Oregon Historical Society–which explains the rainbow stoles worn above.

     Participants in this year’s phoney ordination, according to Bridget Mary, included: Ruth Broeski in the middle standing next to first U.S. bishop, Dana Reynolds and Sandra DeMaster in deacon stole. Also in picture are priests: on far right Suzanne Thiel and Toni Tortorilla. on far left next to Deacon Sandra DeMaster is Juanita Cordero.

Intentional Disrespect of the Sacrament of Holy Orders

     Archbishop Vlazny went on further within his 2007 statement within the Catholic Sentinel, saying, “Even though Catholics were involved, the claim that it was a Catholic ceremony is wrong but, hopefully, not intentionally disrespectful of a sacrament which we Catholics regard as a precious treasure, one for which we are called to exercise reverent and faithful stewardship.”

     Well, this time there is no mistaking that the ceremony was intentionally disrespectful of the Sacrament of Holy Orders and the will of Christ which we Catholics “do” regard as a precious treasure. But more so, still, in the fact that this latest folly was intentionally disrepectful toward our own Archbishop, whom on the same day was consecrating “authentic priests” at St. Mary’s Cathedral in Portland.

The Bottom Line

     Selfishness, envy, power, pride, secrecy, disobedience to legitimate authority and serious personal sin that threatens one’s own eternal salvation are all clear signs of the obscure leader of this sect–the Father of lies… Although, I doubt that these would “recognize him” as such. 

Beware little children. Beware.

For more on the story read: 

Two Excommunicated in Canada, Two More to Follow? Archdiocese of Portland Oregon Next 

To meet the first American Catholic woman bishop, Dana Reynolds, click here