Tag Archives: V.O.T.F.

Jesus founded a Church, but which one?

EDITOR NOTE: The inspiration for this post came, oddly enough, from the misfortune of an elderly Canadian farmer who this week found himself up-side-down in a combine for 24 hours before help arrived. It appears (thankfully) he’ll survive, but the story reminded me of the overturning of life, both positive and negative, I found within my own week–mostly on the subject of our holy religion:

–After over 500 years of Protestant rule in England, Pope Benedict XVI humbly walked into Westminster Abbey and proclaimed–not once, but twice–himself the Successor of Peter and the one responsible for Christian unity (to applause…).

–On the other side of the pond, apostate Catholics busied themselves in Minneapolis as they organize meetings in an attempt to separate the Catholic Church in America from her spiritual ties with Rome. Good luck with that one…

–On the domestic front, I and a young fellow worker are initiating a conversation on many subjects concerning politics and religion. Coming from bible alone background my highly intelligent new friend recognizes, as I myself do, our theological differences. But, for me, it’s simply refreshing to talk with youth about such matters. Many youth today could care less about discussing matters concerning the primordial meaning of their lives: to come to know, love, and serve God in this life and be with him forever in the next.

–And then, there was the confused comments I found on the blog this week about the relevancy today of Gnostic women priests from the past…(?)

All in all, these subjects each boil down to questions regarding truth. And specifically, the truth about the Church Jesus founded.

Timely then, was this weekly e-mail update post I received this morning from the most worthy convert blog, Bread From Heaven. The post reproduced here from BFH is entitled:

Which Church Did Jesus Start?   

What follows is a transcript of Patrick Madrid’s CD: Why I Am Catholic When I Could Be Anything Else

———————————-

Jesus founded a Church.

Mt 16:17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.”I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

Let us do a thought experiment and suspend judgment about which Church is the church that Jesus founded.

FIRST CLUE:

Mt 5:1“You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.14″You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden;15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.16″Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.

The Church that Jesus is establishing is VISIBLE so that the Father will be glorified. Now this passage is not necessarily about the Church but why would Jesus give us a advice that he Himself would not take? Why would he tell us to be visible and yet build a Church and leave us all questioning which Church it was? Does that make any sense?

Now why would Jesus go to the trouble of establishing a Church and then make it so obscure and difficult to find that no one could know if they were in the True Church or not? Does that make any sense?

Jesus said, “No one lights a lamp and then puts it under a basket”

So why would he allow His Church be so difficult to find among thousands of competing beliefs that it is equivalent to lighting a lamp and putting it under a basket?

SECOND CLUE

Mt 16:17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.”I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

We see here that Jesus declared His plan to build His Church. Whichever Church this is, that He is establishing, it is His Church. He started this Church. No other human being would be able to claim to have started this church.This also is a church that is being built by Christ. Although the members of this church are human the builder and perfecter of this church is Christ Himself.

CLUE THREE

Mt 28:18 “And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

First Jesus declares, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore..”

Go ….Why?Whenever you see the word “therefore” you have to find out what it is there for? And the rule of thumb is that the answer can be found in something previous to it. And there we find Jesus saying

“All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.”

So because of the authority given to Jesus He is sending the apostles out into the world with a certain authority. Some may argue that that is stretching it. Jesus isn’t exactly saying that there. I believe He is but we can bolster that with passages such as Luke 10:16:

And Jesus said, “”The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.”

To Peter

Mt 16:19“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

And also to the Apostles:

Mt18:18“Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.

So there are a number of places where it is clear that the disciples were being sent forth with the authority of Christ. And they are being sent forth to the whole world. Not to just one country or town. Not to just this race or that, or a certain era in time, but to everyone, in the whole world, for all time, until the end of time. Jesus’ Church is a universal Church. This is not a church that convinces people to say the sinner’s prayer and then moves on. This church makes disciples…..of all nations. This is just another way of saying, “Make Converts”. When you convert someone you bring them in to the Church. And the doorway into the Church is the doorway of baptism, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Mt 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

Next we see that this is a teaching Church.

“…teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you.”

So, Jesus gave commandments for the apostles to teach. They were not just suggestions. These are teachings Jesus commanded the disciples to pass on. So, when this church, whichever this church may be, goes forth and teaches; what she is doing is not saying, “This is what we think should be taught.” But rather, this is what Jesus Himself taught us. And we are simply passing that on to you.

And then Jesus says, Behold I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Think about what that means. What must it mean?

Jesus Christ was neither a liar nor a fool. So since He was not deceiving us when He said those words, nor was He mistaken, we can rely on what He said about being with this Church that He was going to establish. That must mean that never could there have been a time nor will there ever be a time when this Church stopped or fell away or was ever vanquished by anything, because Jesus was going to be with it to protect it.

So, now lets get into the heart of the thought experiment. Let’s consider where we are today. The Catholic Church is one Church among many other churches that claim to be the true church. It is visible. People can see Catholic Churches in their town. There are Catholic schools and universities, there is St. Peter’s in Rome, etc.these all make the Catholic Church visible.

But we are not just talking about buildings. The priest, bishops, and pope are all visible. The lay people may not be prominently visible but if you are friends with a Catholic their catholicity becomes visible, sooner or later, either by seeing a crucifix around their neck, a rosary on their car mirror, pictures or statues in their home, praying with the sign of the cross, etc.

And the Catholic Church is visible in a particular way in its teachings. If you go into a town and ask for the Church where they confess their sins to a priest, and they pray for the dead, baptize babies, believe in the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, teach that the mass is a sacrifice, begin and end prayers with the sign of the cross. What church are they going to send you to? No one is going to send you to the Baptist Church, the Lutheran Church or any church other than the Catholic Church.

It is also visible because it has distinctive Catholic teachings. You might even say peculiar Catholic teachings that are unique to the Catholic Church. But there are other churches out there and some do and believe in one or two of the distinctive Catholic teachings.

So, let’s continue with our thought experiment. Let’s roll the clock back 50 years. The Catholic church is there but there are no Calvary Chapels. Chuck Smith was alive and probably still Catholic. But he hadn’t yet founded the first Calvary Chapel. It was founded in 1965.

Let’s go back 200 years to the year 1810. The Catholic Church is there. The pope, the bishops, the teachings, you’ll see all those outward signs of the presence of the Catholic Church we mentioned above. But there is something you will not find, no matter how hard you look, in the year 1810. You will not find the Mormon Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It did not exist. It had not been founded yet by the man who would establish it, Joseph Smith. There also were no Jehovah’s Witnesses in the year 1810. Charles Taze Russell, the man who would start that religion had not been born yet. There were no Seventh Day Adventists, because Ellen Gould White had not started that religion yet. There were no Christian Scientists because Mary Baker Eddy would not found that church for another nearly 70 years, in 1879.

But now let’s go further. Let’s go to the year 1510. Again, the Catholic Church was visible alright, a lot like today. It was a very messy time. There were priest scandals, the lay people were not well catechized in the faith, tumult and tension in the Catholic Church. But you can see it in 1510, the pope, the bishops, saints and sinners and everyone in between. But there is something you can’t see in the year 1510. Protestantism. It just did not exist. Luther would not pound his 95 Theses on the door of the church for another seven years. Calvin, Zwingli and many others had not yet begun to break away from the Catholic Church or the Lutheran Church. Think about that. In the year 1509 Protestantism did not exist anywhere in the whole wide world of Christiandom. No Presbyterians. No Baptists. No Methodists. No Lutherans, etc.

And if you keep going back in time you will find that the Catholic Church has always been in existence since the time of Jesus’ resurrection. The Pope, the bishops, the teachings, etc. You find popes making decisions and bishops from across the world sending to Rome or traveling there themselves to get a decision from the Bishop of Rome. Who does not want to belong and trust the Church that Jesus Christ founded. Why would anyone prefer a Church started by a man?

END OF POST

VOTF rivals rank anti-Catholics

EDITOR: Bishops speak for the Church

This blog joins with the Catholic League in condemning the behavior of the dissident group known as Voice of the Faithful. Their continual plots against and promotion of schism within the Catholic Church in America is a sure danger to authentic Catholic faith and morals including those of our children. We desire our children to grow-up in the practice of their holy faith in union with the will of God–free from such rancorous errors in service to souls in need and the Church.

Accordingly, this family of Catholic converts entrusts to our shepherd(s), supported by our prayers, the task of protecting their futures, the future of the Church, by acting now to inform by warning Catholic faithful in America on the manifest errors Voice of the Faithful represents and actively promotes.

The story follows–

Catholic League president Bill Donohue sent the following letter to Connecticut lawmakers today:

Dear Connecticut Legislator:

Some Catholics who support H.B. 5473, the bill that eliminates the statute of limitations for cases of sexual abuse, are falsely positioning themselves as being a legitimate competitor to the voice of the bishops. No group has irresponsibly assumed this mantle of authority more than Voice of the Faithful.

To be sure, lay Catholics have a right to speak to all public policy issues that touch on the affairs of the Catholic Church. But no lay Catholic organization has the right to portray itself as a substitute to the canonical authority of the bishops. That is what Voice of the Faithful has done.

In its recent letter to you, Voice of the Faithful unjustly condemns the bishops for seeking to “mislead, mischaracterize and spin the facts in an effort to preserve their temporal, rather than spiritual, authority.” In doing so, it not only goes well beyond the pale for even a dissident Catholic organization—it betrays an animus so vile as to rival the antics of rank anti-Catholics.

Voice of the Faithful is not only financially bankrupt (a reflection of its abysmally low membership), it has shown itself to be morally bankrupt as well. Unlike loyal lay Catholic sons and daughters who support the palpable reforms made by their bishops, those who support this group have never found a reform worth cheering. In other words, nothing the bishops can ever do is enough to satisfy them.

The Catholic League respectfully asks that you weigh the real-life concerns of the bishops regarding the draconian implications of this bill. And we ask that you not be distracted by those who harbor an agenda of their own.

The Adventures of King Küng vs God’swilla — What they’re saying…

Brian Coyne —  Catholica:

A Suggestion re Hans Küng’s Letter to the World’s Bishops…

Inspires bishops to look His Holiness or Curia officials in the eye and say boldly and confidently:

“Holy Father [or n.n.], please listen to me. The vast bulk of my people have stopped listening to what you and the Vatican have to say about most things. They stopped listening decades ago. You need to address that problem instead of only listening to this noisy minority and remnant who keep telling you what a wonderful and holy person you are and who are saying all these novenas for you. Those people are no longer the congregation we need to convince that Jesus and the Church have something worthwhile to offer the world. They are no longer the congregation that is going to secure our own salvation or impress Almighty God!”

But first, in order to gain the attention of bishops, has initiated a grass roots letter-writing campaign contest complete with a $25.00 gift voucher for the person “who can compose the best letter to a bishop that might persuade them to pay some attention to Professor Küng’s open letter…”

Bryan ConesU.S. Catholic :

Pope Benedict five years on

“Kung raises good, hard questions, but I fear his letter will fall on deaf ears. Now is the time for openness, for public discussion, and for a new beginning, but no one in power seems to have the nerve. The fact of the matter is that the church is now too large and too diverse to be run by a medieval bureaucracy in the capital of an ancient empire. The gospel and the disciples called to proclaim it deserve better…”

Hans Küng, well… on Hans Küng — National Catholic Reporter:

Ratzinger’s Responsibility

On celibacy…

“According to the latest Emnid-poll, only 10 percent of those interviewed in Germany believe that the church is doing enough in dealing with this scandal; on the contrary, 86 percent charge the church’s leadership with insufficient willingness to come to grips with the problem. The bishops’ denial that there is any connection between the celibacy rule and the abuse problem can only confirm their criticism…”

Celibacy again…

“Celibacy is not “holy”; it is not even “fortunate”; it is “unfortunate”, for it excludes many perfectly good candidates from the priesthood and forces numerous priests out of their office, simply because they want to marry. The rule of celibacy is not a truth of faith, but a church law going back to the 11th Century; it should have been abolished already in the 16th Century, when it was trenchantly criticized by the Reformers…”

Er, celibacy…

“Honesty demands that the pope, at the very least, promise to rethink this rule — something the vast majority of the clergy and laity have wanted for a long time now…”

Ahh.. forget it. Next!

Ruth Gledhill, Religion CorrespondentTimes Online:  

Father Hans Kung blames Catholic views on sex for clerical child abuse

“A leading Roman Catholic theologian has linked clerical sex abuse with priestly celibacy, blaming the Church’s “uptight” views on sex for child abuse scandals in Germany, Ireland and the US…”

“Father Hans Kung, President of the Global Ethic Foundation and professor emeritus at the University of Tübingen in Germany, said that the Church’s attitude was also revealed in its opposition to birth control…”

Voice of the Faithful — VOTF Alert: Hans Kung letter calls for 6 steps to address crisis

Dear Friends:

On Friday, April 16, noted theologian Hans Kung published an open letter to all bishops calling, among other things, for a new ecumenical council. The step was one of six Kung outlined as a response essential for the Church to recover from the current scandals and crises.

In the letter, Kung also says the “worldwide system of covering up cases of sexual crimes committed by clerics was engineered by the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger (1981-2005).”

Here is a link to the text of that letter, which was published by IrishTimes.com over the weekend: Open Letter to Bishops by Hans Kung

More tomorrow…

Title H/T Rev. Dennis Brown

END OF POST

‘My Son, deliver your church from the National Catholic Reporter and…

 …dissipative structuring’

Fresh off its support for federally funded abortions the National Catholic Reporter turns on the Holy Father this week… 

 

Catholic columnists are beginning to state the obvious when it comes to the enemies of Pope Benedict exploiting the current sex abuse scandal for their own ends: “It’s payback time for Benedict.”  

But, that’s not the whole story, is it?

No, it’s not. There’s a more troubling side to the NCR story… 

Here’s a bit on the underlying movements flying just beneath radar detection “inside” NCR’s airspace this week:

  • VOTF is one of the Catholic reform groups that is joining others under the umbrella “American Catholic Council.” Their first gathering is scheduled for Pentecost, June 10-11, 2011 in Detroit.
  • The goal of the American Catholic Council, in simple terms, is to create and promote an autochthonous Church; a Church both Catholic and American modeled on, as ex-Jesuit Robert Blair Kaiser says, “the Maronites, the Melchites, the Byzantines, the Copts and sixteen other autochthonous churches in the Middle East that are loyal to the pope, but glory in their own governance, their own married clergy, and their own liturgies.”
  • Actually, there is nothing “loyal” about conveners of the American Catholic Council when it comes to the Chair of Peter and his teaching magisterium. These want an independent Catholic Church in America that elects its own priests and hierarchy, condones abortion, contraception, homosexual relations, married clergy, women priests, divorce and other “radically inclusive reforms.”
  • One such group under the ACC umbrella, and mentored by VOTF, is the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform (CCCR) within the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.
  • Most telling of the many “tactics” the ACC is deploying in order to achieve its goal of re-creating a new ecclesiology, (i.e. a false Christ and false church), comes from CCCR co-chairman Bernie Rodel:

The tactic is called ‘dissipative structuring’. There are four basic characteristics of dissipative structures: 

1. Disorder and Disequilibrium – It is necessary for the system to generate sufficient disequilibrium (Disorder) within itself to create the degree of freedom within which the system’s change can take place.

2. Symmetry Breaking – For a new order to emerge, the old order must be demolished.

3. Experimentation – Breaking symmetry alone can lead to chaos unless it is also supplemented by activities which will generate new forms or configurations around which the system can reorganise.

4. Reformulation – The experimentation process leads to the development of new possible configurations, around which the system must reformulate.

  • To simplify: Dissidents believe under this theory that it’s necessary to create disorder (chaos) within the Church because the divinely instituted hierarchical nature of the Church in the world must be destroyed in order for the body of Christ on earth to finally accept the spurious proposals and reconfigured “American Church” VOTF, CCCR, and the American Catholic Council offers…

Yes, it’s payback time. But, the enemy’s attack by means of NCR and ACC proponents has nothing personal against Benedict himself per se, he’s merely a roadblock. No, this hell inspired attack on the papacy is aimed at weakening–with the intent to destroy–one of the three pillars of God’s divine revelation to man: Magisterial teaching. The hierarchal nature of the Church…

There’s a problem with this course of reformation, however, and something to seriously consider in your own reading of NCR’s article:  God is not a God of disorder but of peace… 1 Cor. 33  

The following is a combox appeal for the American Catholic Council from VOTF’s Sister Maureen Paul Turlish found on the NCR site following its attack article. I’ll leave it up to you to sniff out if it promotes a diabolic attempt at reformation of the one Church of God through means of the four basic characteristics of dissipative structures. My mind’s already made up…

This will be hard to believe

Submitted by Maureen Paul Turlish (not verified) on Mar. 26, 2010.

This will be hard to believe but the pope does have the power to turn the corner on this even at this very late date.

He is the only one who can but it depends on whether he has the will to do it. It will cost him everything and I do mean everything.

The curia has its own vested interest in opposing the pope but, again, the pope is the only one who has the power. He is the most knowledgeable of anyone about this given his former position as Head of the Holy Office. He knows. He always knew.

What will he have to do? Take the next step to start with.

For years he has been saying how sorry, etc., etc., he was and is that this happened. His sincerity is not doubted but he has not followed up by taking the next step.

He has apologized for “any mistakes that may have been made,” much like Boston’s Cardinal Law and the American bishops have said but they never actually ever said they were sorry for what they individually did or did not do, they never admitted that in so many cases that they committed crimes or were complicit in the commission of crimes.

While every country, Ireland, the States, Australia, Germany, etc., has its own variation on this horrid theme, the bishops, generally, have not admitted guilt. In the U.S. they have not.

In the United States no bishop, not even Cardinal Law, left his diocese in disgrace. Law was actually rewarded with his present position. He got to vote for Benedict XVI, he heads important church committees and such.

Auxilary bishops in Boston received their own dioceses like William Murphy and John McCormack to name just two.

Mostly the Catholics I have talked to fall into two groups. Those who have walked away from the institution, although they still think of themselves as “Catholic” and they always will be, and those who are angry and want to help in the reformation of the church. Voice of the Faithful members, www.votf.org have joined with others, the movement for an American Catholic Council, www.americancatholiccouncil.org, to start that going. Bishops in the U.S. and I suspect other countries have as we say, “cut a deal” with individual state prosecutors to avoid being charged criminally.

Yes, the church has lost its way. Leadership, all male remember, has failed big time but why?

Unless the pope admits that there were broad, fundamental, systemic and endemic reasons that allowed, permitted, facilitated this happening and then works with all interested parties to correct those flaws, developing a new paradigm for governmental leadership in the church, the church will evenually(sic) bleed out.

The church’s ministry is pastoral. It should be reaching out in every way possible, first to victim/survivors then to all members who have been affected by this this. The bishops should be welcoming of any group that wants to help, but they aren’t very welcoming.

Leadership hasn’t really been doing this, they refuse to meet with people, they bad mouth groups like Voice of the Faithful and they continue in the U.S. to viciously oppose statute of limitation reform in the individual states by the power of the states’ Catholic conferences, and remember, we have 50 of them!

No, actions need to follow words. They need to speak Truth to Power and they haven’t done that.

Actions have consequences and bishops in the U.S. should be removed from office as should some in other countries.

They have failed the People of God.

Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims’ Advocate
New Castle, Delaware, USA

You may contact sister with your concerns. Or, better yet, simply pray for her conversion as with all of these…

END OF POST

Lovingly Crushed: Catholic Coalition for Church Reform

New Warning in Arch. St. Paul/Mpls: American Catholic Council satellite group says Archbishop is using his power to crush them...

JanetHauter1
Janet Hauter, member of the bankrupt dissident group VOTF and now Co-chair of the American Catholic Council, addresses the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform in April.

Stella Borealis roundtable blogger Adoro said it best over on Abbey – Roads:

That […The Official warning on the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform within the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis] really wasn’t written for the participants. It was written to inform the public that they aren’t part of the Church. It’s the job of the Bishop to state those things and I believe that canonically, he MUST publish such a document.

It also establishes grounds for canonical penalties as certain things must be promulgated.

Perhaps future excommunications, even.

Below is the warning statement from the Archdiocese followed by the CCCR response. Let us pray that these folks, the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform and the American Catholic Council, come to their spiritual senses and repent, realizing that God is not directing their actions in opposition to His own Church…

OFFICIAL STATEMENT FROM THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SAINT PAUL AND MINNEAPOLIS

It has come to the attention of the Archdiocese that a group calling itself the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform (CCCR) is planning a 2010 ‘synod’ in the Archdiocese entitled, ‘Claiming Our Place at the Table’.

While the agenda for the proposed synod purports to be an exploration of the role of baptized Catholics within the institutional Church of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, it is not being conducted under the auspices of the Archdiocese, the universal Roman Catholic Church, or any entity or organization affiliated with the Archdiocese or the universal Roman Catholic Church.

The Archdiocese wishes it to be known that the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform, the 2010 synod, and individuals endorsing the same, are not agents or entities of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis or the Roman Catholic Church. Moreover, the Archdiocese wishes to lovingly caution those members of the faithful participating in the ‘work/study groups’ and intending to attend the synod of the potential that the issues on which CCCR will seek reform are magisterial teachings of the Church, and are therefore to be believed by divine and catholic faith. The Archdiocese also wishes to remind the faithful of its need to shun any contrary doctrines, and instead to embrace and retain, to safeguard reverently and expound faithfully, the doctrine of faith and morals proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church.

CATHOLIC COALITION FOR CHURCH REFORM RESPONSE

Dear Friends of CCCR:

The Archdiocese has issued another statement regarding the status of the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform (CCCR). The first one was on the occasion of our founding prayer breakfast on April 18, 2009. The most recent statement appears in the Catholic Spirit of August 13, 2009. It seems there are some issues that need clarification.

The published statement bears the coat of arms of the Archdiocese but there is no name of the person issuing it. We are presuming that it was issued with the authority of Archbishop John C. Nienstedt. No one from the Archdiocese has spoken with us directly.

The Archbishop is entirely correct that CCCR does not act in any official capacity for the Archdiocese nor is it in any way sanctioned by the Archdiocese. Nevertheless, we are Catholics who reside within the Archdiocese and we are committed to using whatever gifts God has given us in service to our local church. In announcing our Synod of the Baptized for September 18, 2010, we presumed, as an independent organization, that we could name our local church without including the information that we had not been authorized to do so. We apologize to anyone who thought we were claiming authorization.

After the first Archdiocesan statement in April, issued by the Chancery Office, we informed the Vicar General of our identities and our activities and asked for conversation with him. Our last letter asking for a meeting was sent Monday, August 10.

The Archbishop has nothing to fear from us. If the problem is that we are calling our 2010 conference a “synod” and only bishops can officially call a synod in ecclesiastical practice, he need only ask us to consider renaming it. To us, our use of the word “synod” signifies the participation of all the baptized, not just the ordained baptized, in the process of directing the local church. Since Vatican II, we have been unwilling to abdicate our baptismal responsibility for the direction the church takes.

Better even than asking us to reconsider the name, the Archbishop could offer to partner with us in calling a Synod of the Baptized. Instead of using his power to crush us, he could join with us to invite the whole Archdiocese to think about and discuss how we can further the mission of Jesus together.

That is precisely what we are attempting to do in the work/study groups the Archbishop “lovingly” warns people to shun for their own good. One of the work/study groups is discussing Catholic spirituality, what characterizes it, and how it can be nurtured within the local church. One of the groups is entitled Catholic Identity/Christian Identity. It is attempting to articulate the values of the institutional church that may be undercut by contemporary culture. Another group is discussing social justice and how the local church can improve in its commitment to the marginalized. Still another group is focusing on the importance of the role of bishop in the local church and the necessity of the relationship of leader to the body of the church. We are discussing human sexuality, church governance and authority, the “emerging” church, children and families, and clericalism. We have so far made no statements or recommendations for reform on any of these topics. Does discussing the questions threaten the Archbishop’s authority, church doctrine, or the well-being of the local church? We hope not.

We ask you to write to the Archbishop asking him to re-think his censure of us and asking him to back us in our effort to live up to our baptismal calling. We are asking for a meeting with him and will keep you informed.

Archbishop John C. Nienstedt

Archdiocese of St Paul and Minneapolis

226 Summit Avenue

St Paul, MN 55102

Send us a copy of your letter, if you want, at 2080 Edgcumbe Road, St. Paul, MN 55116.

CCCR Board Co-Chairs

Paula Ruddy

Michael Bayly

Bernie Rodel

END

Catholic Coalition for Church Reform meeting: facilitating ‘dissipative structuring’ within the local church

“Claiming our place at the table!”

neri3-770224

“Ah, hey…, anybody got a rope?”

The blog Liberal Spirit commented the other day on the recent monetary resuscitation of the dissident church group Voice of the Faithful, and afterword had this to say:

VOTF is one of the Catholic reform groups that is joining others under the umbrella “American Catholic Council.” Their first gathering is scheduled for Pentecost in two years, June 10-11, 2011 in Detroit.

SPEAKING OF BANKRUPTCY…

The goal of the American Catholic Council, in simple terms, is to create and promote an autochthonous Church; a Church both Catholic and American modeled on, as ex-Jesuit Robert Blair Kaiser says, “the Maronites, the Melchites, the Byzantines, the Copts and sixteen other autochthonous churches in the Middle East that are loyal to the pope, but glory in their own governance, their own married clergy, and their own liturgies.”

Loyalty to the pope? Right…

beggarNever mind that America is at this very moment in history standing “ragtime” on the corner: morally, financially, and spiritually bankrupt, purveyor of child holocaust (abortion) at home and abroad, is owned part and parcel by Communist China, and flirting itself with the idea of actually accepting (or being force-fed) socialism as a way and means of American life, schismatics today want now to re-create an American Church with American values divorced from the Eternal City, Rome.

The truth be told, it makes sense from their point of view–that of the world.

Conveners of the American Catholic Council want an independent catholic church that elects its own priests and hierarchy, condones abortion, contraception, homosexual relations, married clergy, women priests, divorce and other so-called “radically inclusive (see: Imploded Episcopal Church) reforms.” But, the Bottom line of such heresy and schism–and sure warning for all faithful Catholics concerned for their eternal salvation and that of their families–is this:

They’re pressing to create a false Christ and false Church.

One such group under the ACC umbrella is the newly formed Catholic Coalition for Church Reform (CCCR) within the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

On Friday, April 17, 2009, a statement by the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis was issued concerning the “Catholic Coalition for Church Reform” (CCCR), which read:

“The “Catholic Coalition for Church Reform” is a self appointed group that is advocating changes that are in direct conflict with the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. This group has no affiliation with the Archdiocese or its parishes.”

Despite Archbishop Nienstedt’s notification to the faithful CCCR scheduled its second planning meeting on July 15th, at St. Edward Catholic Church in Bloomington, MN. It appears as if the meeting was moved from St. Edwards to another location because of lay contact with the Archdiocese protesting the group meeting on church grounds and its disobedience to the Archbishop. Yet, the meeting was held anyway.

FACILITATING DISSIPATION IN ST. PAUL /MPLS…

A recap of the CCCR meeting is found here, but among the most telling of “how” the coalition will achieve its goals of re-creating a new ecclesiology in MPLS/St.Paul was offered up by CCCR co-chairman Bernie Rodel. According to Michael Bayly’s Post:

“Rodel observed that in the Church today we are witnessing (and, in many cases, participating in) “dissipative structuring,” a process by which a system (in this case the Church) lets go of its present form so that it can reorganize in a form better suited to the demands of its changed environment.

“Dissipative structures demonstrate that disorder can be a source of new order,” said Rodel, “that growth appears from disequilibrium, not balance. Disorder and disequilibrium are the conditions necessary to awaken creativity. Inherent orderliness will follow.”

Rodel concluded his remarks by observing that “events like tonight’s meeting, the ongoing meetings of the work/study groups, and next year’s synod are facilitating dissipative structuring within the local church. Such structuring will, in turn, foster the emergence of a collective creativity crucial for reform and the creation of a kin’dom centered Church.””

What? Yea, I thought the same thing. “What the hay is dissipative structuring?”

Here’s a quick rundown on the theory (see: gobbledygook) of dissipative structuring within organizations (in this case, how CCCR will be acting out within the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis):

There are four basic characteristics of dissipative structures, (think energy theory here) which define the elements of system–Catholic Church–transformation. These are:

1. Disorder and Disequilibrium – It is necessary for the system to generate sufficient disequilibrium (Disorder) within itself to create the degree of freedom within which the system’s change can take place.

2. Symmetry Breaking – For a new order to emerge, the old order must be demolished.

3. Experimentation – Breaking symmetry alone can lead to chaos unless it is also supplemented by activities which will generate new forms or configurations around which the system can reorganise.

4. Reformulation – The experimentation process leads to the development of new possible configurations, around which the system must reformulate.

To simplify further: Dissidents believe under this theory that it’s necessary to create disorder (chaos) within the Church because the divinely instituted hierarchical nature of the Church in the world must be destroyed in order for the body of Christ on earth to finally accept the spurious proposals and reconfigured “American Church” CCCR and the American Catholic Council offers…

There’s one big problem with this theory:

God is not a God of disorder but of peace… 1 Cor. 33

WORSHIPPING IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH: HOW YOU CAN HELP THE CAUSE OF PEACE IN ST. PAUL/MPLS.

1. Don’t participate. Warn your family, friends, and fellow Catholics of the spiritual danger(s) involved in falling for propaganda (errors) coming from representatives of either the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform or the American Catholic Council within your diocese. Especially, be on watch for advertisements that promote “Synods of the Baptized” or invitations to meetings found within parish bulletins describing “Catholics coming together to dialogue on difficult Church issues…” This smokescreen tactic was used recently within a bulletin at St. Joan of Arc Catholic Church in Minneapolis.

2. Contact your pastor in person or by e-mail and (respectfully) inform him about the dangers CCCR and the American Catholic Council represent within the Archdiocese.

3. Contact Archbishop John C. Nienstedt by e-mail and (respectfully) inform him of the same here: <communications@archspm.org>

4. Pray for all those suffering from a spirit of constantly taking umbrage: with Church, Church doctrine, and defiance of divinely instituted authority–in this case, the Catholic Church and Archbishop Nienstedt.

END

HAT TIP: Madhukar Shukla ART: “The Writer”

State Vs. Church in Connecticut? Try V.O.T.F. Vs. Apostolic Church in America…

judasbetrayal 

Quasi-Masons    BREAKING NEWS: CONNECTICUT BILL PULLED

      In Monday’s, March 9th, 2009, online edition of the National Catholic Reporter Tom Gallagher (VOTF) wrote the following within his article A Proposal: Look to Civil Law to reform parishes:

The parish is the primary institution where the church lives out its life. “The parish is a beacon that radiates the light of faith,” Pope Benedict XVI said in December. “Thus it meets the most profound and authentic desires of the human heart, giving meaning and hope to the lives of individuals and families.”

The pope speaks of an ideal. The reality in the United States’ 19,000 parishes is, unfortunately, quite different. Far too often, the local institution designed to radiate the light of faith is dulled by structures that impede the church’s mission.

      Mr. Gallagher is right. And those structures that dull the radiant light of our faith and impede the church’s mission are those structures of organized dissent such as the group he represents, Voice Of The Faithful (VOTF) in Connecticut, and other quasi-mason-like entities undermining the Catholic Church in America today. Groups such as (Fidelity Warning):

Accountability in Connecticut

      Despite perhaps the half-truth that the church-imperiling Bill #1089/2009, introduced in the Connecticut legislature by Rep. Michael Lawlor and Sen. Andrew McDonald (that would in effect order the Catholic Church to reorganize), is seen by many as pay back by Lawlor and McDonald in attempting to silence the Church over moral issues, it appears now that the full truth behind the impetus of this attack, (and those responsible for it), is beginning to surface.

From the Journal Inquirer :

HARTFORD – The co-chairmen of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee say a bill that Catholic bishops contend would strip the church of control over its finances did not originate from their desks and is not an “attack on the church.”

In a statement issued this afternoon, the co-chairmen, Sen. Andrew J. McDonald, D-Stamford, and Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, wrote:

“It has been incorrectly characterized that this legislation originated from the two of us as an attack on the church and freedom of religion. That is not the truth, and the facts do not support such a claim.

“In reality, this bill was proposed and written by a group of faithful Catholic parishioners from Fairfield County who asked the Judiciary Committee to consider giving the subject a public hearing,” the statement continued. “Especially considering the fact that one of the large-scale embezzlements which gave rise to this proposal originated from a parish corporation in Darien, a town that Senator McDonald represents, we decided to give these parishioners a chance to present to the Judiciary Committee a case for their proposed revisions to existing corporate law.

“A lot of misinformation has been spread about this proposal, and we ourselves are still learning exactly what its impact would be. We are keeping an open mind to what these parishioners have to say about their church, and we respectfully ask that others give them the courtesy of listening to their proposed changes in the existing state law governing Roman Catholic corporations.

“We ourselves are questioning certain aspects of their proposal and even the constitutionality of the current law. Despite what has been portrayed, we have not endorsed nor are advocating for this proposal,” they added.

      On March 11, there will be a public hearing on this bill. Bridgeport Bishop William Lori and Hartford Bishop Henry Mansell are imploring Catholics to attend. Perhaps, then, we’ll discover the name of the “faithful Catholic organization” who approached the legislators with the bill. I’m betting, as I said yesterday, that this attack on the apostolic nature and authority of the Church was born from Voice of The Faithful. One thing is for certain, if it’s discovered to be true that VOTF is responsible for such public irresponsibility in attempting to harm the Church they should be held accountable, (and in full measure), by proper authority.

We believe in one Church

      Below you’ll discover why some years back Bishop Lori (with forthought) refused to allow VOTF within his diocese, and today it seems we know why. Here’s VOTF in its own words from a affiliate review:

When Bishop Lori learned of the formation of a VOTF Chapter, he was not supportive. He mentioned to Fr. Blanchfield that he was against it because of certain speakers who had addressed the National Meeting in Boston. In particular, Frances Kissling who had publicly supported Freedom of Choice in the past.

We asked for a meeting with Bishop Lori, but he sent his Vicar General, Fr. Cullen to meet with Fr. Blanchfield and our Board. We met with the Vicar General and Fr. Blanchfield at the St. Jerome rectory. Fr. Cullen told us that the bishop would let us meet on church property if we: 1) Changed our name from VOTF to some other name, and  left the National VOTF, and 2) each member of the Board agreed to sign some kind of affidavit affirming our agreement on several Church proclamations regarding abortion, birth control, women’s ordination, celibacy, etc. On the spot, none of us would agree to this, and the meeting broke up. Subsequently, Bishop Lori forbade Fr. Blanchfield from letting us meet on St. Jerome property or anywhere else in the diocese.

Bravo, Bishop Lori, Bravo.