Faithful French bishop punished for being……..Catholic March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, awesomeness, Basics, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, true leadership.
The Revolution is in an uproar in France, since Bishop Luc Ravel said somethings that are markedly Catholic. Can’t have that. Via Tancred at Eponymous Fowler:
His Excellency, Bishop Luc Ravel,a Catholic bishops in the French Military Ordinariate is to be “punished” by the French Ministry of Defense, for his writings. He has also been told to cease using any emblems identifying himself with the army. The bishop apparently in his words and actions, contradicts “republican values”. No doubt, as a good Catholic he does. But then, so did the thousands who were slaughtered by the Revolution…
The bishop wrote:
“...Christians feel shackled between two ideologies. On the one hand an ideology that is a caricature of God, which has contempt for man. [That would be islam] On the other hand, an ideology that manipulates man, despising God. [That would be leftism] On the one hand, we have those who are declared and known: the terrorists of the bomb, the Prophet’s avengers. On the other hand, we have terrorists of thought, the proponents of secularism, the admirers of the Republic. In what camp is a Christian to find himself”?
“We do not want to be held hostage by Islamists, but we also do not want to be slaves of correct thought. Islamic ideology has led to 17 victims in France, but the ideology of thinking correctly [political correctness] creates annually two hundred thousand victims in the womb of the mother. Abortion has become a fundamental right and a weapon of mass destruction “
I don’t know much about Bishop Ravel, but it sounds like he’s figured out the cultural predicament facing Catholics at the moment, squeezed more and more tightly between the vise of leftism and the immovable object in islam. He also rightly understands that abortion is absolutely vital, it is the keystone of the Republican war to return our culture to the days of pagan hedonism and barbarism. Without abortion as the backstop, the great left-wing trade (we give you sexual hedonism, we take everything else) falls apart. They know that only too well, which is why they will trade virtually anything and everything before giving up abortion. With abortion, they maintain control.
But I think leftism does reveal its grave weakness in that it cannot tolerate any competing or contradictory thought. So rather than argue the point on the merits (such as they are), they choose to shoot the messenger. That’s been a dominant characteristic of the revolution since it burst on the scene in 1789. Political opponents are not to be out-argued or even out-maneuvered, they are simply to be done away with.
But, remember, it’s we Catholics and other Christians who are the real extremists to worry about. Goebbels would be proud.
Religious liberty in a secular state March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Ecumenism, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, paganism, persecution, secularism, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
add a comment
Great talk by Michael Davies below, a man who understood the critical need for unity among all faithful Catholics in the effort to reclaim our Church. Subtitle to the talk is: “The duties of a Catholic to Christ the King in a secular state. How to use the religious liberty that has been accorded to you to uphold the Kingdom of Christ.” Thanks to Sensus Fidelium for uploading this video. Please support Sensus Fidelium monetarily if you find these videos valuable and you have the means. Thank you.
I have not finished listening to the video but over halfway in there is some really good, solid catechesis here on a subject we don’t often hear enough about. Such a shame Mr. Davies passed away so suddenly and at a relatively young age, he was a great servant of the Church.
I love listening to Michael Davies talk. He goes a bit fast at times, but he has such a wonderful dry sense of humor.
Davies also has a booklet on essentially the same topic as above. You can order that here.
World turned upside down: Iranian official claims US arguing Iran’s position in nuke negotiations March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, foolishness, huh?, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, self-serving.
Sheesh. Our Dear Leader isn’t trying to even hide it anymore. A former Iranian official who defected during ongoing negotiations in Switzerland has said that the United States is basically arguing in favor of Iran’s nuclear ambitions with reluctant Europeans in the 6 party talks. Obama, of course, created a false crisis with respect to the negotiations by insisting on an end date which is imminent. Thus, he apparently feels pressure to reach a deal, any deal, before the timeline expires. Because no one has ever heard of diplomatic negotiations extending beyond the planned timeframe, no, never:
In his television interview, Mr Mottaghi also gave succour to western critics of the proposed nuclear deal, which has seen the White House pursue a more conciliatory line with Tehran than some of America’s European allies in the negotiating team, comprising the five permanent members of the UN security council and Germany.
“The US negotiating team are mainly there to speak on Iran’s behalf with other members of the 5+1 countries and convince them of a deal,” he said.
So where does “arguing in favor of a muslim terror state acquiring nuclear weapons” fit into Obama’s oath of office to defend the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic?
I know a lot of readers have huge problems with US foreign policy in the Mideast over the past several decades, with constant warfighting and silly notions of building democracy among medieval tribesmen who don’t even possess the fundamental approach to human nature that “democracy” pre-supposes, but I have to say that Iran obtaining nuclear devices – if they don’t have them, already – could represent an existential threat to essentially any nation in the world, including this one. Any normal logic regarding deterrence or how nuclear weapons tend to affect the behavior of nation states (they tend to make them more cautious) can be thrown out the window with Iran, the number one exporter of terror over the past 35 years and a nation that has shown it is quite willing to suffer huge losses in the name of advancing their religious worldview. Even more, Iran’s leaders are possessed of a messianic vision that tells them they can bring about their glorious islamic “parousia” by instigating a fight to the death with the infidel West. At the very least, Obama’s program of appeasement and tacit permission for Iran to obtain nuclear devices will, with grim certainty, set off a Mideast arms race and we will see at least Saudi Arabia if not a number of other states develop nuclear capabilities one way or another.
If the Obama Administration really is essentially Iran’s point of view with France and other European participants in the talk, we see once again how the left constantly projects their own immoral behavior onto their ideological opponents. You may recall that a few weeks ago, a number of Republican senators sent a letter to Iran’s president informing him that the senate had to approve all treaties, and that administrations change, the point being that a future administration may chuck any agreement reached with Obama that is harmful to US interests. Democrats and their media shills claimed such a letter was treason!, treason with a capital T, because…..well, because it made Obama look foolish. Which is true, he is monumentally foolish. But now we see that Obama is taking the side of a country that begins every day with regular chants of “Death to America” and which is directly responsible for the loss of hundreds of American lives in recent decades. We are also basically serving as Iran’s tactical air force in the battle against ISIS, which threatens shia Iran more than it really poses a direct threat to the US. But it’s the Republicans who are traitors. I see.
I don’t know if the disastrous conduct of these negotiations by Obama is due to his basic deference to islam or if it’s just because he’s an equally progressive ninny. After all, Iran has killed a lot more sunni muslims in recent decades than they have Christians or Jews. So I don’t quite get the angle, other than the fact that he wants a deal to try to pretend his foreign policy has not been a complete, abject failure.
Then again, some men just like to watch the world burn.
Walt must be spinning in his grave: Disney-ABC launches new program starring sicko Dan Savage March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Long long ago, way before any conversion I experienced, I used to occasionally read Dan Savage’s column in the local alternative weekly. Even though I was very much a libertine at that time, I was repulsed even then by much of what he wrote. I guess even worse were the scenarios his correspondents ostensibly presented (he wrote a “Dear Abby” for the profoundly sexually troubled, but I suspect many of the stories were invented by Savage himself), as he was beyond crude and depressingly sick even then. If anything, he has grown more deranged as the years have gone by. For twenty years he has made no bones of his hatred for all things good and pure. He hates religion, and especially Catholicism, with an intensity that is surely diabolical. He constantly attacks morals and decency as the affront they are to his own lifestyle, a lifestyle so beyond the pale of any standard of decent behavior it would likely have resulted in incarceration only a few short years ago.
But such is the environment in which we live, that the man who has said absolutely horrific things about all believing Christians and any politician he finds objectionable to his radical (even this word is far from sufficient) blend of perverse self-pleasing politics, is now going to be given a show on ABC, and to add insult to injury, the program is to be called “Family of the Year:”
Media Research Center (MRC) and Family Research Council (FRC) are launching a joint national campaign to educate the public about a Disney ABC sitcom pilot based on the life of bigoted activist Dan Savage. MRC and FRC contacted Ben Sherwood, president of Disney/ABC Television Group, more than two weeks ago urging him to put a stop to this atrocity but received no response. [Read the full letter]
A perusal of Dan Savage’s work reveals a career built on advocating violence — even murder — and spewing hatred against people of faith. Savage has spared no one with whom he disagrees from his vitriolic hate speech. Despite his extremism, vulgarity, and unabashed encouragement of dangerous sexual practices, Disney ABC is moving forward with this show, disgustingly titled “Family of the Year.”
The link goes on to list just a tiny sampling of Savage’s egregious statements against people he hates over the years, but I won’t include them on this blog. In fact, the statements chosen are some of his more innocuous, if that may be believed, but they really are. Savage tried for a long time to get like-minded folks to use the term “Santorum” to describe something so disgusting I can’t even describe it in general terms. And yet that disgusting product is the daily reality for all those who share Savage’s inclination, which tells us a very great deal about what kind of people we are dealing with. Sorry to be obtuse, I have to dance around this because it is so beyond the pale I can’t possibly even give any more hints than I have.
So, this is the cultural elites telling all Christians to go you know what themselves. We’ve had this growing for a while, and Disney, through ABC, has been in the vanguard of this kind of cultural persecution. This is about the 27th program (I made that up, but there have been many) from ABC that extols the perverse and degraded state of the “family” today and constantly bashes the faithful, non-perverse, undivorced, Christian family. We’ve had shows like “Modern Family” and “Desperate Hosewives” and “Good Christian B#$%^s” – all with input from the same nucleus of Christ-hating sodomites – that not only attack the traditional family, they are the prime vehicle of indoctrination in the new, anti-Christian cultural “standards,” such as they are. Look, Marshall Kirk wrote back in 1989 that sodomites, through their great influence in the media, would use that media to basically propagandize Americans, over the course of decades, into not just accepting, but lionizing sodomy and those who practice it. And so you have it.
Things have reached such a state of collapse that a bill in Indiana to defend religious rights from sodomite persecution is now the greatest controversy in the land, even though similar bills have been signed at the federal level and in a number of other states. But that was before the perverse agenda gained clear ascendancy last year. Now, all bets are off. What used to be perfectly acceptable and reasonable is the greatest affront to “freedom” (of the perverse) imaginable.
Christianity cannot stand side by side in a culture with this official approbation of acts and lifestyles diametrically opposed to the Faith. As one advances, the other must retreat. For the time being, we know which that will be.
Some music cuz I feel like it March 31, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, blogfoolery, disconcerting, fun, huh?, non squitur, silliness, Society.
And Dismas isn’t even around to enjoy it. I guess I’m in the mood because I’m only workin’ two days this week. Just a smattering of some favorites:
My wife and I were at John T. Floore’s Country Store the night this song was recorded. Helluva show, best I ever saw.
I spent several summers in the 80s out in the Panhandle. I think this song is a bit too much on the negative side, and McMurtry is generally annoying, but I think this tune does give a very good feel for what the Panhandle is like:
Have to throw in some Jerry Jeff:
Another, off an album almost no one remembers:
An even lesser known number. It was on Contrary to Ordinary in ’78 but not performed by Walker. Not sure who sang it. John Inman? Anyone know? Few probably care. Have no idea why someone thought it went with their railroader hobby:
Jack Ingram. This song….well…….too much to tell:
Fr. Nicholson: Pope Francis ushering in an era of upheaval, could lead to a new rash of priest sex abuse (fixed) March 30, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, priests, scandals, secularism, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church, unity.
Yowzer. That’s a pretty hot take, but I think as he goes through the argument, he’s got a pretty good point. He ties in the doctrinal chaos and exaggerated expectations for massive change in the Church that existed in the late 50s and early 60s – when the priest boy rape became epidemic – with similar expectations today. He forecasts a similar explosion in sex abuse cases if the doctrinal chaos reigning over the past two years, and the concomitant build up in expectations for change in the Church’s immutable Dogmas, will lead to a similar epidemic.
I don’t agree with everything said below, and I’ve certainly disagreed with some of Fr. Nicholson’s takes in the past, but I think he makes an interesting point that is worthy of consideration. I’m glad he did note that while Pope Saint John Paul II and Pope will probably never be a Saint Benedict XVI did help re-establish some greater doctrinal certainty, at least in the Petrine office, they certainly didn’t fully restore the doctrinal integrity that has existed in happier days in the Church’s existence:
Sorry, coded the video wrong!
I do like his summation, that in these times faithful Catholics must unite to support and defend each other and the sacred deposit of the Faith handed onto us, whether that means helping out those being persecuted monetarily or through moral support, calling out doctrinal error, supporting faithful bishops and priests, and the like. That is certainly a key point with me. I do find a bit of irony in this, however, given the source, and what he has said in some other videos. But I’ll just scoot right past that and echo the call for all faithful Catholics of good will to desist from the circular firing squad, turn around, and direct our fire at the encroaching enemies of the Faith who surround us.
It’s always been something of a point of fascination to me, how a Church that was by so many measures robust and doctrinally cohesive in the 50s timeframe was at the same time so ripe for revolution. I do think those of us who did not live through it can never quite imagine what a tumultuous, even earth-shattering time the 60s was. Outside the Church or within, so many things, from TV to jet travel to new music to fashion to advertising to what name you, everything changed radically over that period. People became convinced that mankind really was entering some new technological golden age and that all the old rules, the societal compact, if you will, of all preceding times, could simply be chucked with abandon. That thinking, almost a virus in its effects, certainly penetrated the Church and caused largely unexpected upheaval. At the same time, we also know that by the mid-50s there were many modernists inside the Church who were stealthily, and as the decade went on, more and more openly working towards a revolution. By 1958 they were simply looking for an advantageous opportunity to strike, and Vatican II gave them that opportunity. I think the two events, an ambitious, united, and strongly networked modernist cabal, and a society expecting flying cars, all manner of wonder drugs (medicinal and otherwise) and round-trip tickets to Mars within a few years produced a perfect storm that struck a Church perhaps somewhat complacent and a bit full of itself. The result was a veritable French Revolution, which nobody really expected or saw coming, either, by the way.
As for our current revolution, times are different. We have direct evidence of the disaster that will follow in the wake of doctrinal uncertainty and expectations-building. But I don’t know if that will be enough to deter the aged modernists in their ambitions to show themselves right, lo after all these years, that the revolution of the 60s was an inevitable organic event that simply had to happen, and not a top-down betrayal by elites who foisted a hostile and competing construct on the 2000 year old institution Christ founded. I think the rampant perversion and gross immorality Fr. Nicholson laments answers that question irrefutably, but intellectual pride is, as the Angelic Doctor said, the most difficult form of pride to overcome. And few men in their 70s or 80s are very open to a total reversal from a lifetime of belief, no matter how destructive and contrary they can be shown to be.
As a final aside, and a recommendation to you, I picked up this video on Bones’ site. He has a post where you can sign your name to indicate your support for the nearly 500 English priests who reject the attempts to change sacred belief regarding marriage, divorce, the Blessed Sacrament…….you know what I mean. The whole modernist Kasperite gambit. I signed. You can find my name, Fredo Corleone, bottom of Lake Tahoe, NV.
More garbage from Kasper the modernist paramour March 30, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church.
Reading some more quotes below from Cardinal Kasper, which reveal in stark clarity precisely why he is viewed as the arch-heretic Kung’s prize pupil and also why he is the current paramour of the modernists, I am struck by the question – who with a Catholic heart could not read this man’s work (filth might be a better word) and not react with revulsion? Who would find in this stuff “serenity?” Via Vox Cantoris:
In 1967, this same German Kasper said:
“The God who is enthroned over the world and history as a changeless being is an offence to man. One must deny him for man’s sake, because he claims for himself the dignity and honour that belong by right to man…. We must resist this God, however, not only for man’s sake, but also for God’s sake. He is not the true God at all, but rather a wretched idol. For a God who is only alongside of and above history, who is not himself history, is a finite God. If we call such a being God, then for the sake of the Absolute we must become absolute atheists. Such a God springs from a rigid worldview; he is the guarantor of the status quo and the enemy of the new.”
Cardinal Kasper explicitly rejects a dozen defined Dogmas I can think of off the top of my head right now. This is nothing but modernist immanentism, “we create ‘god’ by our thoughts and loves and desires” horse hockey. We must deny a transcendent, omniscient all-powerful God because……no, not because He claims some dignity or honor that belongs to “man,” but because He claims dignity and honor that offends the monumental hubris of the modernist intellectual. The modernist is offended by this God because the modernist sees himself as god. It works this way: modernists do believe we humans somehow create God out of our spiritual needs, desires, loves, etc., and since no one understands those needs and loves as well as the highly trained modernist intellectual, those modernists embody ‘god’ better than anyone else. This is not ascribing base motives to ideological opponents, this is what these guys really believe!!! No wonder they fight with such passion and have no qualms using unscrupulous machinations, opponents of modernism offend against the dread god Kasper and must be crushed.
This man has to either hate or butcher everything that predates 1870. Tradition for him is nothing but an obstacle to be not just overcome, but obliterated.
Another quote, from a much more recent Kasper book:
In this same book that the Pope has praised, Kasper writes more carefully [the serene theology on the knees book]:
“On the basis of its metaphysical starting point, dogmatic theology has difficulty speaking of a compassionate God. It has to exclude the possibility that God suffers with his creatures in a passive sense; it can only speak of pity and mercy, in the active sense that God opposes the suffering of his creatures and provides them assistance. The question that remains is whether this satisfactorily corresponds to the biblical understanding of God, who suffers with his creatures, who as misericors has a heart with the poor and for the poor. Can a God who is conceived so apathetically be really sympathetic? Pastorally, this conception of God is a catastrophe. For a so abstractly conceived God appears to most people to be very distant from their personal situation.” [Walter Kasper, Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life, trans. William Madges (New York, 2014), p11]
Yes, this is much more careful, the code speak of the modernist warhorse after 40 years of political machinations. It’s still utter garbage from the top. Dogmatic theology has no difficulty “speaking” of a compassionate God – and see how he once again sets Tradition, or the preceding Magisterium, up as an obstacle to be overcome. In fact, in terms of a right understanding of such concepts as true mercy, justice, compassion, etc, the dogmatic beliefs of the Church form the most beautiful, transcendent, and cohesive whole the Church has ever seen. But since that traditional understanding poses a natural barrier to Kasper’s still pressing modernist sensibilities, it has to be construed as somehow wanting. That is to say, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Church’s 2000 year conception of God, it is in fact the best conception human possible, the problem for Kasper lies in the fact that he and his cabal do not share it, an dare in fact violently opposed to it as being an obstacle to their revolutionary goals. It should be clear, then, why Kasper and those like him constantly speak of the Church’s belief and practice as being some terrible old decrepit thing that must finally be put down.
I would remind that Kasper has already been shown to have misquoted Church Councils, made up quotes from Church Fathers allegedly supporting his position, and completely butchered the plain meaning of others in order to pursue his ends. He has proposed false conundrums and used heavy-handed pressure tactics to influence prelates to support his side.
IOW, everything Pope Saint Pius X said about modernists and their reptelian nature is completely, 100% true.
1 comment so far
St. Maria Goretti parish in Arlington (Diocese of Fort Worth) is having a special Good Friday exposition of many holy relics, including portions of the True Cross. And no, if you “added up all the bits of the ‘true cross’ available they would be larger than the Empire State building” meme is totally false – in fact, all the pieces don’t even equal the volume of the cross bar of the Cross.
Other amazing and rare relics include the crown of thorns, the tunic of our Lord, and the Last Supper table cloth. Pretty amazing. You can have a favorite Rosary or other holy item turned into a third class relic.
Details on the time and place below:
If time permits, we might try to run over there between other Good Friday activities. Do something special this Holy Week! Take some days off! Turn it into an event.
BTW, the blog will be mostly dead from Tuesday PM until next Tues. April 7.
That’s the argument Patrick Archbold lays out below, and I he’s got more than a slight point. While some people forecast that faithful Catholics might freak out or even “schism” over some outlandish pronouncement by the Synod, the progressive faction, including the German episcopate, sure seems schismatic by their novel, even heretical, beliefs and actions:
Ever since the announcement of the Synod on the Family and Cardinal Kasper’s infamous kickoff speech, people have been predicting that traditionalists might schism because, like Inspector Javert, they just can’t handle all that awesome mercy……..
……In all the speculation, whether you think it is a disaster or the awesomest thing since communion in the hand, there is one common thread. Everyone expects that the progressives will get what they want. The deck is stacked after all.
But what if that single presumption is wrong? What happens if, by the protection of the Holy Spirit, the Pope does what Popes are supposed to do and he says, “No!” What happens if the Pope says, “Sorry, Jesus was pretty unequivocal about this and you can’t separate the pastoral from the doctrinal, you can’t separate truth and mercy?” What happens then?
Well, to find that answer, we don’t have to look very far. We just need to look at the words of Cardinal Marx, the president of the German bishops’ conference, and a leading proponent of mercy-palooza:
……..“the synod cannot prescribe in detail what we have to do in Germany.”The German bishops want to publish their own pastoral letter on marriage and family after the synod, the article said.“We are not just a subsidiary of Rome,” Cardinal Marx said. “Each episcopal conference is responsible for the pastoral care in their culture and has to proclaim the Gospel in its own unique way. We cannot wait until a synod states something, as we have to carry out marriage and family ministry here.”
I can’t translate German, but I am pretty good at translating Progressive. The closest translation is “You better do it, Rome, or we will.”
Remember, one of the reasons that Pope Francis even called a Synod on this topic was because the German Episcopate was threatening unilateral action on this front.
Smells like schism to me.
Well that’s pretty much the argument I’ve been making on this blog for at least a year and a half. While schism as a state does have a precise theological meaning, in practical terms those who reject Dogma are placing themselves outside the Church. The German bishops threatening to publicly and formally deviate from the Doctrine of the Faith and establish their own micro-Magisterium in competition with that established by Jesus Christ are plainly threatening a schismatic act, and to even make the threat is to reveal a seriously schismatic attitude. That is to say, we already have a schism in practical terms, in being, if you will, if not in formal definition. This is exactly the same situation that existed in the early 70s with the Dutch episcopate, who threatened schism over several matters, including, most infamously, Communion in the hand. It seems threats of schism have worked to the modernist’s advantage in the past.
As for whether faithful/orthodox/traditional Catholics – that is, those deserving of the name – will “go into schism,” I’ve always found such arguments leading and unfair. If the Synod makes some abominable claim that simply cannot be accepted (and I have no idea how, but, then again, the level of authority of a small subset of bishops, even one meeting under the aegis of the Holy Father, is highly questionable. However, the encylical that typically follows would be another matter entirely) it will not be faithful Catholics who are in schism. It will be those who accepted and promulgated the unacceptable. Some might try to argue otherwise, but if those who simply believe and practice what the Church has always believed just keep on doing that, and if there is no concrete action taken to “separate themselves from Rome,” then there would be no schism. We can oppose the error without changing a thing, without taking any concrete step from which the only consequence would be to seriously harm, if not destroy, our collective credibility as those remaining true, or truest, to the Church Christ founded.
I have no idea how this second session will play out. I am maintaining a watchful vigilance. Some people are arguing Pope Francis is distancing himself from the Kasperite cabal, while others indicate the Ordinary Synod is being “stacked” with progressives.
Tradition-supporting Italian Bishop stripped of power? March 30, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, pr stunts, sadness, scandals, secularism, Society, the return, the struggle for the Church.
Rorate has a post regarding Bishop Oliveri of Albenga-Imperia in Italy, a bishop known for his strong support for the Traditional Latin Mass and the traditional practice of the Faith. There have been some (relatively speaking) minor allegations regarding problems handling abuse and some other matters in the Diocese, so last year a coadjutor bishop was appointed. At the time, it was not clear what role the coadjutor would have. Rorate is reporting, based on recent revelations in the Italian press, that Bishop Oliveri will be replaced in all but name as the functional head of the Diocese, with Coadjutor Borghetti taking over all administrative and disciplinary functions:
What was predicted by Italian media in October last year, as reported by Rorate at the time, has taken place exactly as foretold: Msgr. Mario Oliveri, 71, the exceptionally Traditionalist-friendly Bishop of Albenga-Imperia, has been stripped of all powers and is now Ordinary of the diocese in name only.
The appointment of his Coadjutor Bishop, Guglielmo Borghetti, was announced on January 10, but the full extent of the powers given to him was not reported at that time. This has now been publicized thanks to a series of articles in the Italian media and blogosphere in the last few days. The full text of the bull appointing Msgr. Borghetti was read out to the Consultors of the Diocese on March 25, and published on the diocesan website (h/t Messa in Latino). The bull specifies that he is nominated Coadjutor Bishop “with special faculties” consisting of no less than the same jurisdiction that a diocesan bishop has according to Canon 381 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
The new Coadjutor Bishop himself confirmed to the Italian news agency ANSA that he now has full powers. ANSA also mentions that “the priests who attended his first celebration in the seminary have expressly said that for the Diocese of Albenga ‘begins a Copernican revolution.'”
It must be kept in mind that even when a Bishop receives a Coadjutor, the former does not necessarily lose his normal powers as ruling bishop until he steps down. The current situation in Albenga-Imperia is therefore exceptional, and can only be the result of the express will of Pope Francis.
As our readers will certainly realize, this humiliation of yet another Traditional-friendly Bishop stands in dramatic contrast to the Pope’s inaction over the crisis enveloping his scandalous appointment of Juan Barros as Bishop of Osorno in Chile, despite credible and multiple allegations linking him to the sexual abuse of minors.
All the supporting links are in Italian, so it is difficult to understand, specifically, how this assigning of roles to the coadjutor is more expansive and different qualitatively than such appointments normally are.
This matter may bring back unhappy memories for Dallas Catholics, who recall that in 2000, Joseph Galante was appointed Coadjutor Bishop of Dallas in the wake of Bishop Grahman’s disastrous handling of several priest boy-rape cases, especially that of Rudy Kos, which at the time resulted in a historic civil judgment against the Diocese. Scandalously, in spite of the fact that his credibility had been shattered, Bishop Grahman refused to step down and turn over significant areas of diocesan administration to Bishop Galante. There followed a very public row that divided the clergy and laity and led to Bishop Galante’s eventual stormy departure in 2003.
I am not certain if Bishop Galante was given similar “special faculties” to more or less forcibly take over administration of the Diocese of Dallas, as apparently this Bishop Borghetti has. Certainly, it was expected that Bishop Grahman would retire within 18 months of Galante’s appointment, something Bishop Grahman steadfastly refused to do (which brings up rather significant questions regarding obedience, since Pope Saint John Paul II had very clearly conveyed his express desire that Bishop Grahman retire early and give up the reins to Galante- apparently, arch-liberals like Grahman are allowed to obey if they want and disobey when they feel like it – pretty rich coming from a man who demanded absolute unquestioning obedience from all this priests). So could Oliveri “pull a Grahman” and simply refuse to leave, refuse to give up an administrative role, and work with those priests loyal to him to maintain a power base? Unlikely, as it seems only modernists/progressives are allowed to get away with such disobedience. Those friendly to to Tradition generally have qualms of conscience that would prevent them from acting in a way so contrary to the express will of the Sovereign Pontiff. But double standards in treatment can tend to erode that tendency towards obedience, a trend that could have unfortunate consequences for the future of the Church.
As a final footnote, after the ambitious Bishop Galante finally got his diocese (Camden, NJ), he turned out to be at least as dogmatically liberal as Grahman. His administration of the Diocese of Camden was filled with church closures and unhappy laity. Galante revealed himself to be very strongly on the side of the hermeneutic of rupture, you could say. He was no fan of Tradition, and sought to sack priests who were too tradition-friendly. There was also a financial scandal. At least one good local priest indicated “we dodged a bullet” in not getting Galante as our bishop.
So perhaps all’s well that end’s well. But not for Bishop Oliveri.