Private sin leads to public heresy: or, explaining Cardinal Wuerl October 29, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
As part of a post regarding Cardinal Donald Wuerl’s heterodoxy, Vox Cantoris describes how “private” or hidden sin influences the way self-described Catholics, including many bishops and priests, think, paving the way for their embrace of manifest evil. I’ve brought up this topic many times in the past but never so clearly or so well. It really ties together how the personal sins of millions have led to the cultural calamity we see around us, and even more, the collapse of the Church in opposing immorality. While I think it very edifying, I would like to stress that it does, of its nature, deal with mature themes and thus should not be read by children or those with more sensitive consciences:
A few weeks ago, just before the start of the Synod, I was chatting with a priest friend. The subject of the Synod came up and the issue of homosexuality and state sanctioned, so-called marriage, between members of the same-sex and the overwhelming support for it by Catholics. I said that it is because these Catholics who support the abomination of sodomite and lesbian “marriages” are chronic masturbators. They view pornography on a regular basis alone or with their spouses or concubines and keepers. [Full stop. This is the key. Yes, the rest figures in, but not yet in a majority, I don’t think. But a majority of Americans/westerners now abuse themselves regularly. They couple this abuse with porn use. Over time, “regular” porn doesn’t do it and they have to descend into greater and greater kinks to get their thrill. That almost invariably includes sodomy. So now you have tens of millions of people conditioned to accept sodomy as “normal,” because no one wants to think themselves abnormal. And so it goes. M-F sodomy is the “gateway drug” to all kinds of other and worse things] They engage in adultery themselves or have an “open marriage” and engage in “threesomes.” They have experimented in the past with orgasms with someone of the same sex. They engage in sodomy in its actual and broadest sense as man and woman and as husband and wife to their own physical and spiritual detriment. [Also rampant, and a big factor] They contracept, as a couple or individual. They may have had or aided the murder of their baby in the womb [we know about half of all Americans adults have played a direct role in procuring an abortion] or they may be a closet sodomite or lesbian themselves.
They do this and they call themselves “Catholic.” They may go to Mass and if they do, they surely receive the Holy Eucharist. What they do not do is go to Confession. In addition to not accepting the above as sins because they do not see them as sins, the one sin they do accept and would never want to commit is that of hypocrisy. To them, being hypocrite would be the greater sin.
After all, “Who am I to judge,” they would ask themselves.
How does the above relate to Cardinal Wuerl? VC includes a comment from a priest that makes the connection:
Cardinal Wuerl is the foremost spokesman for giving Communion to abortionists in public office.
All his current arguments for giving Communion to adulterers and sodomites are recycled from his many past statements in defense of giving Communion to abortionists in public office.
He pretends that Denial of Communion is a “penalty” that exists ONLY because of canon law–i.e., Canon 915. It is not, of course. It is mandated by the moral law, because: a) a minister of Communion who gives the sacrament to a person obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin is collaborating directly in the sin of sacrilege; b) the faithful are led to believe that the sin of the communicant is not a sin. By pretending that Denial of Communion is a “penalty,” Wuerl evades the REAL issue: Giving Communion to person obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin is always grave matter; i.e., a mortal sin.
By pretending that Denial of Communion is a “penalty,” he pretends that he is exercising legitimate “discretion” or “prudence” or “pastoral judgment” when he gives Communion to abortionists, adulterers, lesbians, etc. Bishops DO have discretion when it comes to the application of penalties, but Denial of Communion is not a penalty. [It’s the very worst of sacrileges]
Cardinal Wuerl’s long-standing PRACTICE–giving Communion to pro-abortion politicians, self-proclaimed lesbians (Cf. the case of Fr. Marcel Guarnizo), and gay couples (at regularly-scheduled “gay Masses in Pittsburgh and Washington), etc., is the reason that he is COMPELLED to insist now that Communion be given to people living publicly in adulterous unions.
I think that’s dead on. The argumentation so many prelates have used to support their previous heterodox positions now veritably forces them to endorse even more extreme heresies, like pseudo-sodo-marriage.
That’s the way it is with heresy. It never stops with one. Heresy tends to lead to apostasy, just as Luther’s trumped up angst over sold indulgences led him out of the Church. How many men now drawing very comfortable livings from the Church are practical apostates? Probably best we don’t know.
There is more at Vox Cantoris, including evidence of Wuerl’s hypocrisy, but I’ve taken enough. Do go read it, though.
Why do I get a weird mental connection of Fr. James Martin, SJ everytime I see Cardinal Wuerl?