jump to navigation

And now we hear from the modernist cabal: Cardinal Weasel’s er Wuerl’s evasive heterodoxy November 3, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.

Consider the previous post and this one exhibits A and B for the crisis in the Church.  Exhibit A presented a quite strong orthodox critique of the Synod, exhibit B shows the consummate Church politician (and doctrinal ne’er do well) exhibiting both the naked DISDAIN for souls that most of the hierarchy holds, as well as their inability to ever pronounce clearly on a subject of any controversy.  Cardinal Wuerl, there is a sad appropriateness in your being so long the ordinary of Washington, DC (consider it a test of  your patience to see if you can watch the whole thing):

Who do you believe – Bishop Schneider, who says 2000 years of Doctrine AND practice has been undone by the Synod’s final report, or Cardinal Wuerl, who continues the official (and obviously well-coordinated and rehearsed) line, that while the practice may be completely inverted from what the Church has always done, somehow, the “doctrine” remains sacrosanct and unchanged?  Cardinal Wuerl, you are a really bad liar.

This is how intellectually bankrupt these men are: Cardinal Wuerl really argues that because all have sinned, no one has the right to insist the Church retain her eternal moral standards, devolved directly from Divine Revelation.  Dude, what do you have in YOUR closet?  And I do mean closet.

Am I the only one noting that Raymond Arroyo – hardly anyone’s most implacable rad-trad – seems to go from dismissive to having a hard time containing his smirks and eye rolling as the interview goes on?  His incredulity seems to reach epic proportions towards the end.  And he raises very fair points, points I’ve raised on this blog for years. What the hell are the laity to think when we hear Cardinals – Princes of the Church – disagreeing on fundamental matters of Doctrine and practice, such as the correct interpretation of Dignitatis Humanae?

Arroyo: “Is there an opening in the document for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion or no?”  Wuerl replies: “I think what we see in that teaching is the clear recognition that the Church’s teaching remains intact. There’s no change in the words of Jesus, there’s no change in the Gospel, there’s no change in what the Church has said for 2000 years….but there’s also no change in the understanding that the Lord is a merciful and loving Lord.  One of the priests speaking to the entire Synod body said, the created love of God, the love of God the Creator, when it meets the human condition, becomes the merciful love of God.”  OK……and how precisely is it merciful, Cardinal, to encourage people to remain in their sins, sins that will damn them to an eternity of unimaginable suffering?

In essence, this is the same balderdash we’ve heard for years.  I’m sure you’ve heard it from priests and bishops as I have, that we have to “meet people where they are,” to “not judge them,” as “we’re all sinners,” and that after we wow them with our mercy, then we’ll start, at some indeterminate future point, “to share the fullness of the Church’s belief and encourage them to amend their lives.”  The problem is, as I’m sure your experience confirms, is that that future point is never reached, that what happens in practice is that the Doctrine gets completely forgotten and washed away, while the indifference and the utter lack of any standards whatsoever becomes the permanent norm.  Thus, there is no conversion of souls, but a conversion of the Church, from the only true source of Light and Grace on earth, to just another worldly body corrupted by money and the tyranny of evil men.  This is so because mercy cannot be decoupled from repentance.  Nor can the Justice of God be subsumed by His Mercy.  These are extremely dangerous and damaging concepts, and many more souls will be lost- and the moral standing of the Church perhaps permanently and gravely wounded – by their repetition by so many faithless and worldly prelates.

That Wuerl should choose to obfuscate is hardly surprising.  This is, after all, the man who has built a career out of refusing to deny Communion to those in the most manifest, public states of sin in rejecting Church Doctrine and advancing abortion and other atrocious evils.  Good Lord will the Church be blessed to be free of this man in a few weeks, not that I hold out much hope for his replacement.

How about Bishop Schneider of Archbishop of Washington, DC?


1. c matt - November 3, 2015

I think it’s pronounced “Hurl”.

2. tg - November 3, 2015

I saw the interview last night. It was hard because I normally don’t watch interviews of people I don’t agree with. One thing Raymond should have asked him is repentance on the part of the sinner. I never hear that word. The new buzz word is going to be “encounter” Jesus Christ. Our priest spoke about what the Austin Diocese is going to do about getting Catholics back and to “encounter” Jesus. I thought I already have thru Baptism and the other sacraments.

Baseballmom - November 3, 2015

“Encounter” was the buzzword and all the rage in the late 60’s and 70’s…. Can’t these people come up with something original?

Tantumblogo - November 3, 2015

I really believe this: in most of the hierarchy we have today, who were young men in the 20s and 30s when the 60s happened, they simply cannot overcome those halcyon (to them) years. That’s the key driver behind their embrace of modernism, they keep trying to recreate the “magic” of the 60s/early 70s. I think it is that kind of emotional attachment to a distant day – really a kind of pining for lost youth – that drives much of their ambition towards revolution. Of course, they are also doctrinaire ideologues, but I think there is something more behind their passion.

3. Frank - November 4, 2015

Our priest at the Latin Mass said that he is responsible for his flock and has to answer to God for either distorting or omitting the Church’s teaching. He reiterated that one should not receive Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin. Mortal sin exists, whether certain prelates want to acknowledge it or not and has to be removed by Confession first. None of us is without sin but we cannot receive Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin. It is a sacrilege. He did not mince words.

Tantumblogo - November 4, 2015

You’re blessed to have such a priest. I’ve been disappointed that our own local TLM priests have maintained a total silence on the issue of Synod 2015 and its implications for souls. Last year we had a priest go off at length against the Synod, but he is no longer at the parish. Too bad.

H-town - November 5, 2015

This traditional priest pulls no punches on the Synod:

[audio src="http://reginaprophetarum.org/audio/20151101-Do-We-Have-Faith-of-Our-Fathers.mp3" /]

4. Frank - November 4, 2015

If it’s any consolation, many of the heresies throughout the ages have been started by priests or bishops and spread sometimes very rapidly, i.e. Arianism, Pelagianism, Gnosticism, Lutheranism, etc. So we should not be surprised that the same can occur today, even at the highest level. The heresy of administering Holy Communion to those who are in a state of mortal sin will be outted for what it is–grave sacrilege. Unfortunately it will do damage but the Truth will always win in the end.

5. Marguerite - November 4, 2015

This sacrilege is happening because of the cavalier attitude the clergy and laity have treated this August Sacrament since the 1970s. Get back to receiving Holy Communion directly into the mouth and on ones knees. Lay ministers should not touch the Body and Blood of Christ–only consecrated hands. Treat the Body and Blood of Our Lord as it should be–in holy wonder, awe, reverence and respect.

6. Marguerite - November 4, 2015

One of the Eucharistic Ministers in a Church I used to attend called the Consecrated Body and Blood of Christ, the bread and wine. Okay, it this may be splitting hairs, but methinks that many in the Church no longer believe Whom they are receiving in Holy Communion. That’s why they don’t believe it’s a sacrilege to hand out “bread and wine.”

7. David - November 4, 2015

The last several months I have commended Raymond Arroyo for doing his research and tactfully asking good questions. He interviewed Cardinal Kasper and challenged him. Bishop Morlino was interviewed expressing concern on annulment reform, and I saw Raymond express his concerns over the weekend when this interview aired. Raymond also had Fr. Murray and Fr. Schirico on during the visit of Pope Francis.

I was also glad Fox News had Fr. Schirico and Fr. Murray during the visit of Pope Francis, although one day Fox News did bring a more liberal priest one day from the Diocese of Rockville Center.

8. Margaret Costello - November 6, 2015

We are all sinners? Well there is a huge difference between a Catholic in a state of sanctifying grace possibly committing a venial sin and someone who is willfully committing mortal sin, refuses to repent and even demands that the Church change to accommodate them. One is headed for Purgatory and then Heaven…the other to Eternal torment. Light and dark. Sheep and goats. God bless~

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: