It was not easy to leave the Roman Catholic Church. I love her history and theology. Her sacraments defined my life. It was the total failure of the hierarchy of the Church which really pushed me to leave it behind. These articles about Cardinal Dolan is another example of how far the leadership in the Church has fallen. http://virtueonline.org/new-york-ir...ks-day-parade-gays-while-catholic-media-fumes http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-saint-patricks-day-massacre.html
He might not be on the same level as Benedict but by definition all of the Catholic Cardinals (except for the odd one over 80 who goes a bit senile, like that recent one who supposedly gave the Islamic profession of faith during a speech) are arch-conservatives. Open liberals do not get elevated to the rank of Cardinal by the Pope's who themselves were selected by Conservatives. Cardinal Dolan has recently gained some greater awareness of PR and publicity manipulation. If you look at what he's saying (just like with Francis's statements) he's following the guidelines of the Catechism fairly closely. The homosexuals are being allowed to self-identify and march, their "dignity being protected" or however that section goes. I'm really not one of Dolan's admirers, but I do think it's unfair to suggest he's caved. Were it a Catholic rather than secular event he might have had to take more action, this is the best damage limitation available that sticks by RCC rules.
The church has been on a downward slide since V2. So we you say he is doing wat the Catechism says, you got to remember that it was written by modernist and liberals. ST. Patrick day started as A CATHOLIC celebration. There is no way a Christian Priest should be going along with any event that will promote any sin. St. Patrick day in new is a victory to Homosexuals and will be used as triumphant achievement in there movement. So below I posted what the last Cardinal said eleven years ago
That's what the SSPX would have us believe yes. If you count Rome no longer assuming that all non Catholics are all going to hell as being on a "!downward slide" then well....I see that as an improvement. Hardley, certainly parts (notably those referring to freedom of concience) do come a bit close to grating against Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors but there is no blatant contradiction as of yet. Considering the Church can and continues to routinely condemn democracy, socialism, freedom of thought, modern science and an assortment of other things on a near-enough monthly basis I think it's hard to accuse the Church of modernism, much the reverse if anything. It did, but now it's more or less the Irish version of the 4th of July; a chance to get drunk and celebrate. How is the Cardinal promoting sin? It's a secular event, one which he has no power in organizing. I'm sure the Cardinal has a few choice words for those who promote homosexual acts (a very different thing from innate orientation) but identifying as gay is not itself a sin. It is a triumph indeed, St Patricks day may be an important day to christians but we must remember that it carries so many other meanings too, especially for Irish and those of Irish decent, belivers or unbelivers, hetrosexual or not. Neither he or the Cardinal Dolan are going against Catholic regulations; certainly his is a more in-you-face rabid protest but both approaches are perfectly acceptable to Rome. If anything I think Dolan's approach has more tact than the former Cardinal. What would storming out of the parade accomplished? That the "gay agenda" has chased the Church away and that Rome hates the gays? That's all the former cardinals message managed if you remember, Dolan is aware the gays have the majority vote by a landslide but is still portraying the Church's teaching with a rather more pacifistic approach.
I have read your reply. As a person after much thought and prayer left Rome, I have to disagree with much of what you said. Cardinal Dolan to me on this issue and many others represent the some of the worst the modern church has to offer. I could not in good faith follow the leadership of the Catholic Church. I love her very much. As you religion says Bad Roman Catholic, I too was a bad roman catholic. So I did what reason said was just and what reason dictated. Where could I find the Catholic Faith. I found it in the Anglican Church. Leaders of the Church like Dolan are people who made me question the catholic church and for the sake of my own consciousness helped me leave. I might be biased here, but no Christian should be the head of the parade that this year will be used to show how far homosexuals have come and the victories they have won.
Fair enough! I guess though if you really do belive the claims to being the only Church directly founded by Christ and that the Pope wields the charism to never make a mistake on matters of faith or morals as many Catholics do they won't leave. This is probably going to make me unpopular. I am a bad Roman Catholic, but as the polar opposite to yourself it seems . I no longer attend because I'm pro gay, pro contraception, rather skeptical of infallibility after taking a look at Church History amongst other things. Being any one of those is of course a mortal sin in Catholic eyes, I've just come to the conclusion that there's not an awful lot of point pew warming if I'm barred from taking part in Church life and communion (I never was formally, but those excommunicated in mortal sin are told to abstain) and they think I'm going to hell anyway. I don't see what's wrong with a Catholic cleric leading a secular parade. Sure I'd be more concerned if it was a Nazi rally or something of that vein but even presuming I was anti-LGBT rights (surprise surprise I was once) I personally as a heterosexual christian wouldn't shy away from leading the parade. Sure there's gays in it, but there's fornicators, contraception takers, socialists, democrat voters and other assorted "sinners" in it too. Should we bar all of them from marching too? I can't imagine they'd be very many left to do it.
Rev2104, Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the RCC. I seriously considered at one point entering the RCC, but my problem was not with the Catechism, which, for the most part, is acceptable. My issue was with the apparitions which led to such things as the Sacred Heart devotions, the Miraculous Medal, the Divine Mercy image, etc. A lot of nuns claiming to have conversations with Jesus and Mary and promises attached to such devotions. I just can't accept these as true, and even though the Church says a Catholic isn't bound to accept them, it is obvious the Church promotes and encourages belief in them. Additionally, the extreme level of Marian devotion was an issue as well. When I was Orthodox we venerated the Theotokos, but I feel the RCC has crossed the line at times, especially with the title of Mediatrix of all Graces, and Louis de Montfort's writings about becoming a slave to Mary, which I feel is blasphemous. Again, the RCC would say I don't have to believe those things, but the fact that they won't condemn them, and even encourage them, is very problematic for me. God bless you as you discern the path He has chosen for you. Peter
We are far apart as we could be I supposse. I am socially conservative. Not to the extent that I think the government should enforce laws since I am a strong believer in limited government. I am sure I am on of the guys you look at thinking I am crazy and I look at you the same way. In the end we both have the some hope in Christ, So pray for me and I will pray for you.
In reflecting on certain aspects of catholic devotions I can now looking in see that they were a waste or even maybe blasphemous. I am not sure and I honestly try to not look down on Catholics since I know a lot of them of course. In the end idea that there is swaths of Anglicans who go back to Rome I do not get. I ran to from Rome, but there are plenty of people climbing into the boat to cross the Tiber.
Rev2104, I have many Catholic friends, and most of them are very devout and faithful Christians. The majority of them dismiss my concerns about these things since they don't bother with such devotions themselves. I do not understand myself why so many Anglicans want to swim the Tiber, unless it is because they are so unhappy with many of the developments that have happened in Anglicanism the past several decades and want to jump ship. I would hope that orthodox Anglicans would stay and try to fix what is wrong or enter continuing bodies; that they would fight to preserve and defend classical Anglicanism rather than surrender it to the modernists and revisionists who are trying to change it.
Crazy? *chuckle* Not at all. I won't lie I'm something more of a socialist who does think the goverment has to have a slightly further reaching hand to ensure certain freedoms are protected but variety of opinion is a mother of innovation and creativity. I don't just assume people are nuts because I don't always agree with them , who knows they might have a better idea. Through Christ we are one (Romans 12:5 )
I'm possibly one of the worst people to comment, because I've never been especially deeply involved with the devotions to saints (Marianism not included), in truth partially because some individuals who are on the road to or have been saints don't really seem very saint like (I'd seriously love for someone to prove to me the cases for Pius IX and John Paul II were actually for saintly qualities and not political arselicking) but I cannot think of anything propagated by Catholicism as being blasphemous. Really, short of the myth that Catholics worship Mary (we don't) I'm a bit lost with that claim. A few CoE clerics have converted to the RC Anglican rite created by Benedict XVI as a reaction against liberals within British politics and the church itself, especially when Jeffery John was picked as a potential candidate for Bishop and later made dean of St Pauls. Not because of Catholic doctrine itself from anything I've seen, rather it seems purely to stick the middle finger up at the liberals by setting up shop with other archconservatives.
The Anglican Church i am a member of is part of the Anglican province of Christ the king. I really hope i got the long name right. What i've learned there is Anglicanism has it's own history and traditions that make it a unique beautiful expression of the Christian faith. We are also the most Catholic look mass and Church in town(or close to it). So there no need to go to Rome. I can understand not everyone has a church like mine ,but the new order mass is so flawed I have no idea how a reasonable person could go to it.
Ah pope talk I really liked pius the 9th. I can not believe they made jp2 and john 23 saints. I watched on tv hoping there was some sort of joke involved. The way jp2 changed the qualification for saints is a joke. There also talk of sainting paul 6. Pretty much saint everyone attached to v2 and show how v2 was a great thing. Not the event the modernist and liberals hoisted upon her. I can not believe men like pius 12 never got sainted. He was pope during suuch hard times and under him we saw one of the biggest expansions of the church. The biggest in the modern era. But now the Catholic Church along with almost all churches are shrinking.
Really? I'm loathed to speak too badly about priests usually but I think he was a megalomaniac utterly detached, at times quite dangerously far from reality. I'm sorry, I know the Vatican is tucked far away from modern society but kidnapping little Jewish boys (Edgardo Montara) is bad m'kay? If there was ever a Pope outside the Middle-Ages/Renessiance who succeded in making the Roman Church look like some Ancient Elderitch tyrannical monster it was him. I mean look at papers at the time and how badly they speak about the Church for his policies within the Papal States, the people of Rome couldn't oust him from the secular temporal throne fast enough! I could keep going, especially on the Syllabus of Errors (my inner liberal hisses at the thought of it) but I'll stop..Derailing here Bleh...JPII was just hero worship from Benedict and the other Cardinals given a leg up by him. He basically got sainted for saying Communism was bad and for riding a lot of planes. So did Manfred von Richthofen during WWI, but I don't see any schools or churches being named after him. I can't say much about John XXIII since I never read his case but the Catholic Church would have struggled to survive as well as it has in the past fifty years without that short gust of "fresh air" he let in. Allowing the mass in the vernacular did wonders for the evangelistic elements of the Church and brought it to so many more people. What, make the "Hound of Hitler" a saint? Oh yeah, that's going to go down great with the Jews . I don't think the Vaticans too eager to poke Israel if they don't have to. I think that is possibly the only reason Pius IX hasn't passed the final stage of canonization.
The church was far more healthy before the smoke of satan entered in v2. The numbers speak for themselves. V2 has been nothing but poison. Hound of Hitler? You believe that anti catholic sugar flavored beverage that much. That claim is laughable now in days.
Do you really think so? The sexual revolution had yet to occur when Vatican II took place, and this hastened the decline. John XXIII was something of a prophet it seems, many of his changes regarding marriages of disparity of cult, vernacular mass, annulments and the like seemed to pre-empt and prepare the church for many of the challenges to come. Without it, the Church would not be in the "Winter" that Benedict XVI predicts is coming, it would be stuck in the middle of a Siberia getting buried by the storm. What? The book? Oh goodness no, most of the claims in there were farcical. It cannot be denied though that his papacy was avowedly pro-german. The Catholic Church has never shied away from proclaiming the leaders of countries with Catholic minorities to be infidels/abominations/heretics, even when doing so put the laity at risk of retribution so it seems odd Pius XII was the first to make an exception and be so thoughtful. I'd say it's more likely he was sitting on the fence waiting to come out and condemn whoever lost the war. Had Hitler won it would be America villified as a great Satan, not Hitler.