This is the only article I saw in the papers today, so we are making progress. The media-hype is dying down. Right next to the article is a beautiful advertisement by the Knights of Columbus praising our catholic traditions.

MaryLU

Cardinals Could Learn From This Battalion Chief

very time I see or think of the site that became a national cemetery Sept. 11, I find myself considering thesimilarities between a firefighter and a priest. One profession saves lives while the other is supposed to save souls.

And as the Catholic Church seems on the verge of imploding due to bad management, the memory of that day and all those men and women who rushed right in as soon as the bell sounded has, in a funny way, provided me with a huge sense of optimism about the future of the faith.

It will never be weakened or diminished. It can't. Too many people lean on it during times of deep trouble or need it even when they sail the calmest waters.

Sure, the bosses — the guys in red hats — have screwed things up by their official deception, their inability to recognize or report acrime or tell the truth about their own shocking behavior. But at this point, it doesn't matter because they are toast; they're done and they don't even know it. Most people no longer believe them. They have lost their moral authority to lead.

Why are they done? Because, unlike firefighters, they dropped their duty. They fell in love with the job and then forgot the definition of their occupation.

Just check out Edward Cardinal Egan or Bernard Cardinal Law. I'm not saying they're bad guys, but they're not real priests. They're businessmen. That's how they got their jobs, hanging out with rich people, putting thetouch on wealthy Catholics, impressing Rome and the Pope with their ability as fund-raisers and their absolute obedience to toe the line. And I'm not talking about sticking up for the Ten Commandments. I'm talking about an old hierarchy that apparently thinks the Catholic Church belongs to it, not the people.

You're not going to find members of the hierarchy climbing a tenement stairwell to help the poor. They're afraid someone might ask them why they refused to recognize the difference between right and wrong. Or how come they cheated churches with deep needs by paying out all that hush money.

Here's one huge difference between the two jobs: When the bell rings in a ladder company, firefighters respond immediately. But when the phone ringsat the chancery, they forward the call to lawyers and public relations wizards.

What? You think Egan and Law won the cardinal lottery because they were the holiest priests in the pack? Said the fastest Mass? Could recite the stations of the cross backward? You figure being a cardinal is a civil service slot and that Law and Egan and the rest of this crew scored higher on the exam. Please.

Their appointments were church politics, pure and simple, with lots of elbows thrown by guys who dream of white smoke. Luckily, there is a whole parade of real priests out there every day, in the trenches, working hard to deal with damage done to the institution — not the faith — by the bosses.

I was thinking of them and how arrogantly they've behaved as I read Dick Picciotto's book, "Last Man Down." He is a 51-year-old battalion chief with the New York City Fire Department who has been grateful for every minute he's been given since the morning of Sept. 11 when he and a crew from Ladder 110 in Brooklyn were trapped for hours in the shell of a stairwell after Tower 1 collapsed around them.

Picciotto sat in the darkness thinking he was dead. It took several hours before Picciotto and the crew were located by others who crawled through flames to save them. Unlike the cardinals, Picciotto was on the line with his men. He wasn't some invisible superior. He was a boss, but he was no stranger to danger. His job was to act, quickly and decisively, to rescue the lost and the troubled.

Of course, he wasn't alone. Even now, asthe site is being dismantled and carted off,there are priests around nearly every day.They pray, bless body parts and offer comfort to families of the victims. Their "parish" is an outdoor cathedral of charred concrete and debris.

The faith survived the flames.

I don't think it would be a bad idea for Egan and his fellow cardinals to read Picciotto's book. Maybe they'd realize that we are surrounded by noble people who keep on doing their jobs under the most difficult circumstances imaginable.

Maybe it would finally dawn on these isolated cardinals of the Catholic Church that they haven't been doing theirs.

E-mail: mikebarniclenews@aol.com

-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), May 05, 2002

Answers

Uh, Earth to MaryLu ...
I know that you meant well, but the thing to do was NOT to copy-and-paste an anti-Catholic article here, as though you were Dennis Molson!
We don't want garbage on this forum. I will ask the Moderator to delete this thread.


-- (@@@.@), May 05, 2002.

This article was written by a devout "Irish Catholic" who is very angry at the hierachy. It is not anti-catholic...it is anti- hierarchy, something catholics can't seem to grasp. Does being a devout catholic mean that we must think 'collectively' and not question wrongdoings by those who govern the church? Where is there anything anti-catholic in this article? Tell me. The catholic mass is the most beautiful symbol of our church, the hierarchy is not. What Mike Barnicle says is true and sometimes we have to question those who are at the top. It is not anti-catholic, it is not catholic bashing. If you knew what went on 'behind the scenes' you would agree with what Mike Barnicle says.

I think it is time to stop calling good catholic people who want the truth exposed, 'anti-catholics' or catholic 'bashers.'

Does being a good, devout catholic mean that we must 'believe' that there is no corruption in the church - corruption that could trickle down to hurt everyone and damage the church.

What has gone on here is like a cancer that keeps on spreading and facing that ugly cancer and wanting to get rid of it, does not mean anyone is catholic bashing. It has nothing to do with the sacred holiness of the mass - it has everything to do with individuals in power who are hurting others, even the good priests who dedicate their lives to serving others.

I am a very good catholic but knows what goes on behind the scenes and want to banish the evil before it destroys our church completely and it will if it is not destroyed. Cancer has to be removed before it is deadly and. I see nothing wrong with what Mr. Barnicle said.

Wake up and see how those in 'power' are destroying something that is so beautiful. Why isn't anyone taking a stand here? Are those people in Boston catholic bashing too? Is Bill O'Reilly catholic bashing, is Fr. McBrien of Notre Dame a catholic basher, is Alan Keyes, a devout catholic man who addresses the issues, a catholic basher? There are many very good and devout Catholic people who want their church back, want to get rid of the cancer that is about to destroy it. It does not mean they are not faithful. Read the article again and you will see that Mike is 'defending' the good, holy priests who serve God and others every day. He is bring to light the darkness brought on our church by those in power and I see nothing wrong with what he said.

-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), May 05, 2002.

The magician makes exaggerated gestures with one hand, to focus your attention, while he performs the trick with the other quiet hand. As your eyes and ears are diverted towards the outcries and the arguing and blaming, the quiet ones... who are they? What are the up to? Hmmmm...

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), May 05, 2002.

Emerald, I think I know what you mean when you call me a magician, the quiet one using tricks to divert your attention.

If you want to know, Emerald, I am getting angrier by the day. The more I learn about the hierarchy and how they work, the angrier I get. But, I will not let anger destroy me because uncontrolled anger is like a cancer too and I will not let that happen. I will not let anger take away my peace, nor will I let it destroy me or my faith in God. My faith is not in the posters here who just want to talk about all the good things about our church, but fail to see the evil in it.

I have a mind and eyes to see and ears to hear.

What got me angry is how the Dioecese in Boston refuses to settle with the victims because the Diocese will go bankrupt if they do, and won't be able to settle with 'all' the other victims. The richest diocese in the country will go bankrupt. I don't believe that at all. Maybe if Cardnial Law humbled himself and sold his mansion rather than close catholic schools, maybe he could afford to settle with the victims. It makes me sick. What is really going on is that they know how many years it would take for the victims to get a court date, if they sue, and they want to stall this thing. It is a corrupt, evil, injustice.

You know what else makes me angry. I watch my mother go to church every day and sit there with a haunting look in her eyes, so pained, because she cannot receive the Eucharist. She looks at herself like an outsider because she divorced an abusive alcoholic. She was told she should not divorce him (by her pastor) just because he had a drinking problem. She was told she took him for better or for worse so she stayed in an abusive marriage much longer than she should have. Her self-esteem was zero, her joy - her joy came from receiving the Eucharist. That is what sustained her. It was we, her children, after the last beating, who finally convinced her to leave and she did. Several years later she met a wonderful man who adored her and gave her a good life. They are very happy together and she deserves this happiness. She now considers herself an adultress. She will not annul the first marriage for reasons of her own. The ghost in her marriage is the catholic church which she still loves.

So, there she goes every morning to church with a longing for Jesus that she will never have again.

So, maybe I did start out on this forum quietly but the more I learn about what is 'really' going on, and the more I think about my mother's heart aching for Jesus, the angrier I get. I come on here and listen to you people who just don't want to hear the truth about those who run the church, you just don't want to hear it.

I compare to what is going on to the Enron scandle. People who worked for Enron, loved their jobs, loved the company, but those in power destroyed it and destroyed the lives of those who worked for them.

Well, maybe it is time for me to think about my Catholic faith because I just can't take the way the church hurts people any more.

When they announced that the Boston Dioecese changed its minds about settling with the victims, I realized that it is still all about the institution, it is about protecting the institution and they don't care at all about the heart, souls, or lives of those they hurt. That is very, very sad. If those in power continue to do what they are doing, they are going to lose a lot of money and a lot of souls. I can't do anything about it but pray for them, pray for the church, and pray for my mother.

My brothers, sisters and I told her we would pay for the annulment, even though she can afford it now, but the idea of dismissing her first marriage just does not sit right with her so she will continue to say her rosary every day, continue to read her bible, continue to attend church every day, and continue to have that haunting, empty look in her eyes when she is there because she can never receive the Eucharist again. Every day she prays for mercy and forgiveness. I think Jesus does forgive her. She already did her hell on earth and I don't think that Jesus is going to send her there again when she dies. She never hurt anyone in her whole life.

Maybe I don't belong in the Catholic Church any more either, maybe I don't believe a lot of it any more but could not bring myself to accept that truth. It is not an easy truth to accept. My heart is breaking too. I wish I was like Fred and Eugene and Mateo and Emerald. I wish I felt as strongly about my church as they do, but this scandal and everything I have learned since then, is destroying my belief in the institution - not my belief in my Jesus or Mary, but the institution itself. Maybe I had to come on this forum to see the truth about myself.

I am sorry if I offended anyone here. You are all good people who love your catholic faith. I thought I did too, but I see compared to all of you, maybe I really don't.

May the good Lord bless all of your for defending what you believe in. I just can't any more. MaryLu

-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), May 05, 2002.

MaryLu, I think that a major part of the problem here is that you are not aware of the purposes of the forum.
The forum does not exist for simple chat/gossip, for hashing and rehashing, day after day after day, the latest scandals being blared on the Clinton News Network (CNN) and in the liberal rags of the nation.

You are a recent arrival here, so you apparently do not know that the sexual crisis in our Church was first raised here a couple of months ago, when it was "fresh" and reasonable to discuss. But it has gone on and on and on, to the point of making most of the regulars at the forum gag. No one is happy to have the same "food" -- be it faithful filet mignon or pedophile porridge -- jammed down our throats ten times a day. It's not that we don't care about what is happening, but that we have already covered the whole darned thing backwards, forewards, upside down, and sideways. There is nothing more, nothing new to say, and most things have already been said five times. If you just can't seem to shake this topic out of your mind, I encourage you to seek out and read all the old threads, to become completely familiar with all the comments that have been posted in March, April, and May. But please try to refrain from posting new threads on this, because there is so much ELSE to discuss here -- interesting, helpful Catholic topics.

God bless you.
John
PS: Bill O'Reilly is not a faithful, orthodox Catholic, but rather a huge dissenter on (at least) some sexual issues. Fr. R. McBrien is one of the worst priests in the entire Church, a horrendous dissenter who has led millions of Catholics astray. If I had the time, I could go through the Barnicle article and show you, point by point, that it contains a variety of improper and offensive comments, things that no Catholic should write. I will pray for you to have a deeper faith, MaryLu, because you are not seeing things properly right now. There is no point in your leaving the Church. You may be somewhat unhappy now, but you will be downright miserable elsewhere.

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 05, 2002.

I wasn't offended... no, it's not you that is the magician. Unless you are a Luciferian.

No one is ever going to understand what is happening until they make the connection between the abuses and Luciferian ritual. But really, I suggest they even don't do that, really... just hang close to the unchanging doctrines; that will do fine enough.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), May 05, 2002.

Mary Lu,

What does that have to do with the high price of fish in China? You're Mother's situation, has been the same, in the holy Church ,since the begining.

You're Mom sounds like a very good woman. But, maybe, you should start a different thread, and ask for prayers? I would be glad to offer my Prayers, for you're Mom's intentions. Why bring that out on this thread, now?

David

-- David (David@excite.com), May 05, 2002.

John I dare say that your post was not meant for amusement, but it did amuse me , thank you. You write very well and I completely agree on the "pedophile porridge" being jamned down our throats. However, it is not as though people should not be concerned with the present problem. The present problem though is not just the pedophilia in itself. It's way bigger than that. I do have a problem with the hierarchy AS IT IS TODAY, not with the hierarchy in se. The hierarchy today is full of Satan's minions who are too afraid to say "I believe..." No, instead they must say, "We, in our own and subjective and completely relative mindset firmly approve of the modern conception that..." so that, by example, us poor catholic faithful will be too afraid of offending some poor prot by our "predjudiced mindset and intolerant views." If you are Catholic, than be so, if you do not act as one, than what purpose does it serve to call yourself one? As the Romans say, do what you are doing. If you are a believer of the Catholc Faith, than do not let yourself be convinced to be otherwise by unwise dissenters who are nevertheless in positions of authority. The worse for them and for you if you do. Rather stick to what the Church has always taught and you will be at peace though crisis be in the Church and its hierarchy. God Bless the Pope. In Christo, Magdalene

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 05, 2002.

I apologize sincerely for my outbursts this morning. I 'promise' not to post any more about the scandal if it upsets you so much. You are nice people. I guess it is triggering some painful situations in my own life and has nothing to do with you nice people. I really don't want to leave the church, but will have to find someone I can talk to about my feelings on the whole issue and this, obviously, is not the place to do that.

I am sorry for burdening you all with it. Please pray for me and my current struggle and remember my mom in your prayers as well. Maybe she can still get an annulment and maybe I can convince her to talk to someone about that.

BTW, I am not a gossip and I do respect 'everyone's opinions even those that differ from me. It is not for anyone else to decide who is a good catholic or not - that is for God to decide. God blesses some people with the gift of boldness and it is necessary sometimes to speak out on issues, even though the truth is painful. I respect Bill O'Reilly, Fr. McBrien, and all the others. They, too, have a right to speak their mind. They are highly educated people - not low lives and I listen. There is a saying in Al-anon - You may not like all of us here, and you may not like everything we say, so take what you like and leave the rest.

May Our Lord's peace reign.

-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), May 05, 2002.

MaryLu, this is a very open thread, my sugestion to you, is find a member thread, they are censor and modertor, if you think this is bad you should see the Anarchy thread.

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 05, 2002.

MaryLu, I will rember your Mom, and you, in my Prayers. Please keep praying, and you will keep you're faith.

God bless you, and you're Mom.

David

-- David (David@excite.com), May 05, 2002.

Yes, MaryLu, please do ask your Mom to speak to her pastor. There is really no good reason for her to be dangling in suspense, unsure of her marital status. Tell her that we are praying for her and that she should have the faith and fortitude (gifts from Baptism and Confirmation) to let the Church determine whether or not her marriage was valid. If it was invalid, why should she deprive herself of the sacraments for years. Jesus longs to be reunited with her, Body and Soul.

Magdalene, thanks for your compliment and post, with which I agree for the most part. There is only one thing that I wish you had not said:
"The hierarchy today is full of Satan's minions who are too afraid to say 'I believe...' No, instead they must say, 'We, in our own and subjective and completely relative mindset firmly approve of the modern conception that...'"

I would like to persuade you not to generalize by attributing these thoughts and words to "the hierarchy today." We have to keep in mind that "the hierarchy today" consists of about 4,000 bishops all around the world. Neither you nor I knows how many of them think and speak in the way you just described. But I am confident that it is far fewer than half, and I know that many even in the U.S. do not think and speak in the way you just described. So, please use more judicious words, such as "some bishops today," rather than "the hierarchy today."

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 05, 2002.

Emerald,

Thanks for the post, it gives me something useful to think about.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 06, 2002.

Hi MaryLu:

Just wanted you to know that I appreciate your heart's cry with what is going on in the Church and your mom, BUT just one thing to keep in mind -- We don't know all the facts. We really don't. There is a lynch-mob mentality that has been fueled by the press, and when that happens alot of innocent people get hurt, and the real story of the real victims gets lost.

I just want to make a couple of observations that I haven't heard any Catholic commentator make thus far.

First, I know a lot of people were disappointed that the Pope didn't receive Law's resignation. But can't you see that the man is doing penance right now! He is having to face his congregation and the press and the victims every single minute of every day. It would have been easier for him to run -- but he was not allowed to do that. The Pope, like a good father, said, "No, you go back there and clean up the mess you helped make. You face it," and isn't that what a good parent does?

Secondly, about the victims settlement fund, now that 'open disclosure' is the name of the game the Church no longer has to pay 'hush money' so as not to scandalize the church. That is the fruit of transparency. These revelations of the past four months will free the Church to respond in the way it should have in the beginning, i.e., healing therapy for the victim AND defrocking of wayward priests -- which is FAR better than throwing money at people.

Hang in there, MaryLu.

Gail

P.S. I'll be praying for your mom!

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), May 06, 2002.

Thank you Gail for your kind words and your 'wisdom.' You are truly a peacemaker and every forum needs a peacemaker. :)

I did speak to mom today and she is going to talk to her pastor. She feels she is too old to do anything about it now, but we are never too old. It's time and maybe I had to express those 'strong' feelings yesterday - I realized I needed to address the issue with her. I can't believe I said 'personal' things on here. I should not have done that, and certainly will be more careful about that and keep to the topic at hand.

I looked at the picture of Cardinal Law today and told my husband that he looks pained. I understand what you mean when you say he is doing his penance. He looks so sad. I think the people of Boston need prayers, the Cardinal needs prayers, and the victims.

I can see where lawyers can be worse than the media - won't go any further with that. MaryLu

-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), May 06, 2002.

Mary Lu - The fury that resides in me with the fact a person being denied Union With Christ is outrageous and immoral. This is the sin against the Holy Spirit for sure which is unforgivable. When is she going to be allowed communion on her death bed I ask?? Damnable man made laws again destroying the beauty of the gift from Christ.

I have attended a number of deaths without a priest and shared Spiritual Communion. Let the person pass from this earth with knowing they are loved not judged. Your mom is being judged by holier than thou " ordained " priests. Shamefull.

-- Jean Bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), May 07, 2002.

Hi, Jean.

I think MaryLu, said her Mom is going, to talk, to a Priest. She just talked to her Mom a few hours ago about this. Rember?

It's getting close to detoxing time! :-)

David

-- David (David@excite.com), May 07, 2002.

John,

I said the "hierarchy today" in the general form with which you took it. Why? Because the majority of the hierarchy today aren't following the true Church and do a lot of feel good and say nice stuff to everybody, out of keeping with tradition and often at the expense of the faith. It sounds harsh, but it's true. I'm a traditional catholic if that tells you anything. If you contest what I say than e-mail me and tell me why and I'll try to explain to you why I think the way do. God Bless, In Christo, Magdalene

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 07, 2002.

Hello, Magdalene.

I have already explained why it is senseless for you to put down the "hierachy today." If you want to continue to do it in the face of what I have said, I can't stop you from being foolish.

You stated: "I'm a traditional catholic if that tells you anything. If you contest what I say than e-mail me and tell me why and I'll try to explain to you why I think the way do."

You don't have your self-description right, Magdalene. You are not a "traditional Catholic." (That's what I am.) Rather, you are a SLT-SSPX -- a "Schismatic Lefebvrite Traditionalist of the Society of St. Pius X." Very much like the Eastern Orthodox, you are not in full communion with the Catholic Church. I know that you (Miss Kane? Mrs. Kane?) are associated (student/faculty/staff/alumna?) with St. Mary's Academy and College of Kansas, formerly Catholic institutions now being run by SSPX members. How sad. If you were once in full communion with the pope and Catholicism, your soul is now in grave danger for having gone into schism. I definitely won't be e-mailing you, because I have heard it all from your side, and it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 08, 2002.

John:

I'm sorry to bust your little tirade here but you are dreadfully misinformed. The sspx is not excommunicated or schismatic and yes I am in St. Mary's (oops! my dirty little secret is out! I guess you wouldn't have known if you hadn't seen my e-mail address!) If we weren't in communion with Rome than why does Rome bother to send for our bishops and they come? Do you suppose that just because someone is affiliated with the sspx than they are automatically going to hell? Beware your condemnations. They might come back to bite you in the butt. If you have read so much and are so convinced of our schism and error, then why is it that the movement is growing so fast and VATICAN II priesthood is on the decline? "By their fruits you shall know them." What are the fruits of VATICAN II I ask you? "Interrelatedness with penultimate universality of all our souls: this is the truth. Adore it (only if YOU believe in it of course)" pppppppplllllleeeeeeaaaassssseeee...spare me the new age fertilizer. That's pretty much close to all that Novus Ordo priests are offering now a days. Believe me, I know. Why do you think that I am here? For the fun of it? Don't you think that it would be easier to say as you do? To be conciliatory all the time? I'm sorry that you aren't informed enough about the situation. How come you accept everybody else except those that don't agree with you and VATICAN II? "We are ecumenical (meaning we accept all different religions), except when it comes the big. bad. SSPX. Than we say '[Well, you] don't stand up to scrutiny [anyway].' And then we stick our nose in the air and walk away." You are so blind that you can't even see the forest for the trees. I insulted you by saying that you weren't faithful? But then it's not an insult to say that I'm schismatic? Looks like we both think the other's wrong. I guess we'll find out when we die won't we. May God Bless you and have mercy on your poor soul.

In Christo, Magdalene

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 10, 2002.

Thanks, Magdalene.
Sometimes when folks disagree with me here, they leave a message to which it is very difficult to reply. I'm happy to see that yours is not one of those. Rather, what you have written can easily be shown to be wrong. I'll put your words in quotation marks before my responses.

"I'm sorry to bust your little tirade here but you are dreadfully misinformed."
I just left an ordinary post, Magdalene, not a tirade. It revealed things that you did not want revealed, so you decided to put an negtive label on it ("tirade").

"The sspx is not excommunicated or schismatic ..."

-- First, I did not state that all who take part in the SSPX are excommunicated. The Church would never speak of an entire entity (e.g., the SSPX) as "exommunicated," because excommunication is something that happens to individuals. Many have entered from outside Catholicism, so it is not possible for them to be excommunicated.

-- Second, you are wrong to say that the SSPX is "not ... schismatic." Apparently, you are just buying the SSPX "party line" on this, without being aware of what Pope John Paul II has actually said. Here are a couple of excerpts from his apostolic letter on the subject ("Ecclesia Dei" [Church of God]), beginning with a reference to the illicit consecration of bishops by Msgr. Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of SSPX:
"In itself this act was one of disobedience to the Roman pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the Church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience —- which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy —- constitutes a schismatic act [Code of Canon Law, 751]. In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the cardinal prefect of the Congregation for Bishops last June 17, Archbishop Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law [Cf. Code of Canon Law, 1382]. ... In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfill the grave duty of remaining united to the vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offense against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law [Cf. Code of Canon Law, 1364]."

Thus, Magdalene, if you were once a Catholic outside the SSPX but now formally adhere to it, you have excommunicated yourself. Even if you were not in SSPX, it appears (if I have read you correctly, on another thread) that you may have put yourself outside of communion with Catholicism by a Feeneyite (heretical) belief on the potential salvation of non-Catholics. [Anyone who wants to read more about SSPX and Catholicism can look at articles in an issue of 'Envoy' magazine.]

You continued: "If we weren't in communion with Rome than why does Rome bother to send for our bishops and they come?

Oh, that's easy. They know that they are in schism, and they want it to end. Some want to be reconciled to the pope [some SSPX priests have been], while others want to convince the pope that Abp. Lefebvre was right. The best way to do either of these things is to go to the Vatican.

"Do you suppose that just because someone is affiliated with the sspx than they are automatically going to hell? Beware your condemnations. They might come back to bite you in the butt."
Why don't you quote my words that say that SSPX people "are automatically going to hell"? Why don't you quote my "condemnations"? You don't quote 'em, because I didn't say 'em. Magdalene, don't be foolish and accuse me of something I did not do. [You have a very good name, as it will help you to prepare to be repentant some day for what you are doing now.]

"If you have read so much and are so convinced of our schism and error, then why is it that the movement is growing so fast and VATICAN II priesthood is on the decline? 'By their fruits you shall know them.'"

Man, what a set-up!
-- First, among the fastest-growing religious groups in the world are the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses. By your logic, they must be free from "schism and error." We cannot judge this by growth, but only by what the successor of St. Peter tells us.
-- Second, there is no such thing as the "Vatican II priesthood." Here is a fact of which I was recently reminded ... During the current pope's pontificate (i.e., since 1978), the number of seminarians has grown from about 68,000 to over 110,000. When viewed worldwide (as the word "catholic" tells us to do), there is no "vocations crisis."

"What are the fruits of VATICAN II I ask you? "Interrelatedness with penultimate universality of all our souls: this is the truth. Adore it (only if YOU believe in it of course)" pppppppplllllleeeeeeaaaassssseeee...spare me the new age fertilizer. That's pretty much close to all that Novus Ordo priests are offering now a days. Believe me, I know."

First, there is no such thing as a "Novus Ordo priest."
Second, the fact that you and others have encountered priests who teach wrongly (New Age or otherwise) has no bearing on the Second Vatican Council. The Council did not tell those priests to do what is wrong. You have fallen for the fallacy known as "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" -- "after this, therefore because of this" -- the "this" being the Council. The truth is that bad priests are teach and act wrongly in spite of, not because of, the Council. You were not aware of this (and lots of other things I am telling you), because your head is full of SSPX propaganda.

"Why do you think that I am here? For the fun of it? Don't you think that it would be easier to say as you do? To be conciliatory all the time? I'm sorry that you aren't informed enough about the situation."

Again, what a set-up! First, you are there in SSPX either because someone has fooled you with lies and half-truths, or because you are stubborn, spoiled brat who insists on having her way rather than submit to the authority of the pope. (I'm not going to try to guess which.)
Second, you must have caused a lot of laughter in other forum regulars by calling me "conciliatory!" I would like to be, but people are always pushing me into conflict with them.
Third, I am totally informed about the situation! Young lady, I was born in 1951. Beginning in 1956, I attended Mass (so-called Tridentine Rite) EVERY DAY. A few years later, I became an altar boy. For a couple of years, I served Mass every morning (sometimes two or three Masses) at a Benedictine abbey. I was in grade school and high school during Vatican II. I know exactly what happened before, during, and since the Council. So I am the one to tell you that you "aren't informed enough about the situation" -- not the other way around.

"How come you accept everybody else except those that don't agree with you and VATICAN II? 'We are ecumenical (meaning we accept all different religions), except when it comes [to] the big bad SSPX. Than we say "[Well, you] don't stand up to scrutiny [anyway]." And then we stick our nose in the air and walk away.'"

You have made an error in assuming that I "accept everybody else ... accept all different religions." I only accept them as fellow human beings, worthy of respect. I reject everything false that they believe. I know that the SSPX is closer to me theologically than I am to any other schismatic church or to any heretical Christian community or to any non-Christian religion. But the fact that the SSPX and Catholicism are close does not mean that the SSPX's errors can "stand up to scrutiny." They cannot.

"You are so blind that you can't even see the forest for the trees. I insulted you by saying that you weren't faithful? But then it's not an insult to say that I'm schismatic? Looks like we both think the other's wrong. I guess we'll find out when we die won't we."

Yes, you insulted me by saying that I was not faithful, because the fact is that I faithfully believe what the Catholic Church teaches.
By contrast, I did not insult you by saying that the SSPX is schismatic, because the fact is that it is schismatic (as the pope stated [quoted above]).
Therefore, I don't just think that you are wrong. I know it, and we don't to "die" to "find out."

"May God Bless you and have mercy on your poor soul."
Thank you. I will need his mercy, because I sin every day.

Dear Blessed John XXIII, you who were so wise in calling the Council at the urging of the Holy Spirit, pray for us.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 11, 2002.

Dear Moderator, can you please help by inserting the missing link-closer ("") above. Sorry. JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 11, 2002.

Magdalene, Please check the recent (5/10) letter from Rome to the SSPX which all but calls them Schismatics.

-- Father Chris LaBarge (marydelfr@starband.net), May 11, 2002.

Fr. L., could you please copy the text of the letter here -- or provide a link or URL? I am not aware of the letter and I doubt that Magdalene could find it (or would even be willing to look for it).
Thanks. JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 11, 2002.

john,

I would not think that such a GOOD Christian man as yourself would be so quick to assume things which have absolutely no evidence. You know what happens when you assume. And Fr. of course the VAtican is going to say everything BUT schismatics because they and people like John want to make everybody think they are and that they are bad. But, do put the letter here if you like. I have no objections to reading it WHEN I HAVE TIME. (I guess that means you just aren't my number one priority right now). I don't think you give sspx members enough credit, John. I guess you think that just some archbishop arbitrarily decided to start it up and go schismatic. Hmmmm...what would be the incentive to do that? Uh, yeah, nothing. He also happened to have a doctorate in Scholastic theology, do you have that? I just don't see why you think that we are so uninformed and would like to stay that way. Don't be ridiculous. The only reason I wouldn't be willing to look for it is because it is getting towards the end of the year and I am extremely busy right now (and trying to be an apologist for traditional Catholicism on the side). Don't act like you don't have priorities either, unless of course the internet is the only thing you work on all day.

God Bless.

In Christo, Magdalene

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 11, 2002.

<"">http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CEDSSPX2.HTM Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei

N. 343/98 Rome, 27 October 1998

Information on the SSPX

-- Carolyn (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 11, 2002.

http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002Apr/2002ecc.htm

information on the sspx

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 11, 2002.

john,

I will answer your above long answer when I have time. Its printing right now. In the mean time, if you go to google and look up sspx and the question and answer stuff, or maybe if you read some more on the sspx, you would know that we aren't schismatic, but then again perhaps you won't as you already seem to know everything there is to know about us. But I will go into that later, when I have fully, and carefully, read your statement.

God Bless.

In Christo, Magdalene

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 11, 2002.

here is a good site which shows why someone would be traditional and proves how one can be so and not be in so-called Schism or excommunicatin or any other of those myths that people like to come up with:

http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20011221_A_Brief_Defense_of_Tra ditionalism.html

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 11, 2002.

Please, Magdalene, don't bother us with these links and other rubbish. I have already said all there is to say in my message to you. If you had read it first, you would not have wasted time with the links and blind comments. You have, in your hands, proof that Pope John Paul II referred to the SSPX as a schism and that formal adherents who were formerly Catholic are now excommunicated. There is simply nothing further for either of us to talk about.

It would be a sheer waste of your time for you to post anything further. And I know that I won't be wasting my time reading what you plan to post. The Pope has closed the case. You now have to decide to remain in schism or be reconciled by a making a good humble confession in a real Catholic church. Please go away now, and don't return unless you decide to do the latter.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 11, 2002.

John,

That suits me fine. I really don't have time to answer your posts anyways (getting to the end of the year). Point is - I know I'm not in schism, or excommnicated or a feeneyite or, anything else you want to cll me. You are always talking about names - well, your name means Beloved of God - why don't you be true to it and return to tradition (along with the Holy Father, of course)...Sorry you are so misinformed.

God Bless.

In Christo, Magdalene

-- magdalene (mkane@smac.edu), May 12, 2002.