Edit: an unsympathetic reader provided this as an example to put Catholics in the rest of the West to shame. Are we actually certain that this reaction comes from faithful Catholics? If these are indeed faithful Catholics outraged at an evil Bishop, which he seems to be, we really ought to feel ashamed.
There was once a time when Catholics would reject an unworthy ordinary by force.
The New York Times reportage isn't very encouraging.
CH 21, 2015
SANTIAGO, Chile — Hundreds of demonstrators dressed in black barged into a cathedral in a city in southern Chile on Saturday and interrupted the installation ceremony for the city’s new Roman Catholic bishop, Juan Barros, whom they accuse of complicity in a notorious case of clerical sexual abuse, blocking his passage and shouting, “Barros, get out of the city!”
The scene inside the Cathedral San Mateo de Osorno was chaotic, with television images showing clashes between Barros opponents, carrying black balloons, and Barros supporters, carrying white ones. Radio reports said several protesters tried to climb onto the altar where Bishop Barros was standing. After the ceremony, he left the cathedral through a side door escorted by police special forces. Outside, about 3,000 people, including local politicians and members of Congress, held signs and chanted demands that he resign.
Weeks of protests, candlelight vigils and letters to Pope Francis were not enough to persuade him to rescind his decision in January to appoint Bishop Barros to lead the Diocese of Osorno, 570 miles south of the capital, Santiago. Bishop Barros was a close associate of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, a prominent Santiago priest whom the Vatican found guilty of sexual abuse in 2011. Father Karadima, now 84, was ordered to retire to a “life of prayer and penitence.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/world/americas/angry-protest-over-bishop-juan-barros-in-chile.html
16 comments:
The high-ups in the Vatican may speak about 'smelling' like the sheep but they certainly do not seem to HEAR them! (only if they agree to a certain preset agenda that is)
I think so - and so does this guy:
http://shoebat.com/2015/02/16/church-filled-evil-demonic-people-time-weakness-must-confront-wicked-ministers-pastors-throw-church-bring-back-christendom/
I'm tired of being excommunicated from my Church and my St.'s parades by fairies. It's time (and past time) to (over)turn the tables!
"So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables." John 2:15
Really, Tancred, how many kids have to be sodomized before a "faithful Catholic" does something?
Only special targets tend to get harmed by child abuse allegations while they are alive, but even completely negligent frauds like Cardinal Mahony get clipped from time to time, even if they still get to vote in papal elections...or serve as special advisors.
"I'm tired of being excommunicated from my Church and my St.'s parades by fairies."
And yet if anyone suggests allowing priests to marry WOMEN you'll rabid over it. Seems to me you get the fairy priests you deserve.
I am glad that this happened. This shows the modernists that we have had enough of them. I hope Pope Francis gets the message!
Early in Christian history, bishops were chosen by the local clergy and lay Christians with the consent of neighbouring bishops. And then the Metropolitan bishops became responsible for appointing bishops after the first Nicene council. Then, from the medieval era to 19th century, secular rulers wanted a veto power or some part in the selection of the bishop.
Could it be that we're going back to the original system, after all our secular and religious heads have become debauched?
Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ, St. Paul, St. John the Evangelist, St. Patrick and all the celibate priests for 2000 years were fairies? Go pipe your "marrying" makes one sexually continent or faithful to the Word of God to Martin Luther (or for that matter to his adulterous namesake Martin Luther King Jr. or John Hagee or Joyce Meyer). P.S. Many who practice the vicious vice of sodomy (and pedophilia), marry "WOMEN".
There's a lot of idiocy on the Internet. I don't know what I cn do about it.
Even if you don't have any respect for others... At least have some respect for yourself.
Firstly, there was an invasion of sodomites to the priesthood after Vatican II because the "gay communities" all suspected Paul VI was queer. Before Vatican II, when a priest committed a sin against chastity it was almost always with another woman. Read this: http://www.rcf.org/docs/droleskeyriteofsodomy.htm
The majority of sodomites (i.e. homosexual men) marry women. This is a common fact supported by various statistical surveys including those conducted by the Kinsey Institute which is pro-sodomite and pro-pedophile. Even in modern times sodomites are afraid to "come out of the closet" and the best way for them to hide their is vice is to marry a woman. The modern "in the closet" homosexual doesn't want to become a priest because people will suspect he's queer, times have changed.
Also, the majority of pedophiles are men who are married to women. The majority of pedophiles don't enter the priesthood in modern times because the parishes are half empty with old people. The majority of pedophiles become public school teachers or sports coaches.
Heterosexual married couples, especially nowadays, commit many obscene sexual sins. With the normalization of pornography things like oral sodomy, anal sodomy, BDSM, swinging, et. al. have become commonplace amongst heterosexual couples. The way homosexuals have sex is no different from the way many heterosexuals have sex in modern times. Mainstream rappers (female and male) are currently popularizing anilingus amongst heterosexuals.
If you read the link I posted above, you'll find out that mandatory celibacy was introduced to combat sexual sins like sodomy in the priesthood. See also "Book of Gomorrah" by St. Peter Damian.
It's because of a Hapsburg emperor that St. Pius X was elected pope instead of a freemason who got vetoed.
Every system is flawed. In modern times an election by the laypeople might end up turning into a popularity contest. In liberal dioceses, "the people" would elect pro-sodomite, pro-divorce/remarriage and pro-abortion bishops anyway.
The only way a good bishop can be assured for one's local diocese is through prayer, fasting and virtuous living by the majority of Catholics in that particular diocese.
Elections might made made sense in the 1st century Church when there were maybe 50 maybe 100 Christians in any given city, and those Christians knew each other intimately and were zealous protectors of Orthodoxy. Not saying that it did, but I could see voting leading to Arianism and local heresies because popular election went on too long.
Nowadays voting would be utter senselessness. Chicagoans and other big city Catholics can't even get a decent mayor or alderman elected. Why should they be trusted to vote for a bishop who they likely never met? It would be a circus!
This blog can't handle truth.I am Done posting intelligent comments that are respectful only to have them deleted.If you are scared of truth you must not have much faith in your belief system
There is something very strange about this protest. The article states that the Barros opponents were holding black balloons and the Barros supporters were holding white balloons. It sounds like the same organizer coordinated both sides of the protest. "We'll ask the anti-Barros people to carry black balloons and the pro-Barros people to carry white ones, so it will be easy for everyone to see who is on what side." Would sincere protesters agree to cooperate with the other side in such a manner? No, they would tell their opponents where to go and would conduct their protest as they have personally organized it. Something's fishy here.
I suspected the validity of the even in the first place because sexual abuse tends to be instrumentalized by the Left; but your observations and analysis make sense.
Post a Comment