Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Santo Subito on March 14, 2012, 06:28:37 PM
-
The priest finally speaks out...
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/father-marcel-guarnizo-i-did-only-thing-faithful-catholic-priest-could-do
-
I'm glad he responded.
-
This is the second incident recently of a priest being suspended for criticizing ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs. In September the Catholic Diocese of Bathurst, New Brunswick removed an elderly priest, 85-year-old Fr. Donat Gionet from active ministry after he caused a storm of controversy by denouncing ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, cohabitation, and abortion in an August homily.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/elderly-canadian-priest-suspended-for-denouncing-abortion-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity/
This seems to be standard procedure and it’s not surprising seeing as a large number of “Catholic” Bishops in North America are card carrying members of the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ mafia.
Here is a little background on Cardinal Wuerl from a woman who has been tracking these creeps for years
http://www.newengelpublishing.com/pages/New-Oxford-Review.html
“Pope Benedict XVI recently appointed Donald Wuerl to the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. Wuerl was a protégé of Bishop John Wright (initially the Auxiliary Bishop of Boston). According to Engel, “Wright’s pederastic predilections were an ‘open secret’ in the Archdiocese of Boston.” Bill Burnett accused Bishop Wright of pederasty. Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):
* Explicit detail removed *
Burnett stated that the abuse ritual began with drinks, a Coke for him and Coke
Then Bishop Wright was made Bishop of Pittsburgh, and this is where Wuerl became his private secretary, protégé, and remained at Wright’s side (as he was made a cardinal) until Wright’s death in 1979. Is this guilt by association? Who knows?
Engel writes: “From 1980 to 1985, Fr. Wuerl served as Vice Rector and Rector of St. Paul Seminary. The seminary had a reputation for rampant ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity going back to the days of Bishop Wright.” Then Wuerl became Bishop of Pittsburgh in February 1988, fulfilling his protégé role.
Writes Engel: “After Donald Wuerl was posted to the Diocese of Pittsburgh, he permitted Dignity/Pittsburgh Masses to continue for eight more years…. Dignity/Pittsburgh was one of the last chapters to be evicted from Catholic facilities in the United States [on orders from the Vatican]. According to Pittsburgh Post-Gazette staff writer Ann Rodgers-Melnick, ‘Banning Dignity was a sad moment for Wuerl.’… Under Wuerl, the Pittsburgh Diocese has become a stomping ground for nationally-known doctrinal and moral miscreants including Father (now ex-priest) Matthew Fox, Sister Fran Ferder, Father Robert Nugent, Sister Jeannine Gramick, Father Raymond Brown and howling feminists Rosemary Radford Ruether and Monica Hellwig.”
In the summer of 1996, Mother’s Watch featured a lengthy article called “Bishop Wuerl’s Magnificent Obsession.” Engel mentions a segment “dealing with Wuerl’s exceptional relations with the members of the Pittsburgh ‘gαy’ community who refer to the bishop as ‘Donna’ Wuerl….” We’ve heard that too. “
-
Now there's a good priest in spite of being an NO priest. He was right to defend what he did.
How about instead of defrocking him, they defrock Cardinal Hurl?
-
I am glead Fr. Gurnizo spoke out, also. This did not seem like a time to bear calumnies silently.
:heretic: Weurl
-
Wuerl sent paddy wagons to intimidate parents protesting his sex education program in Pittsburgh, but sent a priest packing for [discreetly] denying a Budddist lesbian activist Communion.
The list of Wuerl's grievous apostasy and destruction of Catholic moral and historic churches is staggering. His career is sordid almost beyond belief.
May Christ have mercy on us sinners.
-
Of course, as much of an indictment of the man who continues to promote him as the man himself.
-
If you would like to politely and courteously express your concerns to the Archdiocese, they can be reached at: chancery@adw.org.
Communication should be directed to Bishop Barry Knestout.
-
More extensive info on Cardinal Wuerl
http://www.motherswatch.net/content/view/13/2/
-
Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):“
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
-
Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):“
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
I agree.
-
I am glead Fr. Gurnizo spoke out, also. This did not seem like a time to bear calumnies silently.
:heretic: Weurl
Why do you think he should have defended himself in this instance?
Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino would probably tell you the saints would have never defended themselves.
-
Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):“
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
I agree.
I agree as well.
-
Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):“
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
You may be right, but he photograph of Johnson is a graphic scandal. I can't get the image out of my mind of her teaching Catholic kids art for 20 years. Because somehow I know she wasn't really teaching art, she was advancing her perversion and manipulating young minds. The Catholic school graduates end up getting good jobs, they are a force in society.
I think it is important to keep abreast of this situation. It has far-reaching implications. For one thing, the Roman Catholic Church is the most extensive infrastructure in the world. I think it's safe to say this will be the vehicle of Antichrist.
These sex education programs-who ever even THINKS about them? I never do, and I almost had a heart attack reading about Wuerl's work in that area. It amounts to large scale sɛҳuąƖ abuse of children. The filthy dirty women in charge of implementing these mass molestations freak me right out!!
Our children are not going to live in tiny bubbles all of their lives. Their bosses and co-workers will have been exposed to this satanic mixture of sex and "catholicism".
The Mother's Watch piece drove me to the brink-I think it was its excess of caution and restraint.
Think about the access to power Wuerl has in his post in DC. It would be naive to underestimate it. :devil2:
-
Mrs. Elizabeth,
I think this issue is important itself as well. I was speaking to the graphic nature of the sɛҳuąƖ acts being described in detail ma'am.
-
I think it is important to keep abreast of this situation. It has far-reaching implications. For one thing, the Roman Catholic Church is the most extensive infrastructure in the world. I think it's safe to say this will be the vehicle of Antichrist.
When I said "I think this will be the vehicle of Antichrist" I meant the infrastructure of the Church, the institution with all of the money, property and people, not the Spotless Bride of Christ.
Politicians have much more public lives than these warlocks wearing clerical costumes. It is much harder to find out what they are up to, and too easy to be above it all.
We are often discussing the bad men, but this situation points to the very real forces of evil caused by women in positions of authority.
And Lighthouse, the priest was defending basic Catholic morality with regard to the Blessed Sacrament and it had to be defended.
Don't try to make this about Bazz- surely you can be bigger than that?
-
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
I must have missed that part -UGH- you are totally right. I am sure Thursday meant no harm, though. Maybe Matthew can erase that part? (sorry I can't get the quotes to work)
-
And Lighthouse, the priest was defending basic Catholic morality with regard to the Blessed Sacrament and it had to be defended.
Don't try to make this about Bazz- surely you can be bigger than that?
Just trying to establish why you think certain things should or should not be defended and what principles you apply. Bazz was the one who showed you the light, at least the light you thought you saw at the moment.
-
I can't believe this priest is being punished for....well acting like a priest. (Well maybe I can, but that's besides the point)
Just what is it with these NO clergy where they let sodomites and sɛҳuąƖ deviants push them around like this and dictate to them Church doctrine?
This unrepentant lesbian tries to intimidate this NO priest and shame him into letting her recieve the Body of Christ and he's the one who's the bad guy?
What the hell is wrong with these bishops in the NO "church", are they all sodomite sympathizers if not outright sodomites themselves? Don't they know they are only encouraging and enabling the "gαys" in their sin?
What is it with all this power of queer nation over the Church? Do you honestly think that this would go on in most Orthodox churches? Evangelical Prot ones?
Do you think ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs would ever dream of going into a Mosque and dictating to the local Imam about recognizing their "alternate lifestyle" regardless of Muslim doctrine?
No, not for a second but for some reason the Roman church quakes in their knickers the minute some self-righteous sɛҳuąƖ perverts starts demanding respect and dignity regardless of 2000 yr old traditions and doctrines.
This is exactly why men are leaving the Church in droves since Vatican II. Why would they even want to be part of an institution that doesn't even believe in enforcing it's own doctrine and tradition and punishes it's own priests that does.
It's disgusting.
-
"A few minutes before the Mass began, Ms. Johnson came into the sacristy with another woman whom she announced as her “lover." Her revelation was completely unsolicited. As I attempted to follow Ms. Johnson, her lover stood in our narrow sacristy physically blocking my pathway to the door. I politely asked her to move and she refused."
What? Are you kidding me? If I was there, I would've knocked her "lover" on her ass and not thought twice about it. what is this world coming to when these demon-possesed sɛҳuąƖ perverts openly intimidate and confront a Catholic priest in the sacristy? What bunch of BS!
You'll have to forgive me for my language and lack of charity but right now this story has me seeing red and I'm certainly no choir boy or saint.
-
I know. Since when does some bull dyke buddist layperson get to decide who is allowed to hear Confessions.
That creature was willing to use her own mother's dead body to do such a thing, and the apostate clerics are eating out of her filthy hand.
It is beyond disgusting. Can you imagine being cornered by that Johnson creature?
Do you think the minions of Wuerl helped her set this thing up? How would she be so sure of success in this calumny?
-
I am glead Fr. Gurnizo spoke out, also. This did not seem like a time to bear calumnies silently.
:heretic: Weurl
Why do you think he should have defended himself in this instance?
Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino would probably tell you the saints would have never defended themselves.
Do you enjoy trying to start arguments, SJB? Here we are all discussing the good actions of a priest, and you bring over your trash about the SGG again. Then when Elizabeth didn't respond, you made another post trying to get a response from her. You need to show some decency.
-
I am glead Fr. Gurnizo spoke out, also. This did not seem like a time to bear calumnies silently.
:heretic: Weurl
Why do you think he should have defended himself in this instance?
Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino would probably tell you the saints would have never defended themselves.
Do you enjoy trying to start arguments, SJB? Here we are all discussing the good actions of a priest, and you bring over your trash about the SGG again. Then when Elizabeth didn't respond, you made another post trying to get a response from her. You need to show some decency.
I'm trying to establish some principles. You see whatever you want to see.
-
I am glead Fr. Gurnizo spoke out, also. This did not seem like a time to bear calumnies silently.
:heretic: Weurl
Why do you think he should have defended himself in this instance?
Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino would probably tell you the saints would have never defended themselves.
Do you enjoy trying to start arguments, SJB? Here we are all discussing the good actions of a priest, and you bring over your trash about the SGG again. Then when Elizabeth didn't respond, you made another post trying to get a response from her. You need to show some decency.
I'm trying to establish some principles. You see whatever you want to see.
Then take the topic to another thread.
-
Rhode Island Bishop Thomas Tobin told Sen. Patrick Kennedy not to receive Communion because of his pro abortion position.
He still has his job, I guess because he didn't go against ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.
I have been so long out of the loop of the Novus Ordo, it's a shocker to see how bad it is.
-
I am glead Fr. Gurnizo spoke out, also. This did not seem like a time to bear calumnies silently.
:heretic: Weurl
Why do you think he should have defended himself in this instance?
Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino would probably tell you the saints would have never defended themselves.
Do you enjoy trying to start arguments, SJB? Here we are all discussing the good actions of a priest, and you bring over your trash about the SGG again. Then when Elizabeth didn't respond, you made another post trying to get a response from her. You need to show some decency.
I'm trying to establish some principles. You see whatever you want to see.
Then take the topic to another thread.
The topic is now part of this topic. You do you think you are anyway?
-
The topic is now part of this topic.
Yeah, because you are obsessed with talking about it.
You do you think you are anyway?
I presume you mean "Who do you think you are anyway" Who do you think you are to bring the issue up on nearly every thread you post on?
-
Rhode Island Bishop Thomas Tobin told Sen. Patrick Kennedy not to receive Communion because of his pro abortion position.
He still has his job, I guess because he didn't go against ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.
I have been so long out of the loop of the Novus Ordo, it's a shocker to see how bad it is.
I believe ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are somewhat divided on the abortion issue since they fear with the future medical advances they might be able to predetermine if the baby could be potentially ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and therefore aborted.
Can't take that risk now can they.
Also, since their kind goes against all laws of nature they will be systematically be selected for extinction since their incapable of reproduction.
Somebody has to be having babies for future recruits.
-
The topic is now part of this topic.
Yeah, because you are obsessed with talking about it.
You do you think you are anyway?
I presume you mean "Who do you think you are anyway" Who do you think you are to bring the issue up on nearly every thread you post on?
Yes, that's what I intended to say.
I don't bring up "this issue," whatever that may mean, on nearly every thread.
-
Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):“
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
Yes, in hind site I should have summarized that part with something less explicit. However I did want to make the point that the real issue here is Cardinal Wuerl because I don't think this priest would have been removed from his duties without his consent. We now know who he is and he should not be in such a powerful position considering his background. the parishioners should be calling for his resignation from the archdiocese.
-
Here is an instance of where the book is not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t like to read sɛҳuąƖly graphic accounts, do not read what Engel has to say about the rite of sodomy here (for it will make you sick):“
I understand its true, but I don't think this section should have been shared on this website. Its too graphic, and may scandalize some.
Yes, in hind site I should have summarized that part with something less explicit. However I did want to make the point that the real issue here is Cardinal Wuerl because I don't think this priest would have been removed from his duties without his consent. We now know who he is and he should not be in such a powerful position considering his background. the parishioners should be calling for his resignation from the archdiocese.
Its okay. I think it was disgusting, and am glad you showed us the resource anyways.
-
"JREducation" from CAF is outraged that Cardinal Wuerl, yes, Cardinal Wuerl, is getting "thrown under the bus" in this discussion.
If you can get through this without :barf:, please register at CAF and let JR, know how you feel.
:heretic:
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=654445&highlight=responds&page=10
There is an unfortunate thing happening here. Father G is being held up as a faithful priest, because he withheld Holy Communion from a lesbian woman and the Cardinal is being thrown under the buss.
Let's look at Cardinal Wuerl's profile. All of this can be found on the internet, if anyone wants to look for the Cardinal's resume.
1. The media itself, in 1988, called him "The Zero Tolerance Bishop". He investigated every allegation of sɛҳuąƖ abuse in his diocese. He had every guilty priest laicized and reported to the police. He even took a case to Pope John Paul when the tribunal ruled in favor of the priest and then Bishop Wuerl was certain that he was guilty. The Holy See ruled that he was guilty and the priest was laicized.
2. He took on the District of Columbia when the City Council voted for gαy marriage and passed anti-discrimination laws. The Cardinal threatened that he would close every Catholic adoption and foster care agency in Washington. He did as he promised. The Archdiocese of Washington extends into to southern counties in Maryland. I'm not sure that they closed in Maryland, maybe so. I don't believe that he has suddenly become so "gαy couple friendly"
3. He has pastoral concerns as to how to apply the law. He has no objections to the moral position of the Church. There is a big difference. He spearheaded the question to the Holy See on how to apply the law and what was the author's intent after the famous 50 page docuмent from the Signatura. The answer has not come back. We all know that the Church moves slowly on things that it does not consider an emergency. He has not challenged the law, he has asked for practical guidelines. Until such time as they come back, a bishop is free to make his own guidelines. That is legal and moral.
4. He serves on the Sacred Congregation for the Clergy and the Sacred Congregation for the Faith. The man is not only a bishop, but he is a scholar.
5. He is the only non-bishop who was allowed into the papal conclave when Bl. John Paul was elected. That's how much he was trusted by the College of Cardinals.
6. It was the Vicar General who put Fr. G on leave. The Vicar General has the canonical authority to do this, as does the Chancellor. The bishop of the diocese must be informed after the fact. He can uphold or retract the action.
7. There is no mention in the Vicar General's statement about the refusal to administer Holy Communion. The statement refers to reports of ugly behavior on the part of Fr. G toward people after the fact. Whether Fr. G was ugly to people or not, we don't know. He says that he was not and that this is all about the Communion issue. That's his position. It's not Gospel. The Vicar General does not say that the reports are Gospel either. He says that the priest is on administrative leave until the investigation is complete.
8. The Archdiocese of Washington does not have any obligation to run an investigation on this matter. If they really wanted to get rid of Fr. G, they could have done so very legally and without anyone knowing. Fr. G is a guest in the Archdiocese. All that the Vicar General has to do is call his bishop and request that the bishop recall him home. He does not even have to give the bishop an explanation as to why he's making such a request. Fr. G himself admits that the Cardinal is not his bishop. There is no obligation on the part of the Cardinal to give him the benefit of the doubt and have an investigation. The Catholic Church does not operate that way. If someone in authority has a problem with you and you're not their responsibility, they send you home, no questions asked. The Holy See itself can't stop that from happening, unless the priest was placed there by the Pope or it's dangerous to go home. In which case, I would deal with my host privately, not in the press.
Given the Cardinal's record for his service to the Church, it's really unfair to say that a "faithful priest is being persecuted." What about a faithful Cardinal? Is he not being persecuted?
Does his Vicar General not have the right to investigate a complaint?
Were Father's rights violated? Was Father suspended? Was Father sent back to his bishop? Could they have ignored the concerns and shipped him home? Could the Cardinal, as a member of the Congregation for the Clergy have requested that the man's bishop suspend him? The answer to that is, affirmative. The Sacred Congregation could have been asked to intervene with Fr. G's Ordinary.
None of these tragedies have happened. There is an administrative leave, pending the results of an investigation. No one has said that Father is guilty. Even Father himself does not say that he has been found guilty of anything. He says that he believes the the reason is the communion issue. He has not been told this. Until he's told this as a fact, it is his belief. He's entitled to his belief. That does not make him a martyr. If he were unjustly punished, that would be wrong.
He has choices. He can wait out the investigation or he can go home to his bishop. He is not a priest of the Archdiocese. Therefore, canonically, he has no right to a position in any ministry outside of his diocese, nor does he have an obligation to hang around either. He can blow it off and go home. It sounds like he's willing wait for the outcome, why can't we, before we throw another good priest under the bus?
Fraternally,
Br.JR, OSF
-
Ha, I posted the links about Cardinal Wuerl on that site (I didn't include the explicit parts) and received a warning and my post was deleted. Then I posted another link from Mother's Watch about him and and I was permanently banned. Not sure how anyone is supposed to arrive at the truth with censorship like that. Wuerl has made a significant effort to construct a conservative public record, people need to see the rest of him to shatter the illusion.
-
You'll probably reach more Catholics if you comment on the Huffington Post articles, they receive a lot of traffic.
This one just went up
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/15/marcel-guarnizo-lesbian-communion-barbara-johnson_n_1349388.html?ref=religion
-
CAF has gone beyond laughing stock to now outright defending bishops who persecute good priests and apologize to gαy-rights activists. You are absolutely correct in that CAF has become complicit in the sin of these bishops by silencing every ounce of criticism of their deplorable acts on their site. They give the impression to their well meaning neophyte posters that obedience is God. We are apparently supposed to check all of our brains and opinions at the door and follow corrupt bishops wherever they lead us.
HOW is the Church supposed to resurrect itself when every good priest is thrown under the bus by his bishop? They don't get it. Truth doesn't serve obedience. Obedience was meant to serve Truth. Currently the libs are using it to systematically destroy the Church. And the Neo-Caths are their willing dupes. They will be the last to know.