Priest Suspended - and to be Excommunicated - for Orthodoxy?
#41
(07-04-2019, 11:42 PM)St.Eliza Wrote: Ginny, I hope you come back because I have more thoughts and they are especially for you. In the witness in this thread of Father Treco, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I will soon.  I've got chores to do this morning and I'm halfway thru my evaluation of the entire homily in question.  I intend to go line by line, addressing those words of his I find problematic.  So, hang in there.  More from this quarter.  God bless.  Ginnyfree.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ginnyfree2's post:
  • St.Eliza
Reply
#42
Alrightie then.  As promised to Eliza and MM, here is a breakdown of the whole homily by Fr. Treco.  I used the Transcript found at Remant News which can be verified here:  https://archive.is/1X1dp  I have not responded to every single word, but just some major points of interest to me.  I hope you enjoy this next.  It is long for which I apologize.  I hope posts okay.  
Fr, Treco’s words - “FUNDAMENTAL TO THE ETHOS and CULTURE of the Second Vatican Council is an embrace of the world!”

Ginnyfree’s words - False accusation.  Bearing false witness.  The Church didn’t proclaim a “culture” or “ethos” to be adopted or imposed on anyone at all, nor promulgate anything of this sort in the Documents themselves.  This is a mean-spirited interpretation meant to undermine the trust of the faithful in the documents themselves.   If you can cite any particular passage that makes his accusation just, let me know.  

Fr. T. - “It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that this “spirit” of the Council, with its opening to the so-called “modern world” in ambiguous texts unlike any that any previous Council had ever adopted, has caused a rupture within the Church,” 

GF - This is pure spin.  The Council Fathers deliberately adopted a different method of presentation.  Charity demands that good intent be foremost in the minds of those of a critical nature, especially since the accusation, is against the Church herself, the spotless Bride of the Lamb, His beloved when making a note of the method employed by the Church Fathers..   


Fr. T. - “Recognizing the problem with the Council’s apparent departure from Catholic tradition, Pope Benedict XVI made a valiant effort to propose what he called a Hermeneutic of Continuity or Reform… Why should it be necessary to try to reconcile the teaching of one Council with all other councils that came before it?”

GF – Again this is more spin based upon the false premise proposed above.  Anything built upon a faulty premise is false itself. This spin is offered as proof that because a different method of presentation in the Documents themselves was used, the hermeneutic of continuity and/or reform proposed in the Documents themselves is missing and must be sought by one’s own efforts at interpretation.    
In reality, there are two Spirits at work here, as noted by Fr. T.  One is the Authentic Promise of God, the Father that He would send down His Spirit to guide and teach all things and an imagined “spirit of Vatican 2,” that many dissenters in the Church have used to put forth their own works, violating the trust of the faithful in the pews of their priests and religious to faithfully implement the reforms called for. By the Authentic Spirit animating the Council itself.  These are those who rebelled and threw off the gentle yoke of Christ.  Anyone who has read any of the documents knows full well that these actions weren’t part of the reforms at all.  In fact, they contradict many of the things requested by the Council Fathers. 

Fr. T. – “This had never happened before in the history of the Church!

GF – Balderdash.  Many of the Councils of the Church have had a variety of approaches to the subjects at hand and there never was any Canonically binding formula dictated by any Council or sitting Pope by which all future Council proceedings must be conducted.  Neither is there any Canonical formula to which Council Documents must adhere to be binding on the faithful. In fact, if you bothered with any solid books containing conciliar documents, you’d see a variety of styles of address and pronouncements over the centuries.  Are all these variations wrong?  According to the logic of Fr. T, they are.  How dare they? 
 
Fr. T. – “the Conciliar Popes, the Successors of Peter have, in a way, repeated Peter’s three-fold denial of Jesus Christ!” 

GF – Grandstanding and a false accusation. 

Fr. T. – “’And Jesus said: Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, do I give unto you.’ (John 14:2) FIRST, in Paul VI, Peter said the United Nations, not the Catholic Church, has the mission of bringing peace to the world!...... However, only forty years earlier, Pope Pius XI, observing the terrible state of the world between the two World Wars, and in line with what the Church has always taught about her mission, said the following in his encyclical Ubi Arcano Dei: ‘The only remedy for such state of affairs is the peace of Christ since the peace of Christ is the peace of God.’”

GF - However the title itself tells us that Pope Pius XI is not speaking of mere peace between nations, “Encyclical of Pope Pius XI on the Peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ to our Venerable Brethren the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops and other Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Apostolic See” https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en...silio.html  Anyone with any understanding at all of theological matters knows the difference between the peace of Christ and that which is kept by sovereign states between each other. This difference is clearly shown in the Scriptures, John 14:27.  No, the peace of the world is not the peace of Christ, so when one Pope is addressing a peace-keeping organization, he is speaking of worldly peace.  Another is speaking to his Brothers in Christ of the things of God first and foremost.  Pretending that one Pope is contradicting the other, is slanderous, plain and simple, a mean-spirited false witness with intent.  Both men were 100% in both instances and neither is a contradiction of the other. 
 
Fr. T. – “Through Pope Paul VI, Peter denied his responsibility to rule & govern the Church…..Peter neutralized the authority of the Holy Office; Peter refused to discipline wayward Catholic Bishops, theologians and seminary professors; Peter promoted and advanced clerics who openly denied the perennial and immutable truths of the Faith; men who denied the Divinity of Christ; men who denied the historical Resurrection of Jesus Christ; men who denied the unique saving power of Jesus Christ, and the daily representation of this sacrifice, made once for all on the Cross of Calvary, in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass; men who denied the divine origin of the Church; men who denied the Apostolic Succession of the Episcopacy, and men who denied the necessity of the ministerial Priesthood of Jesus Christ.” 

GF – This list of nasty words is just one false accusation after another.  It is the Church he judges and accuses of all these sins.  Martin Luther couldn’t have done a better job.  Why some don’t see what this kind of talk is all about, I do not know. In fact, I had to laugh at the last item, men in collars denying their priesthood. I’m supposed to believe this and take it seriously?  Perhaps it is an identity crisis, just sayin'.
 
Fr. T. – “Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, Peter denied the Church’s obligation to offer worship to no other God, but the Blessed Trinity.” 

GF – There ya have it folks!  Three Popes in a row, all have some other god than Jesus Christ.  Must be true cause Father said so.  Right?  This is IMHO, one of the things the Bishop is probably asking Fr. Treco to retract.  

Fr. T then lists three actions and gives them a negative symbolism that is found only in his own imagination.  How many times have we heard the kissing of the Koran tossed on the floors of apologetic forums before?  It really is getting old.  So where does Father get all this? Matt. 15:18-19 “But the things which proceed out of the mouth, come forth from the heart, and those things defile a man. For from the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false testimonies, blasphemies.”  As his heart desires, so follows his lips. 

Fr. T. - Pope Paul VI…. in his General Audience of January 12, 1966, he said: ‘There are those who ask what authority, what theological qualification, the Council intended to give to its teachings, knowing that it avoided issuing solemn dogmatic definitions backed by the Church's infallible teaching authority. The answer is known by those who remember the conciliar declaration of March 6, 1964, repeated on November 16, 1964. In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner any dogmas carrying the mark of infallibility.’”

GF – And this is not an error at all, just a decision made for the that particular time and place.  Again Fr. T. is having a hard time understanding that the Spirit moves in a mysterious way.  So, I repeat, there has never been a Canonical formula set down for all Councils to follow nor one for the formatting of their documents either and many variations have been noted throughout the history of the Church in both the proceedings and the documents rendered by them.  Fr. T. is here banking on the ignorance of Church history among his listeners. 

Fr. T. – “What are the fruit of the Second Vatican Council?  Firstly, in the wake of the Council, the religious orders of the Catholic Church collapsed: more than 80,000 women religious forsake their vows; secondly, in the wake of the Council, the ranks of the sacred priesthood of Jesus Christ was decimated: in excess of 32,000 priests almost immediately abandon the priestly office”

GF – These rebels in dissent and those who joined them defied the Council, the Council Fathers, and the Church herself, as BTW, Fr. T is doing here.  No, these are the actions of dissent from the Council, not adherence to it.  The true fruits of the Second Vatican Council are growing in the hearts of the Church members who bother to read them prayerfully and do all they ask wherever they find them applying to themselves. It is sad that Fr. T. speaks this way.  It is obvious he’s never read them, for they contain a font of timeless wisdom and many fine pastoral counsels.  Too bad he refused to live by them, same as the other dissenters.  If he'd read them, then he couldn't say these things because he'd know they are lies.

Fr. T. – “In the wake of the Council, heresies that had been previously condemned have been allowed to run rampant throughout the Church, and these heresies have been promoted by professors of Catholic theology and philosophy, theologians, priests, Bishops and Cardinals.” 

GF – The Council is not to blame for anything anyone choose to do.  Their sins are their own.  And what, pray tell, is Father Treco doing himself about combating any heresy in particular?  Zip, zilch, nada, zero.  Instead he’s simply stirring up the pot a bit and preaching falsely, accusing any and all not in front of him of all kinds of nasty things.  Slander.  Mortally sinful slander.

Fr. T. – “Fourthly, in the wake of the Council, there arose a sharp decline in obedience to the Third Commandment; a disobedience accelerated by the substitution of what Cardinal Ratzinger has called a “fabricated liturgy” for the Ancient Roman Rite.”

GF – I refer all readers to just one of the many articles available to address this misuse of then Cardinal Ratzinger’s words at Pathos by Dave Armstrong: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstr...quote.html  In it will be found this: “The article is very long and filled with rich tidbits like the above. He makes a sustained case for Pope Benedict XVI’s love of the New Mass as an organic development of the Old Mass. He does not think the way many traditionalists think regarding the forms of the Mass. Traditionalists who seek to understand the former pope’s true opinions will do well to read it, and perhaps can stop quoting him out of context and purporting to make him express a view that he does not in fact hold.” Which pretty much makes the case against Fr. T.

Fr. T. – “ Friends, the current corruption of the moral lives of the faithful and of the clergy, a corruption led and promoted by members of profession Catholic theological associations, priests, and bishops alike,…the current epidemic of fornication, adultery, and the acceptance of homosexuality as a moral good among the faithful and of the clergy…and the current scourge of homosexual predation among the priests and bishops of the Catholic Church are the foreseeable and inevitable fruit of the Conciliar Popes’ decision.” 

GF – This last accusation is probably the one that push the Bishop over the edge as it lays the blame for sins of individuals entirely upon a Council of the Church as if these sins were commanded in the documents.  BTW, faithful and corrupt morals are pretty much diametrically opposed to each other. Poor wording I guess.  He needs and editor. 

Fr. T. - “Each of the current crises in the Catholic Church are the direct result of the refusal of the Conciliar Popes’ to submit to the Kingship of Jesus Christ!”

GF – Just another false accusation.  He puts the Church on trial before his witnesses all gathered to feed on hatred, lies and false accusations against the Church not there in his midst.    

Fr. T. – “Is there anything that we can do in response to this unprecedented crisis within the Church of Jesus Christ?  And, the answer is, Yes!... We can choose to teach the true faith and only the true faith to our children!  In this regard, a helpful rule of thumb would be to return to those theological and spiritual resources that were approved by the Holy See prior to the revolution of the 1960s!” 

GF – So, everything published after a certain day is garbage, right?  Must be so cause Father said so, so pitch all your books, including the Documents of the Second Vatican Council and the new Catechism.  If you obey Father’s command here, you’ll never read it for yourself and then his lies will be all you’re ever gonna hear.  So, put those blinders on and keep ‘em there. 
Fr. T. “And, so, There are things that must we do!... We can resist!”

GF – What will this resistance to the Church, the Council, and her Fathers look like? Saying this is like crying “Fire” in a crowded theatre and calling it freedom of speech.

I think I’ll add what galls me the most about all this sickening diatribe against the Church is the very real poisoning of the minds of the children who hear these things and are being raised to hate the Church herself except for those few people they see in those special places they go to here such slanderous speeches.  Little Johnny who loves his daddy, hears Daddy talking to Mommy about all the horrible things those who attend the Latin Rite Mass in the Ordinary Form are bad people and so is the Pope and so is the Bishop and they live in fear and hatred of the Church to please their parents and obey them.  They have to wonder if those kids down the street are safe to play with because they go to St. Luke’s Catholic Church and it might be one of those New Masses that aren’t right!  Kids do not hear the way adults hear.  This stuff destroys their innocence in a way that could take a lifetime to restore.  They have to literally leave home to find the Church and her Head because their forming faith is fed with falsehoods and hatred for Christ and His ministers.  This sad situation is exactly the same thing that goes on and on and on in Protestant places all over the world and has stolen the innocence of children from love for Jesus and trust in His Church from millions.  It would be better for a man or woman to have a millstone put around his or her neck and be cast into the sea than to cause one of the little ones who try to love Jesus to fall, fall, fall.  Yes, your fathers and mothers have eaten very sour grapes and that's who's children are gnashing their teeth against the Church of God in our midst.  Lk. 17:12 & Matt. 18:6. God bless.  Ginnyfree.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ginnyfree2's post:
  • St.Eliza
Reply
#43
Wow, Ginny! I appreciate your going over that so carefully. I am going to have to read your notes again slowly as I write here.  But it's hard to read because I am surprised! I had a completely different reaction. 

Also I want to ask, did you read a transcript? Can you link where you got it?

You said, "Charity demands that good intent be foremost in the minds of those of a critical nature." And i feel like that is exactly how I read the words of Father Treco - with charity.  I saw heroic willingness to state the truth clearly and charitably. But you saw something completely different!

It used to be I would be more skeptical of anyone who questioned Vatican II, because Vatican II just IS, and we have to accept it.  It came from the Church, so, it must be a good thing.

But the preponderance of evidence is piling up, and in spite of my desire to put an optimistic spin to Vatican II (because it seems like we are supposed to think and feel good thoughts about it) - I am thinking sometimes things just actually might be what they appear to be. Maybe Vatican II was the big mistake it appears to be . And if it holds less authority than any other council, then why, really, is it a sacred cow?

Evidence is piling up that Vatican II really is a product of infiltration, of bad philosophy and bad theology. And it's plausible - look at the fruit!

As to the mistakes of the Popes, Taylor Marshall and Tim Gordon previously got me realizing that popes that Father speaks of here likely made some mistakes (influenced by Vatican II). They in fact weren't perfect, and can even be a Saint now, and still have make mistakes. I think it is okay to say this. 

I also think it's okay to think about the ramifications of kissing the Koran. The Koran has instructions for to kill and dismember Christians ("Strike off their heads"). I did not know that when I first heard of my beloved JPII kissing the Koran, but nonetheless, I cringed. It didn't seem quite right. However I wanted to think of it as a charitable gesture. But that's me. God, unlike me, would not fence-sit. He would either say His Pontiff, now a Saint, had made a wrong gesture, or a right one. I am now leaning to think He would say WRONG.

That is what Father Treco sincerely believes, and so he spoke it. Can a priest not speak the truth, even if all he believes to be true does not line up with the philosophy and theology of Vatican II?

Some comments on your comments:

You say it's "pure spin" that Vatican II has caused a rupture in the church - but how can you possibly say it hasn't? Contemporary bishops are all for dialogue with pagan cultures and say we need to learn from them. But dialogue with Catholics who hold traditional views - that's off limits. Those are the people who don't matter, with the opinions that don't matter. It sure feels like a rupture to me. 

You say in more than one place that the Vatican II council was good, and the problems came just from spinners and dissenters afterward. I also heard exactly this since I became Catholic in 2000 - that Vatican II document was great, and if you read it you'd know it! - that it's just that some hijacked the brilliant and wonderful words of the council, that's the problem. I haven't read it but I thought that too, since it was so oft-repeated.  But I am beginning to believe that is a myth, a story. I am hearing that much of the Council was a set-up to push through an agenda, and the "spins" were planned. The result of infiltration. And there seems to be substantial evidence to back these claims. And the really, really bad fruits make those ideas make more sense than the previous "myth" of a glorious council document later ruined by some unrelated dissenters putting in their "own" bad spins.

Fr.T said, "the Conciliar Popes, the Successors of Peter have, in a way, repeated Peter’s three-fold denial of Jesus Christ!" 

You call it grandstanding (you clearly not as impressed with Father Treco as I am); I found the statement surprising and then his support of it profound.

Paul the VI credited the UN with that?? No excuse. That was a BIG MISTAKE. I do not agree with your statement that the good priest is pretending or is in any way being false. I think Pius XI is right, and that is how a Pope should be speaking on the matter. The UN's plan for peace is SO OPPOSITE of Our Lord's! 

I agree also with Father's statements about Paul VI. Judging that a past pope to have acted wrongly in some way does not accuse the Church, as it seems you are saying.

And this:

Fr. T. – “Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, Peter denied the Church’s obligation to offer worship to no other God, but the Blessed Trinity.”  


GF – There ya have it folks!  Three Popes in a row, all have some other god than Jesus Christ.  Must be true cause Father said so.  Right?  This is IMHO, one of the things the Bishop is probably asking Fr. Treco to retract.  


You are making an error here. This is not a right spin on the above statement. He said they each made a mistake. They said a wrong thing. That is NOT saying he thinks they have some other god! 

The strong bad spin you have on Father is making it hard for me to read. I am just going to pick out a couple others.

Fr. T. – “In the wake of the Council, heresies that had been previously condemned have been allowed to run rampant throughout the Church, and these heresies have been promoted by professors of Catholic theology and philosophy, theologians, priests, Bishops and Cardinals.”  


GF – The Council is not to blame for anything anyone choose to do.  Their sins are their own.  And what, pray tell, is Father Treco doing himself about combating any heresy in particular?  Zip, zilch, nada, zero.  Instead he’s simply stirring up the pot a bit and preaching falsely, accusing any and all not in front of him of all kinds of nasty things.  Slander.  Mortally sinful slander.


But the thing is, they all say the authority to teach their heresies come from Vatican II! It's such a united front! You ask, what is father doing to combat? Well, he is trying to combat it here by speaking the truth courageously. And anyone who tries to speak the truth will be met with folk who got the memo about THEM. They get sidelined and labeled as fringe adn NOT HEARD. We are the people they do not listen to. We are the people who don't matter. 

So what can we do, and what does Father do? His answer is: Get holy. Make Christ the King of your heart and you life and your every thought. That is what we can do. And pray for our clergy.

I think I’ll add what galls me ... is the very real poisoning of the minds of the children who hear these things and are being raised to hate the Church herself except for those few people they see in those special places they go to here such slanderous speeches.  Little Johnny who loves his daddy, hears Daddy talking to Mommy about all the horrible things those who attend the Latin Rite Mass in the Ordinary Form are bad people and so is the Pope and so is the Bishop and they live in fear and hatred of the Church to please their parents and obey them.  They have to wonder if those kids down the street are safe to play with because they go to St. Luke’s Catholic Church and it might be one of those New Masses that aren’t right!  Kids do not hear the way adults hear.  This stuff destroys their innocence in a way that could take a lifetime to restore.  They have to literally leave home to find the Church and her Head because their forming faith is fed with falsehoods and hatred for Christ and His ministers.  This sad situation is exactly the same thing that goes on and on and on in Protestant places all over the world and has stolen the innocence of children from love for Jesus and trust in His Church from millions.  It would be better for a man or woman to have a millstone put around his or her neck and be cast into the sea than to cause one of the little ones who try to love Jesus to fall, fall, fall.  Yes, your fathers and mothers have eaten very sour grapes and that's who's children are gnashing their teeth against the Church of God in our midst.  Lk. 17:12 & Matt. 18:6. God bless.  Ginnyfree.

Oh dear. I hear that Trad Caths are this narrow minded, but in real life, I see that this is NOT what they are like. Their children embrace the faith. I see young people drawn to Latin Mass. And I never knew any Latin Mass folks who think Novus Ordo attenders are bad. Never! I have heard what you say plenty of times, so I have always been a little afraid of Trad folk. I know this is what I am supposed to think of them. But I started to listen to speakers who consider themselves Trad, because they were saying things I was thinking. 

I think it is okay to say, even to one's children, that a bishops or a pope's actions look wrong (if they do), and to discuss why. 

I am baffled that you say that Trads act in way that ruin their children's innocence. In all the trad families I know of, one of the best things is the delightful way the children have retained their natural innocence like God intended. Instead, I see (and I work with children so I see a lot) that the ones who having their innocence ripped away are the ones whose parents have been deceived by our culture to think innocence is not a valued trait in a child, and instead, exposure to "reality" at a young age is a good thing. I see those children as the ones who are badly affected. Honestly, I have never seen any children such as you describe. Do you have maybe one link to a testimony of a now grown child who feels that having had parents who are wary of Vatican II's effect on the Church hurt their innocence, or affected their growing up in some other bad way?
[-] The following 1 user Likes St.Eliza's post:
  • antiquarian
Reply
#44
https://www.gofundme.com/support-for-fr-...and-family

https://onepeterfive.com/o-father-my-fat...han-treco/
"The riddles of God are more satisfying than the solutions of man"  GK Chesterton

[-] The following 1 user Likes alright's post:
  • St.Eliza
Reply
#45
Father Treco has read this thread and he has asked me to convey his gratitude to all the Fishies who have participated. He especially asked me to thank Ginnyfree2 'for her candor. It was a goodly gift to read her posts'.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • St.Eliza
Reply
#46
(07-06-2019, 02:52 AM)St.Eliza Wrote: I am baffled that you say that Trads act in way that ruin their children's innocence. In all the trad families I know of, one of the best things is the delightful way the children have retained their natural innocence like God intended. Instead, I see (and I work with children so I see a lot) that the ones who having their innocence ripped away are the ones whose parents have been deceived by our culture to think innocence is not a valued trait in a child, and instead, exposure to "reality" at a young age is a good thing. I see those children as the ones who are badly affected. Honestly, I have never seen any children such as you describe. Do you have maybe one link to a testimony of a now grown child who feels that having had parents who are wary of Vatican II's effect on the Church hurt their innocence, or affected their growing up in some other bad way?

In Ginny's defence, I would like to say something here.  Please don't misconstrue this as any form of affirmation of Vatican II - which I personally think has had far reaching consequences that are deeply grounded in the vague "spirit" of the council which has led to all kinds of weirdness the world over.

Parents can mess up in all kinds of ways and in all kinds of circumstances, and, in charity, it can all be done with the best of intentions.  I have seen Trad families where the spirit of the world has infiltrated in ways that were unintended, leading to some serious questioning of the faith, behavior issues, and a worldliness that I would not want my children to be exposed to.  These parents, I notice, tend to discuss the faults of recent popes, the lack of reverence at Mass, and spend a lot of time drinking wine and speaking negatively about the church at cocktail parties while not monitoring their children's choices.  Of course, similar foibles beset Novus Ordo families too.  In the inverse, I have seen Novus Ordo families who have a deep reverence for their faith and whose children are a joy to know.  These families, like many Trad families, spend a lot of time focused not on the sins of hierarchy but on the practice of their faith.  In neither case is the language of the mass the determining factor.  I think I can see what Ginny says here: if our focus is on the faults of VII and the scandal within the church, then we can forget to teach our children the really important stuff - which, of course, has nothing to do with who is pope and everything to do with who is Our King.  For younger children, it is difficult to teach obedience in a spirit of criticism and negativity for the hierarchy of the church because kids are pretty black and white; if one thing is wrong, the whole thing is wrong.  

In the end, I don't really disagree with what Father said.  I don't see anything in his remarks that should bring about excommunication.  Could he have been more PC?  Yes, but I think the time for PC, luke warm drivel from the pulpit is past.  Could these remarks have been reserved for a more adult setting, away from children who might understand very little except that "Father said there's something wrong with the Church" and be confused?  Probably.  I cannot imagine it is easy to walk the tightrope of addressing these issues while speaking in such a way that it does not confuse or hurt children, especially poorly catechized children with little understanding of the faith or its history.  My own children have heard similar homilies and it has resulted in some **great** conversation at dinner (yippie the kids were actually listening!!!).  Were there questions?  Certainly.  But Pilgrim and I had the privilege of explaining things and helping them to understand what they could from it.  Isn't that our job as parents?  

I think whatever judgement we feel impelled to express here should be tempered by compassion for the situation any orthodox priest finds himself in today.  Consider this: any courageously accepted vocation is a willing acceptance of humiliation in the eyes of the world, being branded a pedophile by the media, one's neighbors, considered an intolerant bigot in many settings.  All this just for believing as Holy Mother Church has taught for centuries and having the courage to be a priest - a visual focal point for all the world's hate for our faith.  Frankly, any man willing to accept ignominy in the name of Christ and who can remain orthodox despite the pressures of the hierarchy deserves our loving prayers and support. 

Jovan, you seem to know Father.  Will you please tell him that one little family in Colorado is most certainly praying for him?
Adoption, Home School, and Catholic Family Life:  StolenPears.com
[-] The following 2 users Like Fontevrault's post:
  • mpk1987, St.Eliza
Reply
#47
Father Z had a recent post that seems appropriate here.
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2019/07/because-o...ng-priest/
Adoption, Home School, and Catholic Family Life:  StolenPears.com
[-] The following 1 user Likes Fontevrault's post:
  • St.Eliza
Reply
#48
(07-07-2019, 05:33 AM)Fontevrault Wrote: Jovan, you seem to know Father.  Will you please tell him that one little family in Colorado is most certainly praying for him?

Done.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 2 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • Fontevrault, mpk1987
Reply
#49
(07-07-2019, 05:33 AM)Fontevrault Wrote: In Ginny's defence...Parents can mess up in all kinds of ways and in all kinds of circumstances... Trad families ... serious questioning of the faith ... 

... discuss the faults of recent popes, the lack of reverence at Mass, and spend a lot of time drinking wine and speaking negatively about the church at cocktail parties while not monitoring their children's choices. ...In the inverse, have seen Novus Ordo families who have a deep reverence for their faith and whose children are a joy to know... These families, like many Trad families, spend a lot of time focused not on the sins of hierarchy but on the practice of their faith.  In neither case is the language of the mass the determining factor.  I think I can see what Ginny says here: if our focus is on the faults of VII and the scandal within the church, then we can forget to teach our children the really important stuff...

In the end, I don't really disagree with what Father said...   Could he have been more PC?  Yes, but I think the time for PC, luke warm drivel from the pulpit is past.  ...My own children have heard similar homilies and it has resulted in some **great** conversation at dinner (yippie the kids were actually listening!!!). ... Pilgrim and I had the privilege of explaining things and helping them to understand.... our job as parents...  

...compassion for the situation any orthodox priest finds himself in today. ...  a willing acceptance of humiliation in the eyes of the world, being branded a pedophile by the media, one's neighbors, considered an intolerant bigot in many settings.  ... Frankly, any man willing to accept ignominy in the name of Christ and who can remain orthodox ..
Fontevrault, this is all very well said. I think you and Ginny must be right. The fact is I do not know many Trad families (the ones I do know are special and nice), and people are full of errors and I can see how this can be. I also do know devout Novus Ordo families just as you describe.  So thank you for correcting me. I think yours is the proper perspective.

And yes, Father's homily was not lukewarm. So many statements of bishops in our times give us the wonderful opportunity to understand what Jesus was explaining about lukewarmness as something one wants to spew out. I think I get it now. 

Your family, Fontevrault, sounds delightful. You are blessed in so many ways. It is such a huge gift to be Catholic and to have a Catholic worldview. God has given us RICHES. It is a great responsibility. 

Yes, every priest deserves our compassion and continuous prayer. I am starting to realize that more and more now. The faithful and the deceived priests face challenges, and they need us, and especially the prayers of those of us with eyes to see.

___________________________

[P.S. I am listening to this, as I often do. I love it: ]
Reply
#50
(07-06-2019, 11:54 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Father Treco has read this thread and he has asked me to convey his gratitude to all the Fishies who have participated. He especially asked me to thank Ginnyfree2 'for her candor. It was a goodly gift to read her posts'.

Well! I didn't expect that. Hello to Father, if he comes back to read.:salute: I hope he feels our support! :chleader:  And it does not surprise me that he is not put off in any way by a sincere, well meaning dissenter.   

Father Treco, you are in my husband's and my prayers. You spoke the truth courageously and charitably and that lifts my heart so much. We are blessed by you. I add you to my list of  venerable heroes of the faith in our times - like Vigano, Burke, Schneider, who make my heart glad. You are in a "family" with St. Thomas More. [And your grandpa is St. Nick!]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)