Saturday, 16 May 2015

Pope Francis appoints "gay sex" advocate Timothy Radcliffe, O.P. to Pontifical Council


It seems that one cannot even take a break from gardening and then one makes the mistake of turning on a computer to find what? Oh, just more evidence that the Church is in its greatest crisis since the Protestant Revolution and this time it emanates from the very top. I should have gone for that nap sooner!

Truly the Pope has lost it.

If it's not some bishop musing that our beloved Saint Mary Magdalene may have been a lesbian it's a bishop writing books on tonsil hockey.

Can there be any doubt now that the sodomite mafia has taken complete control over Jorge Bergoglio the Bishop of Rome?

Who is Timothy Radcliffe, O.P.?

Well, Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., was once interviewed by Father Thomas J. Rosica, CSB at Canada's Salt + Light Television, Our Catholic Channel of Hope. You will begin to get the picture on his theology by losing the twenty-two minutes and twenty-two seconds which you'll never get back from watching it. 

You can also find out about this wayward Dominican at Protect the Pope wherein you will find that this Dominican is a dissenter on the Church's teaching on a number of areas involving homosexual behaviour. Here we have a report on his appearance at the 2014 Divine Mercy Conference as reported by Protect the Pope and copied below in the event that something mysterious happens with that blog and we maintain the original bolding:

Let's take a little look, shall we?:


* * * 

A selection of Fr Radcliffe’s writings expressing dissent from the Church’s teaching:

Fr Radcliffe gave the following contribution to the Church of England ‘s review of homosexuality and gay marriage:

Fr Radcliffe OP expands the meaning of fertility to include gay sex

But not every marriage is fertile in this way. We must avoid having a mechanistic or simplistic understanding of fertility. Jesus speaks a fertile word: This is my body, given for you. He is God’s fertile word. And surely it is in the kind and healing words that we offer each other that we all share in fertility of that most intimate moment. When Jesus met Peter on the shore after Easter, he offers him a word that renews their relationship. Three times he asks him; ‘Do you love me more than these others?’ He allows him to undo his threefold denial. Sexual fertility cannot be separated from the exchange of words that heal, that recreate and set free.
How does all of this bear on the question of gay sexuality? We cannot begin with the question of whether it is permitted or forbidden! We must ask what it means, and how far it is Eucharistic. Certainly it can be generous, vulnerable, tender, mutual and non-violent. So in many ways, I would think that it can be expressive of Christ’s self-gift.

We can also see how it can be expressive of mutual fidelity, a covenantal relationship in which two people bind themselves to each other for ever. But the proposed legislation for ‘gay marriage’ imply that it is not understood to be inherently unitive, a becoming one flesh. [...]

And what about fertility? I have suggested that one should not stick to a crude, mechanistic understanding of fertility. Biological fertility is inseparable from the fertility of our mutual tenderness and compassion. And so that might seem to remove one objection to gay marriage. I am not entirely convinced, since it seems to me that our tradition is incarnational, the word becoming bodily flesh. And some heterosexual relationships may be accidentally infertile in this sense, but homosexual ones are intrinsically so.

Sexual ethics is about what our acts say. And I have the impression that we are not very sure of what gay sexual acts signify. Maybe we need to ask gay Christians who have been living in committed relationships for years. I suspect that sex will turn out to be rather unimportant.’

Fr Radcliffe on Holy Communion for Catholics who are divorced and re-married:


I would conclude with two profound hopes. That a way will be found to welcome divorced and remarried people back to communion. And, most important, that women will be given real authority and voice in the church. The pope expresses his desire that this may happen, but what concrete form can it take? He believes that the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood is not possible, but decision-making in the church has become ever more closely linked to ordination in recent years. Can that bond be loosened? Let us hope that women may be ordained to the diaconate and so have a place in preaching at the Eucharist. What other ways can authority be shared?’

* * * 

The Catholic Herald has a collection of articles about Timothy Radcliffe, O.P. You will have not difficulty finding out more by doing some searching.

Running a Google search with his name "homosexuality" in the search brings up lots of fodder.

This is a disgrace right from the top, right from the Pope himself.


 



Pope names Fr. Timothy Radcliff consultor for Council for Justice, Peace


Pope Francis - ANSA
16/05/2015 16:08





(Vatican Radio)  Pope Francis has named Fr. Timothy Radcliff OP a consultor of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. 
Ordained in 1971, Fr Timothy is a long-time friend and contributor to Vatican Radio’s English Service.  He is a well-known preacher and speaker, and author of  several books including  What is the point of being a Christian?  He served as Master of the Dominican Order from 1992 until 2001 and is now resident at the Dominican Priory at Blackfriars, Oxford (U.K.).  He has been a member of the Las Casas Advisory Board and Director of the Institute.   He is an Honorary Doctor of Divinity at the University of Oxford.

16 comments:

Fox said...

Vox I said to you 2 years ago..."when I see what he (Francis) does with the lavender mafia that we know has infiltrated Mother Church, then I will decide what I think of our new Pope" Its been one rough 2 years, and its not getting any better. When will this insanity stop? It seems to me we who are informed can see all to plainly the writing on the wall. God Help Us.

Barona said...

Radcliffe's comments are in English. The Pope does not have a command of that language, to put it mildly. It is not impossible to conjecture that Rome is in total confusion, and that the Modernists (to put that mildly too) are in total control of the English language section of Vatican Radio. Questions: who recommended Radcliffe, why was he recommended? Did anyone try to stop it? If so, who? If not, why? And so on...But how is it that a homosexualist priest continues to function? Who is protecting him? Why? Does he have information on high ranking churchmen? Is there blackmail involved? Questions....

Brian said...

And Francis (CEO Modernism Inc.) gives the dissident cesspool another stir. The stench is overwhelming. Are there no bishops who will a finally take stand, a stand, accompanied by a very drastic warning, directed straight at heart of Francis, a warning that would bring seismic consequences, if not heeded? Cowards...paper tigers...all of them, completely devoid, of the stuff, of martyrs.

Absurdius said...

I'd like to think the Holy Father's choice is a case of 'keep you friends close and your enemies closer'. I cannot help but think that the people making such recommendations to the Holy Father are bonkers.

Fr. Radcliffe's appointment is worrisome.

Lee said...

WOW!

we may be in the midst of The Great Apostasy !

in JM+JT,

Lee www.canadiancatechist.com

Anonymous said...

This should make Michael Voris blanch. He had a very good Vortex episode last year exposing the evil of this priest.

I guess we are engaging in spiritual pornography if we read of this appointment. Nothing to see here folks, just move right along...

Anonymous said...

Agree with you Brian. There seem no bishops or cardinals willing to protect the sheep. We are on our own, it seems. How demoralising. How do we stand up to the wider, squalid culture?

This appointment is ghastly, wretchedly evil.

Come, please Lord Jesus and rescue your Bride!

M G said...

Vox, I told myself that I would withhold judgment on this papacy. I told myself that I would trust in the Holy Spirit. But this is getting too much for me. It greatly grieves my heart and makes me fear for the Church. Yes, Christ said that the gates of hell will not prevail, but it's looking like it'll be a close fight. It's looking like the wolves are closing rank.

I've tried my best to be optimistic. I just don't think I can do it anymore.

Anonymous said...

The book he wrote "whats the point of being a Christian"was it an autobiography by chance .

Anonymous said...

What a revolting priest! It was enough reading his yammering disgusting implications about "fertility" ...I got the picture...

Ah yes terrible times for faithful Catholics with such a corrupt hierarchy.

It is impossible to communicate and "dialogue" with people who have spiritually and religiously and morally left the Church....their minds have been darkened by a state of permanent sin...they are unable to reason and they don't care one way or the other .they have lost the faith (if they ever had it!)..a terrible state for a soul!

So our suffering in this case is an indication that we have not been seduced by this rubbish pretence at Catholicism...we are awake (not perfect creatures!) and suffering....I most certainly will not being going with most of the creepy hierarchs and modernist clergy in general running the show. It's them that have left the Church ...not me...I stay faithful to perennial Catholic teaching and Tradition...anything that contradicts it I reject. Faithful Cathoplics cannot afford not to be informed about the Faith...it must be defended intelligently and forcefully ...coupled with the primacy of Mass and prayer ...this is a weapon too - our knowledge of the "Faith" and we press on knowing that even though a minority ...there are many faithful Catholics and really good priests still around all over the world...and so we go on.

It is the time of the Great Apostasy foretold, I beleive. What else can it be?

Praying for all at Mass...


Michael

Anonymous said...

He rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nullas salus like the other liberals.
If you are allowed to give up the dogma you change any of the other Church teachings.
The Dominicans including Archbishop Augustine Di Noia in the CDF /Ecclesia Dei believe Vatican Council II has replaced the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He said this in an interview with Edward Pentin for the National Catholic Register.
Church Militant could take up this issue.

Church Militant TV did a good job by discussing the Extra ecclesiam nulla salus issue and citing the dogma.Now they have to interpret Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents in line with the dogma and avoid liberal theology ( apparition theology) which originated with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
However they are not responding to questions and comments on their website and Christine Niles' Twitter page.
They can affirm the first part of the Letter which is traditional and pro-Fr.Leonard Feeney.It supports the dogma. They can also re interpret the second part of the Letter to be in harmony with Tradition on this issue.
So regarding the second part of the Letter they can acknowledge that they accept being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.This does not have to be rejected.
However they must not link being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire to the dogma. Since these cases are not known to us in the present times. They cannot be known.
So being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not explicit exceptions to the dogma since they are not explicit for us.They are known only to God . This is common sense.It is not theology.
The Council of Trent and Mystici Corporis only mention these cases. They do not state that these cases refer to persons known in the present times. So they cannot be exceptions to the dogma. They are irrelevant to the dogma.
So affirm the Letter of the Holy Office's support for the dogma and clarify that there are no known cases of persons in the present times who are exceptions.
The same with Vatican Council II. The Council supports the dogma in Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentes 14 . The references to being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire in AG 7 and LG 14 are not known exceptions to the orthodox passages in AG 7 and LG 14 which support the dogma.
Similarly the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms the dogma in CCC 845 and in part, in CCC 1257 when it states that the baptism of water is necessary for salvation and that the Church knows of no other means to eternal beatitude. If there is someone saved without the baptism of water, we would not know of this case in 2015 . So this is a non issue with reference to the dogma.The orthodox passages in the Catechism affirm the dogma and there can be no exceptions mentioned to the in the Catechism, to the dogma. Hypothetical cases cannot be defacto, objective exceptions.Every one needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water today, to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.
So those who want to speculate with liberal theology and discuss the pros and cons of salvation with the baptism of desire, with or without the baptism of water, are free to do so but they must be aware that this is irrelevant to the dogma.If they link their discussion with the dogma they imply that there are exceptions to the dogma, and that these apparitions are personally known to them. They would have to be personally known to them for them to be exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation.
So this is a win-win situation for those who value Tradition. You are affirming the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, according to Fr.Leonard Feeney, the Church Councils and saints and you are not denying being saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance.
We can avoid getting into the complexity of apparition theology on this subject by simply saying that we do not know of any one in the present times saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7,LG 14).
-Lionel Andrades

Anonymous said...

Radcliffe is a... If people lose the faith or never had it, just don't go around perverting to (as Radcliffe does) your own rancid causes the words of Our Lord. Lord have mercy on yet another appalling affront to the priesthood.

BTW Anonymous, if the vortex you are talking about is 'do non-Catholics go to hell', unfortunately Voris got it wrong again. Voris' teaching, which too often falls into the stumbling block of VII pastorial neo-theology, contradicts too many Popes and is wrong:

http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/heresy-in-voris-vortex.htm

Christopher Griffin said...

That no-one in a position of authority will protest this appointment tells you all you need to know about how far up the ecclesiastical ladder the evil one has reached.

'DIS & 'DAT said...

Thanks for today's update on the Vatican's homosexual personnel initiative with the addition of Fr. Radcliffe to the list of insiders. Two things are to be expected: 1. The program will continue and, 2. Most Catholics will either be oblivious, indifferent or approving.

Of greater concern is that after all the homosexual appointments are completed should we expect the official approval of homosexual behavior?

Michael Dowd

Anonymous said...

In 25 years we will recall how Pope St. Francis The Great (doctor of the Church) was a great orthodox pope who fought against the liberal modernists

Ground hog day anyone?

John Paul II was once considered to be a revolutionary liberal who scandalized devout Catholics with Ecumenism (Assisi Meetings), allowing altar girls, allowing Holy Communion on the hand, appointing liberals/modernists/lavender mafia to the episcopate and college of cardinals, crazy Masses with immodestly dressed women (from spandex wearing contortionists to bare breasted natives) and a host of other examples. Sound like a certain Argentinian you know?

An archbishop stood against John Paul II and his revolution, that archbishop was excommunicated while heretics like Kasper, Danneels, and Mahony where elevated to be bishops and cardinals. And lest we forget the child abuse cover-ups which went unpunished...

Why is it that in the year 2015 we are shocked and scandalized? Is it because many of the commentators here were too young to remember the 1980's? There is nothing new under the sun. Francis will succeed, he will become a canonized saint and will be known as an orthodox defender of the faith. If Bishop Athanasius Schneider or Cardinal Burke resist Pope Francis, they will be excommunicated and maligned like Archbishop Lefebvre before them. In reality, those pastors will most likely take the "passive resistance" approach of Cardinal Ratzinger.

Recite the rosary every day to obtain the peace for the world and the end of the war.,

Confused Catholic said...

Jesus told us to love one another. Love the sinner but hate the sin. I am tired of homosexuality being shoved down my throat!
Satan is at work in this world! His goal is to divide and conquer. My niece is going to "marry" her roommate. I will not be part of that. To me, it's just so ghastly!
I believe that we should love everyone, but be loyal to the Catholic Church. These indeed are the end times!
I agree--God help us.