A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!
Showing posts with label Archbishop Cupich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Archbishop Cupich. Show all posts

Tuesday 14 June 2016

Heresiarch SoupItch of Chicago - another episcopal enemy of the faithful!

What the bear wrote!
http://corbiniansbear.blogspot.ca/2016/06/cupich-scapegoats-mentally-ill-to-save.html?spref=fb&m=1
"Here is simple realism. Archbishop Cupich is unfit to have any public position. He is a fool, a tool, and a danger to the faith of Catholics, the dignity of the Church, and the well-being of the public. He is an embarrassment to the handful of Catholics still capable of feeling embarrassed.
Most of all, he is one of those odious and harmful little men who thrive in institutions where there is no accountability and no requirement to actually accomplish anything in the real world. He is coddled and protected by an increasingly out-of-touch Church to the extent he divorces himself from reality and basks in the reflected glow of his own imagined virtues."

Tuesday 12 April 2016

Heresiarch of Chicago Blase Cupich, "I wouldn't exclude anyone" from Holy Communion. Is this what you meant Pope Francis?

Pope Francis! 

Does Blase Cupich speak for you?

Is this true; is this what you meant?

Responde mihi!




“It can no longer be said, according to Pope Francis, that all those living in an ‘irregular situation’ are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace,” Cupich said....Asked in what specific situations he would allow a divorced and remarried person to receive Communion,  Cupich refused to rule anyone out.
I wouldn’t exclude anyone,” he said. “I would like our pastors to have discussion in all of those folks who are in these kinds of situations. … I know in my experience as a pastor, if you’ve seen a marriage then you’ve seen one marriage. There is no instance that can be replicated. Every situation has its variables that are part of it.”
http://www.cruxnow.com/cns/2016/04/12/cupich-pope-has-intuition-about-where-people-live-their-lives/

Remember!
"Will this Pope re-write controversial Church doctrines? No. But that isn't how doctrine changes. Doctrine changes when pastoral contexts shift and new insights emerge such that particularly doctrinal formulations no longer mediate the saving message of God's transforming love. Doctrine changes when the Church has leaders and teachers who are not afraid to take note of new contexts and emerging insights. It changes when the Church has pastors who do what Francis has been insisting: leave the securities of your chanceries, of your rectories, of your safe places, of your episcopal residences go set aside the small minded rules that often keep you locked up and shielded from the world."
With that quote, (originating at the NCReporter) Father Thomas J. Rosica, on numerous occasions, laid out the plan of the Synods on the Family and the Apostolic Exhortation.

Saturday 12 December 2015

Heresiarch Cupich again distorts the Truth - states that people in homosexual unions may receive Holy Communion

During the October Synod on Adultery and Sodomy, Pope Francis appointee to the Metropolitan See of Chicago Blase Cupich (pronounced soup-itch), created a firestorm with his heterodox commentary on homosexuals receiving Holy Communion. He had done it again, this time in the secular press in Chicago as reported by LifeSiteNews.

Referring to the "internal forum" and whether it could be used to permit a person actively engaging in the sin of sodomy, Cupich said:
“When people who are in good conscience working with a spiritual director come to a decision, then they need to follow that conscience. That’s the teaching of the Church. So in the case of people receiving Communion in situations that are irregular that also applies. The question then was: Does that apply to gay people? My answer was: they’re human beings too. They have a conscience. Thy have to follow their conscience.”
The "internal forum" reference in the Synodal final report, which is only a recommendation to the Pope, refers to adulterers, those Catholics who do not have a decree of nullity and are living in an adulterous relationship whilst validly married to another. The "internal forum" was not, in that document, a permission to go forward for Holy Communion, though it is being used  by some to be in fact that. Cupich is manipulating what happened in this regard to extend it to people with same-sex attraction who are not living chaste lives. 

If Cupich wanted to be specific about this, he could be. Any person who is in a state of mortal sin cannot receive Holy Communion. He could state the Church's magisterial teaching, he refuses. The only conclusion that one can make is that he doesn't believe the Church's teaching on the Holy Eucharist and its intricate connection to the Sacrament of Penance/Reconciliation and St. Paul's admonition about eating unto "ones own condemnation."

Cupich went on to state his clear objection to Canon Law 915 that Holy Communion is to be denied to those “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin." Cupich said: 
“It’s not up to any minister who is distributing the Eucharist to make a decision about a person’s worthiness or lack of worthiness. That’s on the conscience of those individuals,”
There is no test at the communion rail (wherever it exists) to receive, it is indeed a matter of the person's conscience and the Minister of the Eucharist, the priest or deacon (I do not sanction the use of EMHC'), cannot know a stranger. However, if they know that the person is "persevering in manifest grave sin" then they must deny Holy Communion. Further, Cupich refers to the "internal forum" which is essentially, spiritual direction - therefore, it must be clear in that "forum" that the person must not present themselves for Holy Communion. Cupich does not say this, in fact, he does the exact opposite but in enough ambiguity to deny that he gives a blanket permission. The fact is, he does give permission with the use of "conscience" and his media interview is scandalous and even more confusing to the faithful.

There must be a reason why these men are so emphatic and persistent about giving in on every front to the sodomite mafia. One wonders what Cupich's reason might be. The late Cardinal George died in his bed, as he expected. He said that his successor would "die in jail." If Cupich does, will it be defending the faith? 

Thursday 22 October 2015

Heresiarch Cupich persecutes traditional Latin Mass. Does he believe Confession is about "forgiveness" - Bring it on baby, we'll out you all!

Thanks to Ann Barnhardt for digging up this little gem. If you want to read what Heresiarch Cupich thinks about the Sacrament of Non-Confession, read it all here.
“We use that word “reconciliation” all the time.  It doesn’t mean about giving people forgiveness. It comes from an anatomical root, namely the eyelash, it is called a cilia. So you begin to see eye-to-eye with people.”
Who appointed this heretic to Chicago anyway? 

Speaking of Chicago, the perhaps the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest and Canons of St. John Cantius might wish to Canon lawyer up. 


Trouble will come from this heresiarch.



http://rapidcityjournal.com/bishop-bans-latin-services/article_b37a5c37-b5a4-5af6-8014-48d9f5ef9da7.html

Bishop bans Latin services

March 27, 2002 11:00 pm  • 
RAPID CITY - A standoff between Latin-rite Catholics in Rapid City and their bishop has left the Latin Mass congregation of St. Michael's choosing to celebrate Good Friday services on the sidewalk instead of in church.
Members of the Latin Mass community, which has met in Rapid City for the past 12 years at Immaculate Conception Church on Fifth Street, say Bishop Blase Cupich has barred them from celebrating Good Friday and Easter vigil services at the church in an attempt to mainstream them into the English-language Mass.
"We've been prohibited by the bishop from celebrating the Easter Triduum liturgies and locked out of our church from noon on Holy Thursday until 8 a.m. on Easter morning," Dan Carda, 58, of Piedmont, said. Carda is a Latin Mass adherent who refuses to participate in the new-order English-language Mass that was mandated by the Second Vatican Council.
Instead, Carda and some of the other 220 members of St. Michael's congregation will gather at 3 p.m. today for Good Friday services on the sidewalk in front of the church.
Cupich sees his decision to not allow Good Friday Latin services at ICC as an invitation to unity, not a denial.
"We're just looking for an opportunity on an annual basis for us to all worship together, for one moment of unity as a Catholic church," Cupich said. "I'm looking for one time each year to do that, and it seems the day the Lord died for us all would be a good day to do it. That's all that this is about."
He said he would like the Latin Mass community to recognize unity with the wider Catholic church. "There has to be some occasion on a yearly basis to reflect the fact that we are one church under one bishop," Cupich said. "I would ask them, 'Why do they find it so difficult, on the day of the Lord's death, to celebrate with their bishop, who is the sign of the Lord's unity?'"
Carda sees it differently.
"This is his most-effective time to crack down, during Holy Week," Carda said, noting that Catholics such as he expect the elaborate pomp and circumstance of the Latin rite during Holy Week.
"I'm quite upset. It's disappointing and very disheartening," Carda, who has drafted a letter of complaint to Pope John Paul II, said. "I don't know why he feels like we are such a danger to him."
Carda and the Rev. Valentine Young, pastor of the St. Michael's community, say celebrating Holy Week in Latin is their right. They have a different understanding of the pope's position on the continuation of the Latin-rite Mass than does Cupich. The bishop's decision to prohibit some Holy Week services, as well as his recent decision to not allow children to make their First Communion or to be confirmed in the Latin rite, is contrary to the pope's wishes, Carda said.
"As long as the pope authorizes the Latin rite, I don't feel like I'm in violation of any of the legitimate authority of the church," Carda said.
After Vatican II, Carda stayed away from the Catholic Church for 30 years, returning only when the Latin rite started being celebrated again in a Sturgis congregation. "To me, the Latin rite is the real church. When you attend, you feel something very special that you do not when you attend a Novus Ordo (New Order) Mass," he said.
Young has said that the Ecclesia Dei document (the papal document allowing for the continuation of the Latin rite for people having trouble making the transition to English) ensures the right to worship in Latin. The document says, "Great respect should be shown to people still attached to the former Latin Liturgical Tradition." Cupich, he said, "is not showing these people respect by what he is doing."
Cupich says he's sorry the Latin Mass community is having trouble with his invitation to worship with him at the main Cathedral of Our Lady of Perpetual Help during Holy Week instead of at Immaculate Conception. "I'm supportive of their desire to have Sunday Mass there, and I'm going to be very patient with them," he said.
But his understanding of Ecclesia Dei is that "… eventually, Catholics have to understand that the reform of the Second Vatican Council is, in fact, an improvement and is important to our spiritual life."
Rome, Cupich said, has made it clear that any celebration of the Latin tradition is at the discretion of the local bishop. "And I've made my decision," he said.
Complaining about him to the Vatican and worshipping on the sidewalk probably won't help the Latin-rite cause, Cupich said. "My impression is that it will not help their standing with the wider church."



Monday 19 October 2015

The malformed and deformed consciences of some Synod Fathers - The Obsession with Homosexuality!

"More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason." Our Lady of Fatima

Tell us Heresiarch Cupich, are you a sodomite? 

Is your brother bishop from Northhampton, Peter Doyle?

You can listen to "Bishop Peter" talk about he "came out to Rome" at this link on Vatican Radio. Why have they adopted the homo-heretical and sodomite language of LGBTQRSTU and V?
http://media02.radiovaticana.va/audio/audio2/mp3/00499153.mp3


"Bishop Peter says he came out to Rome conscious of that ”gap that has to be bridged” but he adds that some of the small groups are moving in that direction through seeing Jesus as both truth as well as compassion and mercy." He expresses concern that some bishops sense “a little fear” of reconciling what he describes as “a Church upholding the eternal truth of faith” and “a Church offering healing and mercy to those who have failed to live up to that teaching.” "He says those who are wanting to explore “what is God’s will for us are in no way trying to undermine the traditional teaching of the Church”, but adds it’s essential to find a way of responding to those in difficult situations…"
Bishop Peter says that in preparation for the Synod he was in contact with supporters of sides of the debate. Regarding the concerns of Catholics from the LGBT community in the UK, he says he’s concerned that the Synod “doesn’t seem to have faced up to those issues”, but rather to have pushed them “into a siding” because the bishops do not know how to respond. He says we cannot “leave people in limbo” yet the biblical understanding of male and female does “not leave room at the moment for same-sex relationships. 
While hoping there may be some further discussion of this topic, Bishop Doyle suggests that issues around homosexuality might merit a Synod of their own, accompanied by further exploration of the theological understanding of anthropology."
http://www.news.va/en/news/synod-bishops-building-bridges-between-truth-and-m
We cannot leave people in limbo” yet the biblical understanding of male and female does “not leave room at the moment for same-sex relationships."

At the moment? The man is a heretic!

These men talk about "seeking God's will?" Was Jesus not God incarnate, the WORD MADE FLESH? Did he not say, "Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect? Perfection does not include sodomy any more than it includes adultery, murder, fornication, wife-beating, child molestation, or any other sin against God, self and man. "Seek you first the Kingdom of God" said Our Blessed Lord, not the anus of another man!

Come out, you and all your filthy, perverted brother bishops and priests.

Every one of you child-molesting, Christ-hating sodomites.  Yes, the Catholic priest abuse crisis was caused by men who were sodomites who infiltrated the Holy Priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ to seize upon their victims, teen-aged boys. They were sodomites -- homosexuals and don't let anyone tell you any different!

The real truth? 

These men have poisoned consciences and Michael Voris articulates it brilliantly:


"But see — and here is the dirty little not-so-secret secret of this Synod — many of these men constantly pounding the war drum for sodomy are troubled in their own private consciences because they are gay. They have supported this evil either directly in their own lives or have friends among their brother bishops who are sodomites themselves. They have blessed these evil unions in private or supported such horror by deliberately looking the other way.

Their own consciences have haunted and accused them for years, because they know this is wrong. They know men having sex with one another is evil and goes against nature, and since they engage in this themselves, or their clerical friends do and they support it, they have to use the Church to silence their own guilt crying out from inside of them. With all the evils plaguing the family in today's world, why do these bishops and their clerical supporters find it impossible to stop talking about homosexuality? One can only conclude that the reason they go on and on about it non-stop is because they are troubled in their own consciences."

Fisting.

Felching.

Golden showers.

Rimming.

Slurp ramps.

Glory holes

Anal intercourse

Oral copulation

Coprophagia

All according to conscience can you do these deviant things and then come to Holy Communion according to Heresiarch Cupich!

Cupich is a distorter of truth. A malefactor "tickling ears."

Remember Favalora? Leahy? Weakland?

Who do you believe, Cupich? Bode? Marx? Bonny? Doyle?

Or these?
1. Athenagoras of Athens (Second Century)

Athenagoras of Athens was a philosopher who converted to Christianity in the second century. He shows that the pagans, who were totally immoral, did not even refrain from sins against nature:
But though such is our character (Oh! why should I speak of things unfit to be uttered?), the things said of us are an example of the proverb, "The harlot reproves the chaste." For those who have set up a market for fornication and established infamous resorts for the young for every kind of vile pleasure — who do not abstain even from males, males with males committing shocking abominations, outraging all the noblest and comeliest bodies in all sorts of ways, so dishonoring the fair workmanship of God.
2. Tertullian (160–225)
Tertullian was a great genius and apologist of the early Church. Unfortunately, after an initial period of fervour, he succumbed to resentment and pride, left the Church and adhered to the Montanist heresy. Because of works written while still in the Church, he is considered an ecclesiastical writer and, as such, is commonly quoted by popes and theologians. His treatise On Modesty is an apology of Christian chastity. He clearly shows the horror the Church has for sins against nature. After condemning adultery, he exclaims:
But all the other frenzies of passions — impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes — beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not sins, but monstrosities.
3. Eusebius of Caesarea (260–341)
Eusebius Pamphili, Bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine and the "Father of Church History," writes in his book, Demonstratio Evangelica: "[God in the Law given to Moses] having forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the union of women with women and men with men."
4. Saint Jerome (340–420)
Saint Jerome is both Father and Doctor of the Church. He was also a notable exegete and great polemicist. In his book Against Jovinianus, he explains how a sodomite needs repentance and penance to be saved: "And Sodom and Gomorrah might have appeased it [God's wrath], had they been willing to repent, and through the aid of fasting gain for themselves tears of repentance."
5. Saint John Chrysostom (347–407)
Saint John Chrysostom is considered the greatest of the Greek Fathers and was proclaimed Doctor of the Church. He was archbishop and patriarch of Constantinople, and his revision of the Greek liturgy is used until today. In his sermons about Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans, he dwells on the gravity of the sin of homosexuality:
But if thou scoffest at hearing of Hell and believest not that fire, remember Sodom. For we have seen, surely we have seen, even in this present life, a semblance of Hell. For since many would utterly disbelieve the things to come after the resurrection, hearing now of an unquenchable fire, God brings them to a right mind by things present. For such is the burning of Sodom, and that conflagration!
Consider how great is that sin, to have forced Hell to appear even before its time! ... For that rain was unwonted, for the intercourse was contrary to nature, and it deluged the land, since lust had done so with their souls. Wherefore also the rain was the opposite of the customary rain. Now not only did it fail to stir up the womb of the earth to the production of fruits, but made it even useless for the reception of seed. For such was also the intercourse of the men, making a body of this sort more worthless than the very land of Sodom. And what is there more detestable than a man who hath pandered himself, or what more execrable?
6. Saint Augustine (354–430)
The greatest of the Fathers of the West and one of the great Doctors of the Church, St. Augustine laid the foundations of Catholic theology. In his celebrated Confessions, he thus condemns homosexuality:
Those offences which be contrary to nature are everywhere and at all times to be held in detestation and punished; such were those of the Sodomites, which should all nations commit, they should all be held guilty of the same crime by the divine law, which hath not so made men that they should in that way abuse one another. For even that fellowship which should be between God and us is violated, when that same nature of which He is author is polluted by the perversity of lust.
7. Saint Gregory the Great (540–604)
Pope Saint Gregory I is called "the Great." He is both Father and Doctor of the Church. He introduced Gregorian chant into the Church. He organised England's conversion, sending St. Augustine of Canterbury and many Benedictine monks there.
Sacred Scripture itself confirms that sulphur evokes the stench of the flesh, as it speaks of the rain of fire and sulphur poured upon Sodom by the Lord. He had decided to punish Sodom for the crimes of the flesh, and the very type of punishment he chose emphasised the shame of that crime. For sulphur stinks, and fire burns. So it was just that Sodomites, burning with perverse desires arising from the flesh like stench, should perish by fire and sulphur so that through this just punishment they would realise the evil they had committed, led by a perverse desire.
8. Saint Peter Damian (1007–1072)
Doctor of the Church, cardinal and a great reformer of the clergy, St. Peter Damian wrote his famous Book of Gomorrah against the inroads made by homosexuality among the clergy. He describes not only the iniquity of homosexuality, but also its psychological and moral consequences:
Truly, this vice is never to be compared with any other vice because it surpasses the enormity of all vices.… It defiles everything, stains everything, pollutes everything. And as for itself, it permits nothing pure, nothing clean, nothing other than filth. ...
The miserable flesh burns with the heat of lust; the cold mind trembles with the rancour of suspicion; and in the heart of the miserable man chaos boils like Tartarus [Hell]. ... In fact, after this most poisonous serpent once sinks its fangs into the unhappy soul, sense is snatched away, memory is borne off, the sharpness of the mind is obscured. It becomes unmindful of God and even forgetful of itself. This plague undermines the foundation of faith, weakens the strength of hope, destroys the bond of charity; it takes away justice, subverts fortitude, banishes temperance, blunts the keenness of prudence.
And what more should I say since it expels the whole host of the virtues from the chamber of the human heart and introduces every barbarous vice as if the bolts of the doors were pulled out.
9. Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274)
Commenting upon St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (1:26–27), St. Thomas Aquinas, the Angelic Doctor, explains why the sin of homosexuality is so grave:
Given the sin of impiety through which they [the Romans] sinned against the divine nature [by idolatry], the punishment that led them to sin against their own nature followed. ... I say, therefore, that since they changed into lies [by idolatry] the truth about God, He brought them to ignominious passions, that is, to sins against nature — not that God led them to evil, but only that He abandoned them to evil. ...
If all the sins of the flesh are worthy of condemnation because by them man allows himself to be dominated by that which he has of the animal nature, much more deserving of condemnation are the sins against nature by which man degrades his own animal nature. ...
Man can sin against nature in two ways. First, when he sins against his specific rational nature, acting contrary to reason. In this sense, we can say that every sin is a sin against man's nature, because it is against man's right reason. ...
Secondly, man sins against nature when he goes against his generic nature, that is to say, his animal nature. Now, it is evident that, in accord with natural order, the union of the sexes among animals is ordered towards conception. From this it follows that every sexual intercourse that cannot lead to conception is opposed to man's animal nature.
10. Saint Catherine of Siena (1347–1380)
Saint Catherine, a great mystic and Doctor of the Church, lived in troubled times. The papacy was in exile at Avignon, France. She was instrumental in bringing the popes back to Rome. Her famous Dialogues are written as if dictated by God Himself:
But they act in a contrary way, for they come full of impurity to this mystery, and not only of that impurity to which, through the fragility of your weak nature, you are all naturally inclined (although reason, when free will permits, can quiet the rebellion of nature), but these wretches not only do not bridle this fragility, but do worse, committing that accursed sin against nature, and as blind and fools, with the light of their intellect darkened, they do not know the stench and misery in which they are. It is not only that this sin stinks before Me, who am the Supreme and Eternal Truth, it does indeed displease Me so much and I hold it in such abomination that for it alone I buried five cities by a divine judgement, My divine justice being no longer able to endure it. This sin not only displeases Me as I have said, but also the devils whom these wretches have made their masters. Not that the evil displeases them because they like anything good, but because their nature was originally angelic, and their angelic nature causes them to loathe the sight of the actual commission of this enormous sin.
11. Saint Bernardine of Siena (1380–1444)
Saint Bernardine of Siena was a famous preacher, celebrated for his doctrine and holiness. Regarding homosexuality, he stated:
No sin in the world grips the soul as the accursed sodomy; this sin has always been detested by all those who live according to God. ... Deviant passion is close to madness; this vice disturbs the intellect, destroys elevation and generosity of soul, brings the mind down from great thoughts to the lowliest, makes the person slothful, irascible, obstinate and obdurate, servile and soft and incapable of anything; furthermore, agitated by an insatiable craving for pleasure, the person follows not reason but frenzy. ... They become blind and, when their thoughts should soar to high and great things, they are broken down and reduced to vile and useless and putrid things, which could never make them happy. ... Just as people participate in the glory of God in different degrees, so also in hell some suffer more than others. He who lived with this vice of sodomy suffers more than another, for this is the greatest sin.
12. Saint Peter Canisius (1521–1597)
Saint Peter Canisius, Jesuit and Doctor of the Church, is responsible for helping one third of Germany abandon Lutheranism and return to the Church. To Scripture's condemnation of homosexuality, he added his own:
As the Sacred Scripture says, the Sodomites were wicked and exceedingly sinful. Saint Peter and St. Paul condemn this nefarious and depraved sin. In fact, the Scripture denounces this enormous indecency thus: "The scandal of Sodomites and Gomorrhans has multiplied and their sins have become grave beyond measure." So the angels said to just Lot, who totally abhorred the depravity of the Sodomites: "Let us leave this city. ..." Holy Scripture does not fail to mention the causes that led the Sodomites, and can also lead others, to this most grievous sin. In fact, in Ezechiel we read: "Behold this was the iniquity of Sodom: pride, fullness of bread, and abundance, and the idleness of her, and of her daughters: and they did not put forth their hand to the needy, and the poor. And they were lifted up, and committed abominations before me; and I took them away as thou hast seen" (Ezek. 16:49–50). Those unashamed of violating divine and natural law are slaves of this never sufficiently execrated depravity.
http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/who-says-homosexual-activity-is-wrong

Saturday 17 October 2015

Hey Heresiarch Cupich - What do you think of this "throuple: oh and how lovely, they want to start a family

Tell us Heresiarch Cupich - in the deranged mind of yours poisoned by modernism, heresy, pride arrogance and a lack of supernatural faith, what thinkest thou of this little group. Will you meet them where they are? 

What a bunch of sickos and any cleric that would  give these filthy perverts Holy Communion will go to Hell.



Gay married couple who got divorced after just one year to include a THIRD man in their relationship now plan to have children with their sisters as surrogates

  • Adam Grant and Shayne Curran, Canada, tied the knot in 2011 
  • One year later they met Sebastian Tran in a nightclub and hit it off
  • Got divorced so the relationship between the threesome could be equal
  • Now all live together and plan on starting a family 

Friday 16 October 2015

Heresiarch Cupich, is this what you want to accompany? To where would that be?

Vox's artwork to cover the posteriors











“If people come to a decision in good conscience then our job is to help them move forward and to respect that. The conscience is inviolable and we have to respect that when they make decisions, and I’ve always done that.”
“I think that gay people are human beings too and they have a conscience. And my role as a pastor is to help them to discern what the will of God is by looking at the objective moral teaching of the Church and yet, at the same time, helping them through a period of discernment to understand what God is calling them to at that point,” 
"It’s for everybody. I think that we have to make sure that we don’t pigeonhole one group as though they are not part of the human family, as though there’s a different set of rules for them. That would be a big mistake.” Blase Cupich
Actually, Blase, they need to abide by the same rules that I do. 

Ignores Second Vatican Council

In response to Heresiarch Cupich's statement, a priest friend wrote reminded me of this and provides some further comment


PASTORAL CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH IN THE MODERN WORLD  (“GAUDIUM ET SPES”) PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS, POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 7, 1965
“16. In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience when necessary speaks to his heart: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law written by God; to obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged.(9)
 Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths.(10)

In a wonderful manner conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by love of God and neighbor.(11)
 Father comments
In fidelity to conscience, Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth, and for the genuine solution to the numerous problems which arise in the life of individuals from social relationships.
 Hence the more right conscience holds sway, the more persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and strive to be guided by the objective norms of morality.
 Conscience frequently errs from invincible ignorance without losing its dignity.
 The same cannot be said for a man who cares but little for truth and goodness, or for a conscience which by degrees grows practically sightless as a result of habitual sin. ”
 FOOTNOTES
(9.)    Cf. Rom. 2:15-16.
(10.) Cf. Pius XII, Radio address on the correct formation of a Christian conscience in the young, March 23, 1952: AAS (1952), p. 271.
(11.) Cf. Matt. 22:37-40; Gal. 5:14.

As Father Ray Blake asked, "Who let this man make his first Holy Communion?"

Postscript

Borrowed from Hilary White at "What's Up With the Synod?" The opening hymn from the next CupichMass



Blase Cupich, Judas Priest

Not a day goes by without another bishop coming out and revealing what they really think. In a breaking story, LifeSiteNews has interviewed Blase Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago who reveals his heretical belief in the primacy of conscience over doctrine and faith and his willingness to cause sacrilege to the Holy Eucharist.

Blase Cupich's words are heretical. In an earlier time, a Pope would have already sanctioned him. Yet, it was this Pope that promoted him to the See of Chicago and invited him as a participant at the Synod. How dare he include the "elderly" in the same sentence as sodomites and lesbians. 

In his own words:



Archbishop Blase Cupich of Chicago — who is participating in the Synod of the Family at Pope Francis’ personal invitation — said at a press scrum in the Vatican press office this afternoon that the conscience is "inviolable" and that he believes divorced and remarried couples could be permitted to receive the sacraments, if they have "come to a decision" to do so "in good conscience" - theological reasoning that he indicated in response to a follow-up question would also apply to gay couples.
“In Chicago I visit regularly with people who feel marginalized: the elderly, the divorced and remarried, gay and lesbian individuals and also couples. I think that we really need to get to know what their life is like if we’re going to accompany them,” he said.
When asked to give a concrete example of how he would accompany the divorced and remarried in their desire to receive the sacraments, Cupich replied: “If people come to a decision in good conscience then our job is to help them move forward and to respect that. The conscience is inviolable and we have to respect that when they make decisions, and I’ve always done that.”
When asked by LifeSiteNews if the notion of accompanying people to the sacraments who had a clear indication of conscience to do so also applied to gay couples in the Church who wish to receive Communion, Cupich indicated an affirmative answer.
“I think that gay people are human beings too and they have a conscience. And my role as a pastor is to help them to discern what the will of God is by looking at the objective moral teaching of the Church and yet, at the same time, helping them through a period of discernment to understand what God is calling them to at that point,” he said. “It’s for everybody. I think that we have to make sure that we don’t pigeonhole one group as though they are not part of the human family, as though there’s a different set of rules for them. That would be a big mistake.”

Blase Cupich is a disgrace to the priesthood and the Church, Under his logic, as long as a murderer or a rapist or a producer of child pornography or a thief does so in good conscience, then the Eucharist is theirs.

There is a set of rules for Holy Communion. Confession, penance and firm purpose of amendment. Where does this man wish to accompany them, on the road to Hell? We all know they are human beings and don't need to be lectured by this apostate bishop.


Let all these Judas Priests come out, one by one. Let them all come out into the light so we can see them and look upon their wicked and deformed faces and minds and hearts conformed to a modernist heresy and not to Christ.

Is Blase Cupich a homosexual? Is he being blackmailed? What is in his closet?

The Synod is a sham. Pope Francis is responsible.

The entire report can be read at: 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-cupich-lays-out-pathway-for-gay-couples-to-receive-communion

Friday 7 August 2015

Cupich's Confusion

If I were to write what I really think of this bishop and the pope who appointed him but I'd have to to to confession. I doubt it will be long until he's a cardinal.

Let us ponder his thought process:
"While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.
Cupich's comments are a disgrace. His equating health care, immigration, racism and the economy in this statement is insulting to the souls of the murdered babies and those who have worked in ProLife for decades. His lecturing of John and Mary Catholic is a condescending display of episcopal pride and arrogance. 

What  a pathetic appointment to the Metropolitan See of Chicago. What a return to the past and the Bernardin legacy. We are sheep without good shepherds and some of these are wearing a disguise.



O LORD, deliver Your Church and Your faithful!

Friday 24 April 2015

Communion in the hand is Eucharistic Sacrilege! (and an apology)

The cleric below is Bishop Manz, the Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago giving Holy Communion to the Chicago Fire Chief at yesterday's funeral for Cardinal George. The Fire Chief may or may not be a Catholic. If he is not a Catholic then he should not have presented himself for Holy Communion. If he is a Catholic then he should know better how to receive Holy Communion in the hand which will always be in my view, an abomination. 

Blase Cupich, the Archbishop gave Holy Communion to the non-Catholic governor Rauner.

I watched the video of this again. The Chief grabbed the Eucharist as Bishop Manz lifted the Lord. In writing originally, I indicated the Bishop committed a sacrilege. I was wrong and I apologise publicly to Bishop Manz and anyone offended by my statement. 

When will this abuse and desecration stop?









How to Receive the Eucharist


  • REV. ADRIAN J. PARCHER, O.S.B.


Often in modern liturgy, the sense of reverence, of dignity, of awe, seems to have disappeared.
communionben.jpg
When you talk about what I'm going to talk about, people say, "Oh, my goodness, Father has me directly in mind, I know he's directing what he's saying at me."  People become self-conscious or even offended.  Recently I spoke to a congregation about the reception of Holy Communion.  I began by saying, "There are no flagrant violations or extreme problems here, but it's good always to remind ourselves of what happens when we receive the Eucharist and how we should receive it."  Then I continued in this vein:
We have the adage "Familiarity breeds contempt."  Not that we have contempt for the Eucharist, but we receive it so often that we can become slovenly.  Even priests can become slovenly in the way they say Mass.  As anyone who's been a superior of a community of priests knows, it's a delicate thing to approach the priest and say, "Father, look, you're saying Mass too fast; you're saying Mass too irreverently; you're doing this or that and you ought to correct it."  Several years ago a Jesuit published a book called How Not to Say Mass, and when we read it in refectory in the monastery one of the old monks said, "How strange that a Jesuit should write a book on how not to say Mass."  Well, here we go. 
If you were to ask me what two dispositions are absolutely necessary to approach the table of the Lord, I would say without hesitation that the first is faith — deep belief in our Lord who is truly present, body and soul, humanity and divinity who becomes present at the words of consecration and who comes into our lives, into our very beings, assimilates us into himself, through the reception of the Eucharist That is whom we are receiving.  We celebrate what Jesus enacted at the Last Supper and on Calvary.  We represent that act to the Father and bring its benefits upon ourselves. 
The Eucharist like all the great mysteries of our faith, is not something that one can explain rationally.  How can Jesus, how can God, be contained in what appears to be a small wafer of bread? But that's our strong belief, that Jesus is truly present on our altars.  Once we have received him in the Eucharist, he is present in our very persons, in our bodies.  We believe that by the reception of the Eucharist we become tabernacles, with our Lord contained within our very selves.  That is a marvelous mystery, and that's the first quality that we have to come with, that deep awareness, that deep faith, that deep belief.  That's what really makes Catholics Catholic.  Take away the Eucharist, and we're like everyone else.  There's no difference.  I think it was one of the French revolutionaries who said, "If I truly believed what the Church wants me to believe, that Christ truly becomes present on the altar at the moment of consecration, I would not walk to the communion rail — I would crawl on my belly.  That is how deep my faith and my humility would be." 
Now we certainly don't expect anyone to crawl, but there has to be that depth of faith.  Out of that faith there has to come a devotion.  You know each of us is baptized into the priesthood of Jesus, and one of the ways in which ordinary baptized Catholics exercise that priesthood is by receiving Holy Communion.  That is the exercise of a power we have from Christ.  It's an act of worship and so we do it.  We come with devotion, we come with humility.  We come — how should I put it? — with great reverence and respect.  I think that's what many people complain about in our modern liturgy, thc fact that the sense of reverence, of dignity, of awe, has disappeared.  But that's more in our disposition than in anything else. 
Now there are two ways in which Communion is received in the Latin Church: We receive either on the tongue or in the hand.  The priest holds up the Host and says, "The Body of Christ," and the communicant answers, "Amen" That is not an English word; it's an Aramaic word.  It really is pronounced "Ahmeen," and it means, "So be it" "I agree."  "I believe."  "It is the Body of Christ."  That's what the "Amen" means: "I honestly believe that when I receive, it is Christ, and so I say Amen." 
No one can dictate how one is to receive Holy Communion.  A priest can't say, "I'm only going to give the Eucharist on the tongue."  Nor can a priest demand that everyone who comes to Communion receive in the hand.  Who decides how one is to receive Holy Communion? The communicant and only the communicant.  It is the individual who decides how he is going to receive.  (The option applies only in countries whose national bishops' conferences have applied for and been granted permission to authorize Communion in the hand, of course.) Often I run into priests who say, "I'm only going to give it in the hand."  And I have to say, "Father, you cannot demand that"
If you are going to receive on the tongue, you should keep certain things in mind.  First, the head should be bent back slightly, and the head should be held erect, but kind of tilted back.  The tongue should come out over the bottom teeth, equal with the bottom lip, so that the priest has someplace to put the Host Sometimes people come up with their teeth clenched, and you wonder, "How am I going to get our Lord into that mouth?"

There are certain things that we priests talk about among ourselves (I'm telling the tricks of the trade now), comments we make about certain kinds of communicants.  We say, "That one was a snapping turtle," because he closes his mouth so quickly that the priest is afraid his fingers are going to be cut off by the teeth.  You look down sometimes and wonder, "Has blood been drawn?" Many a time, I've had the scar of the teeth on my knuckles.  There are also the plungers; they sort of leap forward.  Or you have the toe dancers, who come up on their toes, and you never know where they're going to light.  Others receive on the run; they don't stand squarely in front of you but they stand as if they can't wait to get away.  Come straight forward, face the priest, and don't be too far away, because its awfully difficult at times to reach. 
If you're going to receive in the hand, the best way is to put one hand down and put the other hand on top of it and make, as Tertullian used to say, a kind of throne for the Lord.  When the priest puts the Host on your hand, you say, "Amen."  Take a step or two to the side to make way for the next communicant, then receive our Lord.  Communion should not be received on the run, as you're walking back to your place; it should be consumed before you leave the area below the altar. 
I would like to remind people to indicate clearly how they wish to receive.  Sometimes communicants come up with their hands out and their mouths open, and the priest doesn't know which way to give the Host.  How does this person wish to receive? If you indicate clearly, it's easier.  If you're going to receive in the hand, be clear about where the Host should be placed so that it doesn't accidentally fall.  By the way, if it should fall on the floor, indicate it to the priest.  Sometimes the priest or extraordinary minister doesn't see it
That should be the overwhelming disposition with which we approach Holy Communion: "It is the Lord!"
If you're going to kneel for Communion — and it's all right to kneel — remember that, when you rise, you have people behind you.  Sometimes those who kneel to receive take a step or two back when they rise.  I've seen at times when an older person stands just behind the one who is rising.  A person who uses a cane to steady his walk may come close to being knocked over by someone rising up.  So remember to rise straight up, thinking about the person right behind you
Some people ask me at times, "Father, I see on television the Masses that come from Birmingham, from Mother Angelica, and I see the sisters genuflecting.  Should I genuflect before or after?" Only as a sign of piety; it's not necessary to genuflect, but it is necessary to make some gesture of reverence before receiving the Eucharist.  It may be kneeling, bowing, crossing oneself or some other act.  What is necessary is to receive with reverence and dignity.  I don't think there should be any genuflections after receiving Holy Eucharist.  I don't mean to sound facetious, but, at that moment, you don't want to genuflect to the tabernacle, because the Lord is within you; you are the tabernacle. 
Let me sum up by saying the two main dispositions that we need — faith and devotion.  Remember that scene, in the Fourth Gospel, that occurs after the Resurrection.  The disciples are out fishing, and the boats are coming toward the shore.  Peter, as usual, is completely immersed in what he is doing; he's got his outer clothes off so he can work more easily.  The beloved disciple sees someone standing on the shore and says to Peter, "It is the Lord."  Peter jumps into the water. 
That disposition of John, "It is the Lord" — that's what our faith demands.  It is the Lord that we are worshiping.  It is the Lord that we are receiving into ourselves.  It is the Lord who is giving us in the Eucharist a special way to participate in divine life.  It is the Lord who is sanctifying us.  That should be the overwhelming disposition with which we approach Holy Communion: "It is the Lord!"