James Martin, S.J., heresiarch Jesuit manipulates publicly, the reception and nature of the Holy Eucharist!

"I believe, of course, that it's the Body and Blood of Christ, but you know, as Pope Francis said, communion is not a reward for the perfect.  It is medicine for the sick.  It is medicine for those who need it.   So, you know, you look at the Last Supper, I mean, were the disciples to whom Jesus gave communion all perfect?  Absolutely not.  I mean, he gave communion to Judas, for pete's sake.  So, I think we need to get away from this idea that you need to be perfect in order to approach the communion rail."

“What makes people hypocrites? They disguise themselves, they disguise themselves as good people: they make themselves up like little holy cards, looking up at heaven as they pray, making sure they are seen—they believe they are more righteous than others, they despise others.”  Pope  Francis (source)

I'm happy to know that in James Martin's parish there is a "communion rail," perhaps he would send us a picture. 

It is good to see that more than a few bloggers and haters on Twitter have noticed this man's agenda and heterodoxy.

Father Dwight Longenecker writes:

Fr. Martin has set up a straw man, and this is a typical tactic of the progressive propagandist. They portray those who oppose them as wild eyed, frenzied lunatics while they, of course, are the mild mannered, smiling and reasonable voice of common sense. Really? I expect there are some Catholics who do “hate” LGBT people”, but I haven’t met any. It suits Fr Martin, however, to pump up the hate speech because it’s easy to hate the haters. Consequently by pumping up the hate speech he raises the level of hatred. Those who pump up the accusations of hate pump up hate. They should be reminded that not everyone who disagrees with the LGBT agenda is a bigoted, self righteous, legalistic hater. Bullying others by calling them self righteous, legalistic haters weakens one’s position.Fr Martin is smart.  He should be better than that.

Keep it coming James; you're just too much fun. Almost as much as my Basilian friend.

Now, for a little irony courtesy of our Jesuit friend with an acknowledgment for finding it to One Mad Mom.

Well, if calling people "haters" is not an "ad hominem attack" then, I don't know what is. 

Who gave this boy his First Holy Communion?

H/T to The Hirsch Files

#JamesMartinSJBlockParty
https://www.facebook.com/FrJamesMartin/?fref=ts
https://twitter.com/JamesMartinSJ

It's not the letter of the "doctrine" but the "spirit" - and you're a jealous sibling or an upset labourer if you disagree, so there, now shut-up and do what I say!

"The Synod experience also made us better realize that the true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit."

May God protect us from these malefactors and St. Michael come to our aid. 

Gird your loins brothers and sisters. It has begun.

Final Discourse of Pope Francis

By Pope Francis

Dear Beatitudes, Eminences and Excellencies,
Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I would like first of all to thank the Lord, who has guided our synodal process in these years by his Holy Spirit, whose support is never lacking to the Church.

My heartfelt thanks go to Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Secretary General of the Synod, Bishop Fabio Fabene, its Under-Secretary, and, together with them, the Relator, Cardinal Peter Erdő, and the Special Secretary, Archbishop Bruno Forte, the Delegate Presidents, the writers, consultors and translators, and all those who have worked tirelessly and with total dedication to the Church: My deepest thanks!

I likewise thank all of you, dear Synod Fathers, Fraternal Delegates, Auditors and Assessors, parish priests and families, for your active and fruitful participation.

And I thank all those unnamed men and women who contributed generously to the labours of this Synod by quietly working behind the scenes.

Be assured of my prayers, that the Lord will reward all of you with his abundant gifts of grace!

As I followed the labours of the Synod, I asked myself: What will it mean for the Church to conclude this Synod devoted to the family?

Certainly, the Synod was not about settling all the issues having to do with the family, but rather attempting to see them in the light of the Gospel and the Church’s tradition and two-thousand-year history, bringing the joy of hope without falling into a facile repetition of what is obvious or has already been said.

Surely it was not about finding exhaustive solutions for all the difficulties and uncertainties which challenge and threaten the family, but rather about seeing these difficulties and uncertainties in the light of the Faith, carefully studying them and confronting them fearlessly, without burying our heads in the sand.

It was about urging everyone to appreciate the importance of the institution of the family and of marriage between a man and a woman, based on unity and indissolubility, and valuing it as the fundamental basis of society and human life.

It was about listening to and making heard the voices of the families and the Church’s pastors, who came to Rome bearing on their shoulders the burdens and the hopes, the riches and the challenges of families throughout the world.

It was about showing the vitality of the Catholic Church, which is not afraid to stir dulled consciences or to soil her hands with lively and frank discussions about the family.

It was about trying to view and interpret realities, today’s realities, through God’s eyes, so as to kindle the flame of faith and enlighten people’s hearts in times marked by discouragement, social, economic and moral crisis, and growing pessimism.

It was about bearing witness to everyone that, for the Church, the Gospel continues to be a vital source of eternal newness, against all those who would “indoctrinate” it in dead stones to be hurled at others.

It was also about laying closed hearts, which bare the closed hearts which frequently hide even behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families.

It was about making clear that the Church is a Church of the poor in spirit and of sinners seeking forgiveness, not simply of the righteous and the holy, but rather of those who are righteous and holy precisely when they feel themselves poor sinners.

It was about trying to open up broader horizons, rising above conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints, so as to defend and spread the freedom of the children of God, and to transmit the beauty of Christian Newness, at times encrusted in a language which is archaic or simply incomprehensible.

In the course of this Synod, the different opinions which were freely expressed – and at times, unfortunately, not in entirely well-meaning ways – certainly led to a rich and lively dialogue; they offered a vivid image of a Church which does not simply “rubberstamp”, but draws from the sources of her faith living waters to refresh parched hearts.¹

And – apart from dogmatic questions clearly defined by the Church’s Magisterium – we have also seen that what seems normal for a bishop on one continent, is considered strange and almost scandalous for a bishop from another; what is considered a violation of a right in one society is an evident and inviolable rule in another; what for some is freedom of conscience is for others simply confusion. Cultures are in fact quite diverse, and each general principle needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied.²

The 1985 Synod, which celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council, spoke of inculturation as “the intimate transformation of authentic cultural values through their integration in Christianity, and the taking root of Christianity in the various human cultures”.³

Inculturation does not weaken true values, but demonstrates their true strength and authenticity, since they adapt without changing; indeed they quietly and gradually transform the different cultures.⁴

We have seen, also by the richness of our diversity, that the same challenge is ever before us: that of proclaiming the Gospel to the men and women of today, and defending the family from all ideological and individualistic assaults.

And without ever falling into the danger of relativism or of demonizing others, we sought to embrace, fully and courageously, the goodness and mercy of God who transcends our every human reckoning and desires only that “all be saved” (cf. 1 Tm 2:4). In this way we wished to experience this Synod in the context of the Extraordinary Year of Mercy which the Church is called to celebrated.

Dear Brothers,

The Synod experience also made us better realize that the true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit; not ideas but people; not formulae but the gratuitousness of God’s love and forgiveness. This is in no way to detract from the importance of formulae, laws and divine commandments, but raather to exalt the greatness of the true God, who does not treat us according to our merits or even according to our works but solely according to the boundless generosity of his Mercy (cf. Rom 3:21-30; Ps 129; Lk 11:37-54). It does have to do with overcoming the recurring temptations of the elder brother (cf. Lk 15:25-32) and the jealous labourers (cf. Mt 20:1-16). Indeed, it means upholding all the more the laws and commandments which were made for man and not vice versa (cf. Mk 2:27).

In this sense, the necessary human repentance, works and efforts take on a deeper meaning, not as the price of that salvation freely won for us by Christ on the cross, but as a response to the One who loved us first and saved us at the cost of his innocent blood, while we were still sinners (cf. Rom 5:6).

The Church’s first duty is not to hand down condemnations or anathemas, but to proclaim God’s mercy, to call to conversion, and to lead all men and women to salvation in the Lord (cf. Jn 12:44-50).

Blessed Paul VI expressed this eloquently: “”We can imagine, then, that each of our sins, our attempts to turn our back on God, kindles in him a more intense flame of love, a desire to bring us back to himself and to his saving plan… God, in Christ, shows himself to be infinitely good… God is good. Not only in himself; God is – let us say it with tears – good for us. He loves us, he seeks us out, he thinks of us, he knows us, he touches our hearts us and he waits for us. He will be – so to say – delighted on the day when we return and say: ‘Lord, in your goodness, forgive me. Thus our repentance becomes God’s joy”.⁵

Saint John Paul II also stated that: “the Church lives an authentic life when she professes and proclaims mercy… and when she brings people close to the sources of the Saviour’s mercy, of which she is the trustee and dispenser”.⁶

Benedict XVI, too, said: “Mercy is indeed the central nucleus of the Gospel message; it is the very name of God… May all that the Church says and does manifest the mercy God feels for mankind. When the Church has to recall an unrecognized truth, or a betrayed good, she always does so impelled by merciful love, so that men may have life and have it abundantly (cf. Jn 10:10)”.⁷

In light of all this, and thanks to this time of grace which the Church has experienced in discussing the family, we feel mutually enriched. Many of us have felt the working of the Holy Spirit who is the real protagonist and guide of the Synod. For all of us, the word “family” has a new resonance, so much so that the word itself already evokes the richness of the family’s vocation and the significance of the labours of the Synod.⁸

In effect, for the Church to conclude the Synod means to return to our true “journeying together” in bringing to every part of the world, to every diocese, to every community and every situation, the light of the Gospel, the embrace of the Church and the support of God’s mercy!

Thank you!

Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, our latest heresiarch and homosexualist

Here's another. Oswald Gracias of Mumbai.

DANGER AHEAD. Synod document drafting committee member: Familiaris Consortio? "Circumstances have changed!" Divorced-and-remarried, "decentralization" still on the agenda

Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, one of ten mostly-liberal prelates assigned by Pope Francis to the drafting committee for the final Synod relation, has unexpectedly emerged in recent days as a champion for greater "openness" to homosexuals. His comments in today's Vatican press conference are true to form, and given his role in drafting the Synod document hints at something that can be manipulated in favor of Kasperite and liberal concerns.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/danger-ahead-signs-emerging-of-liberal.html

Other bonds of love and interdependency may be "good" and why the language needs to be even "harsher"

There has been much talk of language at the Synod and how it needs to change to conform with the world. Consider then this:

We must never forget that other bonds of love and interdependency, of commitment and mutual responsibility exist in society. They may be good; they may even be recognized in law. They are clearly not the same as marriage; they are something else. No extension of terminology for legal purposes will change the observable reality that only the committed union of a man and a woman carries, not only the bond of interdependency between the two adults, but the capacity to bring forth children. Let us recommit ourselves to building up the human family, to strengthening marriage, to blessing and nurturing children, and to making our homes, families and parish communities holy, welcoming places for women and men of every race, language, orientation and way of life.

http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/marriage-and-the-family-humanity-s-future

http://saltandlighttv.org/blog/rosicareflections/marriage-and-the-family-humanitys-future-2

How can they be "good" if they are based on sodomy?

If they are "something else" what are they?

The "law" allows "two adults" to adopt children, regardless of whether the adults are one man and one woman. Is this rightly ordered based upon the teachings of the Church?

People are always "welcome" no matter their "orientation." What we must each struggle to purge from our lives is sin and some sins are harder to purge than others. Is this something we must continue to do or do we not call an "orientation" that is based on an "objective disorder" which can manifest as "intrinsically disordered," sin?  Do we leave people oriented towards their sin?

So, it is all about changing the Catechism and the Truth for the sake of language in a false idea that this will bring millions back to the Church. It will not. It will ease the pain of a guilty conscience in some and leave others to suffer dreadful sickness, early death and eternal Hell.

You see friends, the people in the Church think and advocate for what really is a "sodomy synod" are simply wrong. They are in charity misinformed or deluded. They may be advocates of the change in language for a variety of reasons. They may be blackmailed. They may be evil. Whatever the reason, they are wrong and they are not doing the work of Our Lord; they are not working to save souls, they may think that they are, but they are not. 

How can any of hold this opinion and belief? Because it is what the Church has taught through Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition for two-thousand years and She has not been wrong. But these men in clerics are and we know who they are, there is no need to name them. If this Synod has been good for anything it has unmasked them for all to see.

Let us consider what this man who was once a practicing homosexual, pornographic performer and occultist who was saved from all of it by Our Lord Jesus Christ think? How must this man, who has struggled to overcome a life of hell on earth because of God's grace and the Sacraments, feel? The Synodal Fathers seem to be all about "feelings," well, what about the suffering that Joseph Sciambra must endure as he sees what these bishops and cardinals, whatever their reasoning or motivation are out to do?

When Pope Francis and the rest of these men in clerical towers want to go to the peripheries and smell like the sheep, here is a man that can take them there.

God bless him; for he has more faith than some of our shepherds.

A Call for Even Harsher Language on Homosexuality from the Synod

Embracing “intrinsically disordered” - Why “less condemnatory” language hides the Truth of homosexuality

The real reason why “gay” men leave the Catholic Church…

Synod Father calls out “gay” for what it is - ABNORMAL!

Archbishop Blase Cupich wants to “accompany” “gays…”

Synod Fathers: “gays” do not need you to “accompany” them, but to be there when they return...

Shut-up you stupid little Catholic. It is I, the great Clericalist Wizard of Coleridge who knows best - The Faith is not "timeless" and I've seen the "risen lord"

This proves that we are getting to them and we must not stop.

It also proves that they don't give a rat's patootie what you or I think.

They are clericalist on top of being heresiarchs.

http://brisbanecatholic.org.au/articles/on-the-road-together-invective-fear-surprise/

On the Road Together – Invective, fear and surprise "Those voices, clinging desperately to some imagined or ideologised past, cannot point the way into the future. History will have its way, however much we try to cling to illusions of timelessness."

Connect with Archbishop Mark Coleridge:

October 20, 2015
Whatever about the press conference itself, the big surprise for me has been the ferocious reaction in some quarters to what I regard as my quite moderate remarks. Twitter has been frothing with invective, which shows what’s out there – by which I mean the fear, even the panic this Synod seems to have provoked in some. That sort of thing doesn’t look like the Holy Spirit to me – red-eyed joylessness cannot be of God. The impression is that, if you touch the slightest jot or tittle not so much of what the Church teaches but of what her pastoral practice has been or how her truth has been expressed, then the whole edifice built up over 2000 years will come tumbling down. If I believed that, I’d be panicking too and hurling lemon-lipped diatribes this way and that. But I don’t believe it and therefore find myself trusting in the path that’s opening before us, with the abuse rolling like water off a duck’s back. Voices of fear, even panic, have also been heard in the Synod Hall and the small groups, but what’s clearer to me now is that those voices within have strong links to similar voices without. It’s also clear that those voices, clinging desperately to some imagined or ideologised past, cannot point the way into the future. History will have its way, however much we try to cling to illusions of timelessness.
(...)
Once we’ve done our work, it goes to the 10-man commission who are writing the final document. They’ve been hard at it, dealing with the first two parts of the working document. Cardinal John Dew told me that they were huddled over the work yesterday afternoon and into the room unannounced walked Pope Francis – like the Risen Lord, though not (I think) walking through a locked door. He simply wished them well in the work and urged them to give him a good document. They promised to try. Another moment of the Pope of surprises. Let’s hope for some surprises from the final document.
Connect with Archbishop Mark Coleridge:

Has Father Thomas J. Rosica, fluent in five languages, misquoted Pope Francis? If so, what are the implications?

During the address to the Synod on Saturday, last, October 17, Pope Francis quoted St. John Paul II, from the Encyclical Letter, Ut Unum Sint.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint.html

The speech by Pope Francis can be found on the Vatican's web page.

http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2015/10/17/0794/01750.html

Nick Donnelly @protectthePope on Twitter put out the following.

In the original Italian are the Pope's words. He then quotes from the official English translation of Ut Unum Sint and then Father Thomas J. Rosica's translation of what the Pope said quoting the same document.

I asked an Italian contact to confirm the Google translation of what the Pope said and it is pretty good. He translated it as:

"I am convinced that you have in this regard a particular responsibility, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspiration of the majority of Christian Communities and in hearing the question that is posed to me by..."

Well, well, well.

When the quote of St. John Paul II, whom the Pope did quote, is changed from "I am fully aware as I have reaffirmed" as Bishop of Rome in 1995 to "I am convinced that you have in this regard..." it changes the whole message. It goes from a quote of something possessed by the Bishop of Rome to a command to the bishops of the world.

But that is not what Francis said!

Nor is it what St. John Paul II said or meant.

What is Father Rosica up to?

I'm sure it was only a clerical error, "I" versus "you." What's the big deal.

Just a clerical error, I'm sure.



Nota bene:

The Pope's original speech in Italian is here:

http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/it/speeches/2015/october/documents/papa-francesco_20151017_50-anniversario-sinodo.html

Mentre ribadisco la necessità e l'urgenza di pensare a «una conversione del papato»[30], volentieri ripeto le parole del mio predecessore il Papa Giovanni Paolo II: «Quale Vescovo di Roma so bene [...] che la comunione piena e visibile di tutte le comunità, nelle quali in virtù della fedeltà di Dio abita il suo Spirito, è il desiderio ardente di Cristo. Sono convinto di avere a questo riguardo una responsabilità particolare, soprattutto nel constatare l'aspirazione ecumenica della maggior parte delle Comunità cristiane e ascoltando la domanda che mi è rivolta di trovare una forma di esercizio del primato che, pur non rinunciando in nessun modo all'essenziale della sua missione, si apra ad una situazione nuova»[31].

While I reiterate the need and urgency to think of "a conversion of the papacy" [30], willingly repeat the words of my predecessor Pope John Paul II: "As Bishop of Rome I know [...] that the full communion and visible from all communities, in which by virtue of God's faithfulness, his Spirit dwells, is the ardent desire of Christ. I am convinced that I have a particular responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing all ' essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation "[31].

Father Rosica’s translation is:

http://saltandlighttv.org/blog/faith-education/pope-francis-address-at-commemorative-ceremony-for-the-50th-anniversary-of-the-synod-of-bishops

While I reiterate the need and urgency to think of ” a conversion of the papacy,” I gladly repeat the words of my predecessor Pope John Paul II: “As Bishop of Rome I know well […] that the full and visible communion of all the communities in which, by virtue of God’s faithfulness, his Spirit dwells, is the ardent desire of Christ. I am convinced that you have in this regard a special responsibility, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made ??of me to find a form of exercise of the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation.”

San Juan Archbishop Roberto González Nieves supports public outing of adulterers!

Oh for heaven's sake, can you clowns get original? The pillory's been done away with. This moronic cleric wants a public outing of adulterists before they come to Holy Communion. Well, that's merciful, eh?

Who authorised the ordination of this man?  San Juan Archbishop Roberto González Nieves told the 270 prelates at the gathering that the practice of remarried Catholics entering the Communion line with their arms crossed to indicate they wish to receive a blessing, instead of the Eucharist, demonstrates that “spiritual communion is not enough.”
“This gesture shows and suggests several things,” González said of that practice during his 3-minute address to the synod. “It is a manifestation of the desire of sacramental communion and they humble themselves before the community by making clear to all their illegal status; as if to say: Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!”
Saying he wanted to present proposals to “enter into dialogue with the complexity of the pastoral reality and the salvation of souls,” González suggested to the synod that certain divorced and remarried persons might enter into something akin to an "order of penitents" through participation in "places of encounter with Jesus Christ."

http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/puerto-rico-archbishop-calls-path-communion-remarried

Mark Benedict Coleridge. Is he our latest heresiarch?

Today's press conference from the Synod to destroy the family featured Brisbane Archbishop Mark Benedict Coleridge.

Shall we take a look at what this episcopal eunuch had to day?

The Church has traditionally spoken that the second union is adulterous and I understand why. I understand the teaching and what lies behind it, including the biblical background. But at the same time, not every case is the same and that’s where a pastoral approach needs to take account of the different situations. For instance, just to say that every second marriage or second union whatever you want to call it is adulterous, is perhaps too sweeping. For instance, a second marriage that is enduring and stable and loving and where there are children who are cared for is not the same as a couple skulking off to a hotel room for a wicked weekend.  So the rubric, adultery, in one sense, it’s important but in another sense it doesn’t say enough and I think what a pastoral approach  requires is that we actually enter into what the synod is calling a genuine pastoral dialogue or discernment with these couples and the start of that is for people like me to actually listen to their story not just swamp them with doctrine or Church teaching. (Coleridge's commentary begins just before the 24:00 mark - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=timmt6EvF-0)

 

I had a conversation, not too long ago, with a priest - someone who should have been a bishop except he would not dissent on Humanae vitae back in the late 1970. He opined how angry it made him when he would hear Pope Francis say that priests were not "pastoral" or "merciful." He could not understand who it was that the Pope was speaking about. I have certainly not seen a priest any less than pastoral and merciful provided I was repentant for the wretched things that I had done and brought them to either the confessional or spiritual direction.

 

Coleridge waxes on that a "second marriage or second marriage" if it is nice and all is well, is "different from skulking off to a hotel room" and therefore, not really adultery. Well, what if the second marriage began because one or both skulked off to a hotel room? Would it be adultery then?

 

What if the first wife is at home with the other children and struggling? Is there no sin in that for the person who caused the break-up and now lives in something other than adultery?

 

Truly, who educated these men? Have they all been emasculated?

 

There is something, however, even more troubling.

 

We see and hear lots of heterodox commentary at these daily briefings. Why is there no bishops speaking orthodoxy.

Perhaps Fathers Lombardi or Rosica might wish to comment and let us know.

 

We're waiting.

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."

http://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/the-vortexthe-guilty-conscience

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