Father John Corapi reported to be re-establishing his spiritual life as a Catholic priest

Corapi

More…

What Pope Francis never told you: Present-Day Judaism is not Old Testament Judaism

destrjerusalem

General Titus’ Siege of Jerusalem – Pentecost Sunday, 70 A.D.

“What The Jews Believe” is the subject to which “Life” magazine devoted eleven pages of its September 11th issue. The writer, Rabbi Philip S. Bernstein of Rochester, N. Y., is the president of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, “the largest organization of rabbis in the world.” The article enforces the conviction that the Judaism of today is not Old Testament Judaism.

The two opening sentences alone of the lengthy article warrant the above declaration, viz:—“The Jew has no single organized church. He has no priests.” This is enlarged upon in these words:—“The congregation’s rabbi is a teacher, not a priest.” The rabbi is “without any vested ecclesiastical authority, he is not even necessary to the functioning of the synagogue. Any male Jew with sufficient knowledge of the prayers and the laws can conduct a religious service, officiate at marriages and bury the dead.”

This is not new in Jewry. Ludwig Lewisohn, professor of English literature at Brandeis University, Waltham, Mass., says in his “Mid-Channel”:—“With the destruction of the Temple the sacrificial cult of the Jews was destroyed. For among the people there was but one altar, hence the Jewish people were suddenly laicized. Priests and sacrifices and tangible mysteries were no more.”

Surely this is not Old Testament Judaism, which was, as the Catholic Church is, an authoritative God-instituted priestly religion; the high priest being the supreme ecclesiastical authority. Aaron was its Peter, who was ordained by God through his brother Moses (Exodus 28), having successors until about the time of the destruction of the Temple in the year 70 A. D.

Read more

Richmond, Virginia: The largest contingent of Catholic seminarians in decades

In all, 22 seminarians – including eight from Hampton Roads – are preparing to take the vows of ordination in the diocese, according to church officials. That’s the largest contingent in decades and a huge increase since 1997, when just three candidates were in training.

To the Rev. Michael Boehling, who oversees clerical vocations for the diocese, it is “a promising sign that bodes well for the future.” While a nationwide priest shortage that began in the 1960s shows no sign of ending, he said, “the Lord continues to call young men to serve the church” in Virginia.

Read more

Sally Quinn, Gary Wills and the Washington Post: Looking for God’s truth in all the wrong places.

BSMeter2

Garry Wills, a devout Catholic and religion scholar, in his new book, “Why Priests? A Failed Tradition” argues that as we have seen in Vatican II, the church can and does change. And it should if it wants to stay relevant.

Wills’s book takes the reader back to Christ’s time and walks through the creation of the church.

Priests, he points out, were man-made, not prescribed by God. There were no priests in the New Testament and certainly no one held the title “pope.” (Many Christians agree, see: the Protestant Reformation.) The idea of priestly celibacy is relatively new, too, as is the sacrament of confession. Wills points out that even the central facet of the Mass, a belief that an ordained priest can literally turn bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood, is not universally held.

Link

Editor’s note: “Devout” Catholics don’t deny historically proven, fundamental truths of the Catholic faith, based merely on semantics.

As for priests: God had long ago instituted the Old Testament priesthood through Moses’ brother Aaron, which  served as a prophetic “type” of the coming New Testament priesthood, in virtually every respect.

The key differences between the new and the old was emphasis on grace, rather than law … and on the perfect, divinely acceptable, salvific sacrifice of Jesus Christ … rather than the purely ceremonial sacrifices of dumb animals, which never saved a soul.

As for the Catholic ministerial priesthood, we have Christ, our Heavenly High Priest, at the Last Supper, in anticipation of his saving death on the cross, giving us his body and blood as the definitive sacrifice of the New Covenant, personally instructing the men he had earlier hand-picked and personally trained, to “Do this in remembrance of me.”

As both the High Priest and the Perfect Sacrifice of the New Covenant, Jesus succintly fulfilled the Old Law, superseding and transcending the old Temple Worship System through the institution of an all new, grace empowered, divinely salvific system that would endure until the end of time.

That new “system” shortly became known as the Catholic Church, the supreme arbiter of the New Covenant, which came into existence on the first Christian Pentecost, powerfully and divinely constituted, courtesy of the Holy Spirit.

The primary definition of the Catholic ministerial priesthood is to offer sacrifice to God, for the people, so that they might receive and retain the divine grace that is essential for their salvation.

From the earliest days of the Church, the Mass and the sacraments have always been known as the primary channels of God’s saving grace, while popes, bishops and priests (perhaps not then described in those particular terms) had already been charged by Jesus Christ to be, according to his grace, the primary teachers, governors and sanctifiers of the faithful.

The factual existence of a “High Priest” in Christ Jesus would in itself indicate the presence of a priesthood of a lower stature. And that is true, indeed. We have both the Catholic Ministerial Priesthood and the Royal Priesthood of all believers. Complementary yet different, in their particular missions … but all led by Jesus Christ and all nourished by his body, blood, soul and divinity … in the Holy Eucharist.

Since the word “catholic” means “universal” … Mr. Will’s comment about the true nature of the Catholic priesthood and the Eucharistic sacrifice is imprecise,  at best. But according to the definitive and holy words of Jesus Christ, the divine founder and head of the Catholic Church … Wills is totally wrong.

This is what happens when someone shows up thousands of years after the fact and then tries to reinterpret multiple generations of divine providence, in direct opposition to the Catholic Church. 

In their Bibles, Protestants like to mistranslate the word “priest” as “elder”. But that … other than being dishonest … is just more semantics. 

As for the sacrament of penance … the very first act of the risen Christ was to personally empower the apostles to forgive sins, in his name. While the specific form and rubrics have evolved somewhat through the years, the essential process, purpose and spiritual benefits of the sacrament of reconciliation have never changed.

Ms. Quinn and Mr. Wills … this is all in the Bible, clearly understandable in the light of Christ, according to authentic Catholic Tradition, as well as history. I suggest you look it up!

E. J. Dionne is obviously drunk on heterodox feminist “kool aid”.

In giving up the papacy, Pope Benedict XVI was brave and bold. He did the unexpected for the good of the Catholic Church. And when it selects a new pope next month, the College of Cardinals should be equally brave and bold. It is time to elect a nun as the next pontiff.

Now, I know this hope of mine is the longest of long shots. I have great faith in the Holy Spirit to move papal conclaves, but I would concede that I may be running ahead of the Spirit on this one. Women, after all, are not yet able to become priests, and it is unlikely that traditionalists in the church will suddenly upend the all-male, celibate priesthood, let alone name a woman as the bishop of Rome.

Nonetheless, handing leadership to a woman — and in particular, to a nun — would vastly strengthen Catholicism, help the church solve some of its immediate problems and inspire many who have left the church to look at it with new eyes.

Link

Editor’s note: E. J. Dionne couldn’t be more wrong on this one. Women’s religious orders make up some of the most heterodox groups of Catholics in the world today. Making someone like that pope wouldn’t improve matters, in the least. For abundant proof, all we need to do is look at the shenanigans going on with women and homosexuals in the Anglican/Episcopal Communions. But perhaps Mr. Dionne personally approves of such scandalous goings on? After all, he boasts of “running ahead of the Holy Spirit on this one”. Progressive? Hardly! More like old fashioned, blasphemy!

Homoheresy in the Catholic Church

The most open revolt against the Pope and the Church is headed by some Jesuits in the United States, who openly oppose them and announce that despite the above decisions, they will keep admitting homosexually-oriented seminarians, who are, indeed, especially welcome[26].

They have a long tradition in that vein, for years being the mainstay of homoideology and homoheresy. They take many views of the heretical moral theologian, ex-priest Charles Curran, for their own. They are also under the overwhelming influence of their former fellow friar, F. John McNeill SJ, who founded the pro-homosexual movement called Dignity, and published a book entitled The Church and the Homosexual, where he explicitly rejects the teaching of the Church and adopts homoideology.

The book was given animprimatur by his provincial from New York, and has been republished several times despite being banned by the Vatican. This way, it has become a homosexual bible for many American Jesuits.

McNeill seems to mean more for them than Jesus or Saint Paul, much less the Pope[27]. The Theological Studies and America papers they publish still uphold and promote pro-homosexual ideas. Consequently, it is estimated they have achieved the highest saturation with homosexuals, way above 30 percent. Gays feel more comfortable with them than ever, while other priests find the specific atmosphere less and less bearable[28].

More

In case you didn’t know: In a nutshell, the Church—Catholicism—is this…

The universal dimension of the People of God must never be forgotten. Regardless of the nation of which one is a member, the universality “which adorns the people of God” exists to bring all members of the human family back to its source and head who is Christ. (N. 13) This fact demonstrates the “catholicity” of the Church. This universality consists of different ranks based either on the duties of individuals such as “sacred ministry” or on one’s condition and state of life such as family or religious life.

Another important point about the “particular Churches” is that while they may have their own traditions, they must not oppose the primacy of the Chair of Peter. (N. 13) This is something which critics of the “hierarchy” must consider. The pope has a crucial role that must be exercised in the Church’s true nature.

The Church, through all of its members, has been given the responsibility to go out to the world and preach the Good News. (N. 17) In doing so, she must assist those who may otherwise be prone to falling into doctrinal error. This is a problem with and for the LCWR. However, these are the obligations of every disciple who follows Christ. (N. 17) Here the Council Fathers saw need to explicate the specific duties of the various members of the Church taking stock of her “hierarchical structure.”

There’s much, much more

Editor’s note: This article should be recommended reading for every Catholic. It’s that good!

As the author so aptly summarizes: So, this is a little bit about the nature of the Church and Catholicism of which all of us who are interested in Catholicism or claim to be Catholics need to recall and study.