Category Archives: Scandalous

Roman Catholic Parishes Use Collection Envelopes (and their Contents) to Determine a Catholic “in good standing”!


We were recently contacted by a reader asking us for an opinion about the question of whether the Requirement of Registration in a Parish and an Affidavit of Good Standing is appropriate for fulfillment of the role of confirmation sponsor. That’s a compound question consisting of two separate questions:

  1. Is a requirement for parish registration appropriate?
  2. Is an Affidavit of Catholic in Good Standing in the parish in which one is registered appropriate?

The second question necessarily follows on the first question.

The Roman Catholic Parish of St Patrick in Ravena, NY, a parish in the territory of the Diocese of Albany, NY (Edward B. Scharfenberger, bishop) has scheduled their Confirmations for April, 2018, and just recently sponsor designates were informed that they were to provide certain certifications as to their “fitness” to fulfill the role of Confirmation sponsor. We have obtained statements from sponsor designates and a copy of the form to be signed by the sponsor designates. In general, the “contract” is rather primitive and a bit late, since it appears it should have been provided to the sponsor designate right at the start of the formation period and not 2 months before the Confirmation! In addition, it contains a number of silly requirements, one of which caught our eye:

“The sponsor agrees to provide:

+ The Church of St Patrick the name and address of the Parish and Pastor where they currently worship;

+ Further provide the Church of St Patrick with an Affidavit signed by their current pastor certifying they meet these requirements:

– At least 16 years old,

– Fully initiated into the Roman Catholic Faith through the sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist.”

The grammar leaves a great deal to be desired and it’s unclear whether the certifying pastor has to be “at least 16 years old” and “fully initiated” or the sponsor. Another problem is that it is the “Church of St Patrick” while we have always thought of the Church as being the Church Jesus Christ, and the church as used in the Church of St Patrick would clearly indicate the building and not the community, the mystical body; properly stated, it should be the “Parish” of St Patrick for obvious reasons. But the document has other flaws.

It raises the question of What business does a pastor have certifying a sponsor’s age? That’s done by way of a secular birth certificate!

In addition, the current pastor must sign an affidavit confirming the sponsor’s age AND that the sponsor has received the sacraments of Baptism, Eucharist, and Confirmation, all of which are clearly proved by the respective certificates issued by the conferring parish, not necessarily by the sponsor’s territorial pastor. So we had a closer look at what’s going on here because something stinks in Ravena, and the smoke of satan is probably coming from the Albany Diocesan Offices.

Those observations are merely a further confirmation of the turmoil and confusion that reigns supreme in the Roman Catholic Church today, and are clearly visible in the parishes.[1]

First, let’s look at what the Roman Catholic Code of Canon Law, the collection of rules and regulations governing what and how things are done in the Roman Catholic Church, has to say about what a “parish” is — this is an important first step because most “practicing” Catholics don’t have a clue what a parish is.

The Code of Canon Law (sections abbreviated “C.”) defines “parish” in the following terms:

515 §1. A parish is a certain community of the Christian faithful stably constituted in a particular church, whose pastoral care is entrusted to a pastor (parochus) as its proper pastor (pastor) under the authority of the diocesan bishop. [our emphasis]

And c. 518 expressly defines the parish as “territorial,” meaning,

Can. 518 As a general rule a parish is to be territorial, that is, one which includes all the Christian faithful of a certain territory. When it is expedient, however, personal parishes are to be established determined by reason of the rite, language, or nationality of the Christian faithful of some territory, or even for some other reason. [our emphasis]

Therefore, a parish is territorial. As such it embraces all the Catholics of a given region on a map. When a bishop formally erects a parish, he establishes its specific boundaries, and all Catholics residing within those limits are ipso facto (and de jure) members of that parish, whether or not they know it. Canon law does not require anyone living within the parish boundaries to take the additional step of registering at the parish. The very fact that a Catholic lives in the territory of a particular parish is enough to make him or her member of that parish. Canon law does not require formal registration in that parish to be a member of that particular parish. Question 1 is thus moot. A dead issue. No registration is required.

The fact that parishes are by definition territorial does not mean that it is illegal under Canon Law or wrong to require people to register; it may be useful to ask them to register in their parishes for administrative reasons, such as for example, census purposes or for surveys, or for demographic purposes.

In the American Catholic Church the parish registration system has been superimposed on top of Canon Law, but parish registration is not a part or provision of Canon Law. In fact, the parish registration system must never be used in such a way as to contradict Canon Law; if there is a conflict, Canon Law must take precedence. This includes the situation where a local bishop, called the local ordinary, or his staff makes up some “local” law or rule for the diocese; that local rule cannot replace Canon Law or contradict it. Period.

But the question posed is Confirmation Sponsors. On the question of parish registration as regards confirmation sponsors, The purpose of c. 892 and its requirements are merely to make clear that the sponsor of the confirmed person is to ensure that the confirmed behaves as a true witness of Christ and faithfully fulfills the obligations inherent in this sacrament. That should be no problem in theory, but let’s move on.

In the Roman Catholic Church the requirements to be a Confirmation sponsor are the same as those for a Baptismal godparent. As regards the requirements for a person to fulfill the function of confirmation sponsor c. 893 refers back to c. 874 which lays down functions for fulfilling the function of a baptismal godparent, that is, the requirements for fulfilling the role of confirmation sponsor are the same as for a baptismal godparent. According to Roman Catholic Canon law, the requirements for both a Baptismal godparent and a Confirmation sponsor are:

Can.  874 §1. To be permitted to take on the function of sponsor a person must:

1/ be designated by the one to be baptized, by the parents or the person who takes their place, or in their absence by the pastor or minister and have the aptitude and intention of fulfilling this function;

2/ have completed the sixteenth year of age, unless the diocesan bishop has established another age, or the pastor or minister has granted an exception for a just cause;

3/ be a Catholic who has been confirmed and has already received the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist and who leads a life of faith in keeping with the function to be taken on;

4/ not be bound by any canonical penalty legitimately imposed or declared;

5/ not be the father or mother of the one to be baptized.

In other words, the person chosen by the candidate for confirmation or the candidate’s parents, or both, must be someone who takes his or her Catholic faith seriously enough that s/he may serve as a mentor for the person to be confirmed. In essence, the first requirement then, is the trust and confidence of the candidate and his/her parents that operate in determining the fitness of a person to be sponsor. To abrogate that authority or to demean the capability of the candidate or his/her parents to determine suitability in practical terms would be an affront.

The way records are kept.

Canon Law makes no statement, provision or requirement that the proposed sponsor be formally registered in a parish, nor does relevant Canon Law set forth any criteria or system for determining fitness in terms other than that the sponsor designate be a witness of Christ and a capable mentor. Nor does Canon Law lay down a protocol on how that s/he be examined for his/her fitness to be a confirmation sponsor, but merely states to the effect that the person takes his/her Catholic faith seriously and can be a mentor for the candidate.

Scott VanDerveer, pastor of St Patrick, Ravena.

Steven Matthews, pastor, St John Baptist, Greenville.

Since the Code of Canon Law nowhere mentions parish registration, and certainly does not state or even imply anywhere that a sponsor in sacramental Confirmation must be registered at a particular parish, such requirement is being made an obstacle is canonically illicit and unlawful. In other words, the territorial parish of St Patrick Roman Catholic Church, Ravena, NY (Scott VanDerveer, pastor) is wrong to require an Affidavit of Parish Registration and the Parish of St John the Baptist Roman Catholic Church, Greenville, NY  (Steven Matthews, pastor) in Greenville is wrong to deny the sponsor designate a letter testifying to the fact that the sponsor designate is a member of the territorial parish of St John the Baptist Roman Catholic Church. If the sponsor designate lives in the territory of St John the Baptist parish, that person, if Catholic is a member of that parish.

While the Code of Canon Law expressly indicates that a Confirmation sponsor must be a committed Catholic, it does not provide a hint of guidance how this is to supposed to be determined, much less proved. This raises the question whether the territorial parish of St John the Baptist RC in Greenville or the territorial parish of St Patrick RC in Ravena have in place a consistent and reliable system to decide who is a suitable sponsor, and how to document that assessment. For the criteria used to test the quality of Catholics, we have to turn to the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, and to the so-called Precepts. But those so-called Precepts do not possess the quality of law and are extremely difficult if not impossible to verify (the link below).

The Precepts are a classic example of unenforceable control but the gremlin gatekeepers, the so called “Faith Education” directors use them like swords, but without Church authority or common sense to understand them.

We have to ask: Do the concerned pastors know each of their flock by name and do they have intimate knowledge of what their parishioners’ lifestyle and characters are? Or can we better presume that the candidate and his or her parents are better able to make that assessment? Does the fact that someone appears every Sunday at liturgy make him or her good Catholic, and thus a better sponsor than one who does not? Or is the measure one of the magnanimity of financial contributions to the parish, or the fact that both time and treasure are determinants? Can the pastor even recognize the person by sight? Would those be applicable objective criteria to satisfy the requirement that the person takes his/her Catholic faith seriously and can be a mentor for the confirmation candidate?

Again, an example from the Cathedral Church of St Patrick (Charlotte, NC). Explicit statement that collection envelopes are used to document attendance.

Figuratively speaking, this problem can be restated in hypothetical terms as, “Is the use of collection envelopes the final arbiter of whether a person is a Catholic “in good standing” and competent to serve as a confirmation sponsor?” But that’s not even a hypothetical situation! Many parishes are using collection envelopes to decide whether or not a “practicing Catholic” is a “Catholic in good standing!”

The criterion for Catholic “in good standing”?

Here’s a depraved, reprehensible and embarrassing excerpt from the BAPTISM AND/OR CONFIRMATION SPONSOR GUIDELINES of the Cathedral Church of Saint Patrick (Charlotte, NC), which is by no means uncommon and is representative of many American parishes, in that St Patrick’s makes a number of illicit and illegal requirements:[2]

The sponsor is required to certify this information (St Patrick parish, Charlotte, NC).

and the sponsor’s parish pastor must certify

Do these administrators and pastors know their Canon Law or are they arbitrarily applying a personal interpretation of the phrase, “in good standing?” This has been known to happen all too frequently and with tragic results.

Furthermore, while we know that well-meaning Catholics may work long hours in parish offices and programs for low or no pay, and their “dedication” is commendable, they do play a critical role in the life of a typical parish but – and that’s a really big “but” because they do not hold ecclesial office pursuant to c. 145, they are not accorded by law any spiritual authority over other members of the parish.[3]

The bottom line is that the pastor is the person ultimately responsible for the spiritual well-being of his parishioners, and as Canon Law states, parishes are territorial and all Catholics in that territory are “parishioners” under the terms of Canon Law. Therefore, the pastor is responsible for the canonical, pastoral, spiritual well-being of his parishioners. If he is unaware of a problem or a situation that can transfigure into a problem, it is important that he be informed about it, and that he deal with it appropriately. By respectfully calling the pastor’s attention to such an issue, the whole parish, diocese and certainly the whole Church ultimately benefits.[4]

Figuratively speaking, this problem can be restated in hypothetical terms as, “Is the use of collection envelopes the final arbiter of whether a person is a Catholic “in good standing” and competent to serve as a confirmation sponsor?”

The answer is administratively maybe, canonically NO!

Unless the lay administrators of the Parish of St Patrick have an established system approved by competent authority for determining membership in the territorial parishes of St Patrick or of St John the Baptist, the requirement of certifying membership in any parish is served canonically by the mere provision of proof of domicile, said domicile being situated in the territory of a given parish ipso facto and de jure establishes the person as a member of that territorial parish. Canon law takes precedence over local law in the event of ambiguity, vagueness, over-broadness or arbitrariness of the local provision.

RC Diocese of Albany chief rulemaker, Scharfenberger.

In terms of the fact of “in good standing,” unless specifically stated in clear and unambiguous terms How? in practical and objective terms a pastor is to determine “good standing,” and which criteria are to be applied for such determination, as well as the specificity and reliability of such criteria when applied to an ever-changing and practically protean population of a territorial parish, made even more difficult by the mobility of today’s populations, the arbiter in the first instance must be those who are intimately familiar with the character of the sponsor designate; in the second instance, testimony or reference or direct observation my be called upon to further confirm fitness. Otherwise, any claim to system or protocol that may be proffered by pastor or lay administrator is subject to scrutiny, and likely to be found insufficient, if not illicit or even canonically unlawful.

It is our determination that the territorial parish does not have the canonical authority to require registration of persons as members of a parish, that in virtue of their residing within the territory of a given parish makes them de jure members of that parish and entitled to a letter confirming that fact, providing that they can give a showing of having been validly and licitly baptized into the Church.

As established at c. 874 §1 (CCL) the requirements for acting as a confirmation sponsor are also set forth by canon law, that is, the sponsor designate must be baptized, have received the sacrament of Holy Eucharist, and have been confirmed pursuant the terms and conditions of Canon Law. Furthermore, the sponsor designate shall be 16 years old or older, shall not be not be bound by any canonical penalty, and shall not be the father or the mother of the person to be confirmed. The law also requires that the person shall lead a life of faith but does not provide specifics.

How do you score? Do you know how to score? Are you a “Catholic in Good Standing?

Catholic “in good standing.” There then arises the question of what is meant by a Catholic in good standing. It is generally purported that a so-called Catholic in good standing is a baptized Catholic who claims to live by the Precepts of the Roman Catholic Church as promulgated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which derived presumably from the statements expressed or implied in §§ 2041-2043 of the said Catechism. The observation, however, obtains that monitoring those “precepts” for each parishioner is at best daunting if not entirely impossible.[5] Furthermore, even if the precepts were verifiable in any credible way, keeping those precepts would be a question of Pharisee vs tax collector (Lk 18:9-14), demonstrating more technique than disposition (inner forum).

Either the pastor or his administrators would have to take a Sunday mass, reconciliation, Eucharist attendance, and would have to have some method of verifying ascetic practices as well. Some parishes have inaugurated a control of collection envelopes to keep tabs on their flocks but not everyone chooses to use collection envelopes and many simply drop cash into the collection baskets. Most persons today would object to such monitoring and auditing practices.

External observation and compliance do not testify to inner holiness by any means and one would benefit by keeping in mind the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector, while admitting that the majority in the pews are Pharisees or at best ignorant of anything approximating the so-called “precepts.” Moreover, it is flies in the face of reason to even suggest that the majority of Catholics today qualify even in one or two of the precepts; accordingly, the majority, though living moral and ethical lives, would be rejected by the Church as being “in good standing.” So, the reasonable conclusion is that the term “in good standing” is not verifiable in reliable objective terms, and that such verification would necessarily have to resort to a creation of an exclusivist, verifiable class of individuals within any parish, perpetuating an already excessively technical and legalistic hierarchical and paternalistic institution that has had its well-earned share of criticism and condemnation, and has tragically resulted in the hemorrhaging of the faithful from an ailing Church. The term “in good standing” is a farce and should be abandoned post haste.

 

The Precepts used to determine a Catholic in good standing are taken from the RC Catechism. The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church is “a text which contains the fundamental Christian truths formulated in a way that facilitates their understanding” and is “a ‘point of reference’ for bishops, priests, catechists, teachers, preachers, scholars, students and authors.”   The RC Catechism contains doctrine (teachings of the Church) doctrine and some dogma (universal truths of the Church) but in itself is not dogma![6]

Furthermore, the USCCB notes that:

“By its very nature, a catechism presents the fundamental truths of the faith which have already been communicated and defined. Because the Catechism presents Catholic doctrine in a complete yet summary way, it naturally contains the infallible doctrinal definitions of the popes and ecumenical councils in the history of the Church. It also presents teaching which has not been communicated and defined in these most solemn forms.” (17)

The Catechism is a resource book and may be difficult for the “people in the pews,” to understand. According to the bishops’ statement:

“It would be helpful if the reader had some theological background, but the Catechism itself presents a considerable amount of theological background material.”[7]

Most lay ministers and parish administrators do not have theological or pastoral training; it is also true that putting important decisions in the hands of amateurs is a very slippery slope. Add to that the power dynamics and the political and social forces that are prominent in parishes and we have a very hazardous situation indeed.

Any guidelines or protocols existing in a particular parish must, of course, comply with Canon Law, as must any local law, and must be applicable uniformly and impartially to any given situation, including that of confirmation sponsor. The local ordinary (the bishop) and then his presbyter pastor are the ultimate authorities for determining such guidelines and protocols which clearly do not fall within the purview of persons not having canonical authority to promulgate or to interpret such guidelines or protocols.

If a question or problem should arise with regard to the provisions of canon law or to local laws, guidelines, or rules licitly, lawfully, and validly promulgated and ratified, such question or problem should be consigned to the parish pastor in the first instance for resolution. Pursuant to c. 145 and c. 519, lay persons or lay administrators do not have canonical authority in such spiritual matters.

The pastoral, spiritual, administrative procedures in the individual locales use to interview, screen, assess, guide, instruct, mentor, or otherwise prepare sponsor designates for their role as sponsor is beyond the question posed, and are thus beyond the scope of this opinion. That statement notwithstanding, the fact that they are beyond the scope of this opinion does not in any way detract from their importance nor from the responsibility of the parochial ecclesial officers to ensure that such procedures are in place and are implemented objectively and impartially, and that the associated lay ministers and administrators are adequately discerned, formed and mentored to ensure the well-being of confirmation candidates and their sponsor designates.

And the result is bad disciples!

Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany Bishop Edward Scharfenberger demonstrating poverty. Moral poverty? The theatrical and ostentatious costume is a bit over the top for our tastes. Whom does he think he’s fooling, anyway? And then they wonder why they have scandals…

 

Please click on this link to read the original opinion on which this article is based: Responsum ad Dubium re Confirmation Sponsor.


Notes

[1] The parish of St Patrick in Ravena has a number of problems not the least of which is their website which is an indicator of the lack of professionalism and care that one would expect. For example, there is a page entitled “We have come such a long way in a relatively short period of time!  Take a look at our History! / St. Patrick’s Roman Catholic Parish began as a mission church in 1859 where the Church overlooked the Hudson River in Coeymans.  In 1917 it was rebuilt at it’s [sic] current site on Main St in Ravena / So who were our Pastors?” That page shows a series of images of a man’s headshot; apparently all the pastors were look alike clones. The Hudson River is not all that the parish of St Patrick in Ravena overlooked. Maybe pastor Scott VanDerveer should spend some time checking his minions’ work and grammar. It’s an embarrassment.

[2] Isn’t it an interesting coincidence that the local parish of St Patrick in Ravena, NY, should share the same deficiencies as the parish of the same name, St Patrick, in Charlotte, NC? What does that tell you?

[3] Can. 145 §1. An ecclesiastical office is any function constituted in a stable manner by divine or ecclesiastical ordinance to be exercised for a spiritual purpose. Further, at  §2., the Code states “The obligations and rights proper to individual ecclesiastical offices are defined either in the law by which the office is constituted or in the decree of the competent authority by which the office is at the same time constituted and conferred.”

 

[4] C. 519 The pastor (parochus) is the proper pastor (pastor) of the parish entrusted to him, exercising the pastoral care of the community committed to him under the authority of the diocesan bishop in whose ministry of Christ he has been called to share, so that for that same community he carries out the functions of teaching, sanctifying, and governing, also with the cooperation of other presbyters or deacons and with the assistance of lay members of the Christian faithful, according to the norm of law. [emphasis provided]

[5] Appendix I, Catholic Catechism, Precepts

[6] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), “Frequently Asked Questions about the Catechism of the Catholic Church” (http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-catechism-of-the-catholic-church.cfm last accessed on February

[7] Having made that statement, I would like to ask the bishops Who is to decide or determine what is what in the Catechism? Without formation and training it is a hopeless task for the lay person to discern what is doctrine, what is dogma, what is theology, etc. The whole statement is a collection of ecclesial double-talk!

Advertisements

Has the Church sold out to secularism, liberalism, unitarianism, inclusivism?


Interfaith Pastoral Care. Just what is it? Interfaith pastoral care is a hard nut to crack when a client actually is interested enough to ask the question., “What is interfaith?”

Is this reality? Even possible? Honestly.[1]

Some have suggested that we change, broaden our terminology to “interbelief” but I don’t really think that changes a thing; in fact, I think it complicates the conversation even more than “interfaith” does. It gets even worse when the innovators come up with a term like “interpath” care. It soon becomes so turbulent that it becomes obfuscating; it becomes an idiotic dialogue of nonsense.

The Office for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago (RC) defines “the difference between ecumenical, interfaith, and interreligious relations”, as follows:

  • “Ecumenical” as “relations and prayer with other Christians”,
  • “Interfaith” as “relations with members of the ‘Abrahamic faiths’ (Jewish and Muslim traditions),” and
  • “Interreligious” as “relations with other religions, such as Hinduism and Buddhism”.[2]

[Aside: Some proponents of interfaith whatever have adopted the name “interbelief,” “interpath”; how far do we stretch “interfaith” before it becomes “intercultural”?]

In such places like the Public Religion Research Institute[3], we can examples of the glaring misinformation and mixed messages concocted by “interfaith dialogue” proponents can be found in the short article, “How Religious Affiliation and Attendance Influence Likelihood of Divorce.” [4] Here’s an extract from that article:

“A new study released in the American Journal of Sociology finds that “conservative religious beliefs and the social institutions they create, on balance, decrease marital stability.” The study’s authors note that by discouraging pre-marital sex and cohabitation outside of marriage, conservative religious institutions inadvertently increase the likelihood of divorce. However, Professor Charles Stokes, in reviewing the research, notes that couples who are embedded in religious communities tend to have lower divorce rates regardless of their theology.”

Excuse me, but isn’t that a contradiction? Or a glaring error in the American Journal of Sociology when it reports a misinterpretation of the published data. Isn’t the Am Jour Soc a peer-reviewed journal or at least an edited journal? The same article reports:

“In an effort be more inclusive of atheists, the St. Paul Interfaith Network has changed the name of its monthly community meeting to “Inter-belief Conversation Café.” In the Midwest, 2 percent of people identify as atheists.” [my emphasis]

Inclusivism = Universalism = Sentimentalism

Why can’t we just be people of faith and let the atheists be people of unfaith? 

I think that’s pushing the notion of liberal secularism and sentimentalism a.k.a. “inclusivism” right over the edge into oblivion. Forgive me, for I have “ismed” again! In articles appearing on sites with catchy names like, “The Friendly Atheist“, we read lines like: “I’ve heard atheists say something like, Atheism isn’t a faith, so “interfaith” excludes us by definition.” in articles with equally catchy — at least for atheists — titles like, “Minnesota Interfaith Group Changes Its Name to Become More Inclusive of Atheists.” Nothing like letting words and definitions govern your ethics!.[5] Why can’t we just be people of faith and let the atheists be people of unfaith?

We have all became amoral meandering idiots!

So even the atheists are claiming a piece of “interfaith,” though on somewhat shakier grounds, and on condition that you change your group’s name. In articles appearing on sites with catchy names like, “The Friendly Atheist“, and where we read lines like: “I’ve heard atheists say something like, Atheism isn’t a faith, so “interfaith” excludes us by definition.”[6] So what? In articles with equally catchy — at least for atheists — titles like, “Minnesota Interfaith Group Changes Its Name to Become More Inclusive of Atheists“—all 2% of them. Nothing like letting words and definitions govern your ethics! Girls using boys’ toilets, boys using girls’ toilets, women clergy, girl boyscouts. Where does it all end? Segregation became diversity; diversity became indiviudalism; we have all became amoral meandering idiots!

And the  St Paul Pioneer Press  while other proponents have proposed the term interpath dialogue. It seems that these groups are making a radical departure from what we know as “faith” to honor impossible inclusiveness while losing all focus and credibility. These groups are making the attempt to include or at least to avoid excluding atheists, agnostics, humanists, and such with no religious faith in traditional terms but who espouse ethical or philosophical credos.

What we now call post-modern or post-Christian might as well be called post-mortem; we can dilute the doctrines and dogmas (Truth) of world faith and belief communities to the point of losing all tradition and with it all sense of identity; we have lost sight of the fact that unity implies otherness and otherness implies identity.

Another example of how the concept of interfaith can derail and alchemically transmutate into a bastard creature of so-called religion-turned-social-program is the  About Interfaith IMPACT of New York State. (We have no idea why the “IMPACT” is uppercase.) According to their website,

“IINYS consists of congregations, clergy and individuals from progressive Protestant, Reform Jewish, Unitarian Universalist and other faith traditions. Together we work for the common good through progressive religious advocacy.  The interfaith Impact of New York State Foundation, Inc. is a charitable organization. Its mission is to Inform and encourage progressive faith based participation in public dialogue.”[7]

One of IINYS’s stated missions is to ensure a separation of Church and state but a closer reading of what their activities include is a direct contradiction of any separation and has nothing to do with any faith with which I am familiar. Key to understanding what interfaith in the IINYS is the word “progressive.” What this means is “secularization,” social “justice” programming (socialism), and is deeply imbedded in “state” (= government) activity and operations. Of course, you won’t find any mainstream faith or belief traditions represented on the “Reform” and “Universalist” board membership, because mainstream faith or belief traditions have clear and unambiguous statutes and doctrines, not an agenda of political activity clothed in smoke and mirror deception, and a blurring of the black letter of the Separation Clause. And that’s just one example of how “interfaith” is being marketed.

IINYS succeeds not only in confusing any coherent impression that the term “interfaith” may have implied by conflating “moral values” with “social programs,” a gaffe that distracts significantly, among other things, from the organization’s alleged principles, which should not come as a surprise given the intimate, almost incestuous relationship IINYS has with the profane state government of New York, itself in a state of disinformation and secular humanist and liberal materialism. Interfaith is equated with unabashed sentimentalism.

IINYS’s case gets even worse: the IINYS actually uses a P.O. box at the New York State Capitol to receive mail! Now that’s what I call Church-state separation.

They’ve pirated the word but killed the concept.

Another example of the perversion of the faith part of “interfaith” would be the Interfaith Medical Center of Brooklyn, New York. The only faith at IMCB would be faith in the idolatry of medical capitalism and market economy. Unfortunately, at this writing IMCB’s mission statement was “under construction.” They’re probably having a real tough time justifying the interfaith part of what appears to be an enterprise healthcare facility attempting to cater to the needs of a multiethnic community. So why not just say so and leave “interfaith” out of the game? Because “interfaith” means nothing but looks really good. Smoke and mirrors. They’ve pirated the word but killed the concept.

One thing is very clear: there has been no peace between human beings since the Tower of Babel because we all are speaking different languages; even when we’re speaking the same language, we don’t understand one another. There’s no need to imagine the catastrophic confusion that comes about when we attempt to use language to define or to discuss the ineffable, the transcendent like the mysteries of life, death or faith or belief in a transcendent state or spirituality. Imagine that when we have such difficulty distinguishing between religion and spirituality at all!

While I personally reject the alleged definitions of “interfaith” anything, I do understand the thought behind it and the problems of rendering “inter-“ anything intelligible to the point of being useful or implementable. Here are a couple that may help us to get our arms around the notion of what really should have stayed under the rubric of “tolerance.”

As a psychospiritual care provider, I have to confront this problem on a regular basis when I have people telling me, “She wasn’t religious at all.” But then they go on to tell me how she believed in God and in an existence after death; where my conversation partner tells me that she, the deceased, is now in heaven with her beloved spouse. Or “We want a spiritual service, not a religious service.” What do you mean spiritual but not religious? Now the great silence starts and I recognize that my dialogue partner doesn’t know what the difference is; in fact, she’s embarrassed and I have to save her now.

This becomes a particularly acute situation when I am facilitating a family conference for arranging a funeral or memorial service. During this conference I have to chop through suspicion, confusion, defensiveness, family secrecies, and so much more to establish a relationship of trust and authenticity in just a few sentences. I have to learn enough about a person, his or her family relationships, community involvements, likes and dislikes, habits and idiosyncrasies, end-of-life circumstances, and I have to do this without traumatizing my conversation partners or offending sometimes unspoken sensitivities. They didn’t each this sort of thing at my seminary institute, and they didn’t help very much in my many hours of Clinical Pastoral Education in a major trauma center, or in the nursing home or in the parish where I did my pastoral formation. My guess is that most of my instructors and mentors didn’t have a clue outside of what they were able to find in somebody’s book on the subject and what we brought to the table ourselves. At this point in my career-vocation, I can see why it’s something that you can’t just each or get from any textbook, because the lessons to be learned are as diverse as the individuals and families we, as pastoral care providers and psychospiritual guides are called to serve.

In fact, having written the term “pastoral care” I even balk at using that term because not all of the sufferers I companion think of themselves as animals, sheep, who require a pastor, a shepherd. Since we are finding ourselves increasingly faced with practically unlettered clients, clients who don’t read and who never were taught reading and writing skills, who tend to communicated in a few syllables or in emoticons, we, too, have had to develop second language skills, so-to-speak, and I don’t mean only in our liturgical, ritual, and Scriptural language, but in the language we use in the professional milieu and that we use in the care-giving milieu. This distinction does not discriminate between the lower socioeconomic or socioethinic groups but applies equally well to the so-called “educated” and techosavvy groups, who are just as language-challenged as a newly arrived immigrant but less likely to admit the importance of learning the language.

Furthermore, in strict terms, I’m not a pastor at all because I don’t have a fixed parish or congregation, so I’m not providing “pastoral” care as such. In fact, there are very few pastors who are called to do what I do and have to do in my vocation. Normally, a pastor has a congregation with whom he, nowadays also she, is in theory expected to be intimately familiar on an individual basis.  But we all know that today, just about every faith and belief community has succumbed to the post-modern sentimental hypocrisy of the happy-clappy social club, insincere hugging orgies, and idiotic grinning clubs we today call congregations. Or, even worse, the entertainment events in the guise of worship now offered by the megachurches springing up all over the place. Well, they’re cheaper than a ticket to a country western concert and the cappuccino at the java bar is pretty good, too, and cheaper than Starbucks. Music’s pretty cool, too. Maybe God will even show up one of these Sundays! Meanwhile, the show of raised armpits, gibberish cries of ecstasy and the Guinness Book of Records breaker show of hairy armpits will go on…and on. Thank you, Vatican II! Thank you, Facebook! Thank you, Beelzebub!

In recent years, I have found that I am providing a form of psychotherapy as well as spiritual guidance, so I more often than not will use the term psychospiritual care provider. It seems to come closer to what I really do, and doesn’t get the discussion bogged down in a quagmire of denominations, faith communities, belief traditions or spiritual path distinctions. Once we get past the icebreaking and the initial disclosure process, we are in a better position to explore religion and spirituality without treading on eggs.

Meanwhile, back in the conference room, we are sitting with the husband, the three daughters and the two sons of a woman recently dead, and we need to put together a chapel service and a graveside interment service the Saturday morning, two days hence. The funeral director has the easy job of prepping and embalming the body, dressing her, and doing her cosmetics, so that she is Barbie-doll presentable in her lovely imitation mahogany eternity capsule. The FD has the easy part, the dead don’t get defensive; they’re good listeners and don’t talk much.

“So, tell me a little about your mom,” or so the conversation starts.  “Well, I don’t really know where to start. What do you think, dad?” Now dad’s in the hot seat and hasn’t got a clue what the question is. So we start over again, this time I’m trying to recall the scanty information that the FD provided during our initial conversation about the case. And so I move on, now in reverse mode: “What kind of service did you have in mind to celebrate your mom’s, your wife’s life?” Here’s where we get right down to the nitty-gritty: religious, spiritual, non-religious/secular, humanistic (no religion). Mr. FD tells me that your mom’s records show that she declared herself to be Roman Catholic. The daughter-in-charge looks a bit dazed, “She did? Was mom Catholic, dad?” Dad puts on a sheepish look, “Yeah. We

both were. We got married in church and we had you kids baptized, too.” One thought rolls over my mind: “OMG! Just let them talk this one out.” Once they are done doing their own interviews, I can interject with, “It seems your mom did have a religious preference and that she had a faith tradition. You may be surprised but I have had situations like this many times where a parent or a grandparent gets so involved with caring for their family, that there’s just no time on Sundays to pack everyone up and march to church, and so the “religion” moves from the church to the heart. That’s not a bad thing. So I’m not surprised that your mom was busy being a good mom and a loving wife, and managed to keep her religion in her heart and worship there. That’s a beautiful thing. Don’t you think?” In unison: “Yeah. You’re right!”

And so we move past that hurdle, and we have something to hold on to. I have a starting point and the family has a very viable option, the service will be a religious service, but not “too” Catholic, because we don’t go to church and the kids won’t sit still through a lot of prayers. The conversation and sharing goes on beautifully from that point on, once a “major” question has been negotiated.

 

 

But what about the non-religious, or the so-called “quilted family system,” in which you have a mix of non-believers, and believers including the odd Buddhist, the Jew, the Presbyterian, the Evangelicals, Baptists and the de rigueur generic “Christians?” Is this interfaith, interbelief, or interpath? My categorical answer is: Yes. But it’s likely to be non-religious if it’s any of these.

You see, it’s hypersimplistic to presume to take any collection of denominations or traditions and call it by any name, let alone be crazy enough to think that you can properly address and avoid offending any or all of the traditions in the assembly. To be very honest, there are today so many flavors of Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism, Episcopalianism, etc.  Forgive me! for I have ismed.

The truth is that you can provide a service only along the lines of a single tradition – or no tradition — and, if you are not a listener or not well-trained, you run a risk of adoring adulation from some and condemnation as a heretic by others in the same group. The attempt to please all is doomed to please none.

This is because most institutionalized, mainstream denominations simply do not properly train or supervise their clergy – so as not to offend them or in order to allow the clergy to take the odd doctrinal or dogmatic detours to ensure that he or she keeps the pews filled and the collections abundant – so you can go to one service on one Sunday and hear one teaching and the next Sunday go to another worship service and get another take on the Gospel. Neither do the clergy properly and honestly form and educate their constituents; that’s why Christians are so diverse and so critical of and cruel to one another, while preaching some sort of love. Most tend to go where you have a preacher who says what they want to hear; once-a-week worship becomes a happy-clappy hypocritical quest for affirmation and acknowledgement. Orthodox doctrine is a thing of the past; institutionalized religion, the mainstream religions, like any institution are self-serving and self-preserving; it’s a market economy with hymns and incense. It’s ice-cream religion, vanilla or any flavor you’d like.

Meanwhile back at the funeral home, we’re just finishing up and have decided on a chapel service that will be based on the Rite of Christian Burial that will include Roman Catholic liturgical elements, even candles, holy water and incense, but will include some secular poetry readings, and a couple of “Protestant” hymns. The graveside service will be prayerful, moving and tearful. The family’s happy, the FD is over the moon, and I have my doubts.

On the way back to my office I’m pondering, “How am I going to pull this off, and still be able to have dinner with myself again?” That may have been a reason for considering self-harm years ago but today it’s just a pro forma start to “designing” a custom and personalized service we now call the “Celebration of Life,” rather than a funeral ritual.

It’s here that years of study, continuing education, lots of extradisciplinary study, interpersonal skills, creativity, and a lot of help from something I refer to as the Holy Spirit gets us all over the hump rather than in the dump.

In ministering to suffering in general and to those confronting an end-of-life process, death, and the rite of passage from ante-mortem to post-mortem life, we are forced to recognize the indisputable fact that suffering if anything,  while being a common thread running through all of humankind, is inextricably individual; the pain of bereavement is totally one’s own experience, each individual experiences it differently, and any attempt to provide an “inter-anything” type of psychospiritual care is a deplorable fake.

At some time after our birth we are presented to the community in a rite of passage ritual called “naming;” naming explicitly announces to the cosmos that here we have an individual, an “other,” who, for the purposes of distinction shall be called “Baby Doe.” Different cultures will ascribe different duties and responsibilities and different degrees of separateness of the new member but that new member is almost universally recognized as an “other.” Accordingly, the cookie-cutter funeralization rites and rituals of various faith and belief traditions, while they may at one point or another recognize the individual by mentioning his or her name, the overall presumption is that the departed one has indeed departed the community and, upon final disposition of the mortal remains, is no longer. Thank you, Dr Freud!

But this is as far from health reality as we can get. We have to reach back into our own history and bring back the family involvement, the maintenance of important connections with our dead; we have to learn from other traditions how to continue those bonds and how to grow with them.

A clergyperson who doesn’t hone the importance of acknowledging the “other,” the named one, the uniqueness of the deceased, and who doesn’t include the family to the maximum extent possible in the rites of funeralization, is shortchanging the deceased and the mourners! Continuing bonds with the dead is an intimate, personal necessity and not one in which church or community should be dominant; the annual memorial mass is one example of superficiality and ecclesial control. By far more effective is to light a candle at a holiday gathering or to light a candle on a special occasion, honoring the presence and memory of a dead loved one, or even the community of dead loved ones. Perhaps even observing a moment of silent reflection when the family gathers.

The Agape Meal

The early Church started in private homes in the family circle; for centuries it continued and evolved in the warmth and intimacy of private homes, the early house churches; this had less to do with persecution than with the Jewish Sabbath tradition and the primordial agapé meal! But then, the early organizers got together to set the rules and to enforce some control over the various “churches” as they were called in the different faith communities. Gradually, faith moved out of the family circle, out of the home, into the community assembly space, out of the core of the individual human being, until today, it has practically moved out completely. The lights are on but nobody’s home. We are the janitors of the soul, the concierges of the refuge; when we get the call, we prepare the place.

Faith, religious belief, spirituality still maintains an address in the human soul and still receives mail there; our job as clergy, ministers, chaplains, psychospiritual care providers have to keep that abode open, accessible and welcoming for the time when the prodigal has to return, open the mail, and pay the bills. All suffering, all grief, all healing, all transformation is addressed personally to the individual; all care has to do the same: it must be individual, or at least the individual must be provided with the tools so that they can do the DIY repair and maintenance.

Creating new labels for negligence or indifference or continuing cookie-cutter rituals is an affront to any concept of ministry, to any concept of community. We need to stop being narcissistically creative and start being humbly serving.

If we are going to allow any notion of “inter” to enter our lives, our praxis, our ministries, and from there into the lives of those who look to us for guidance, we are going to have to recognize and accept the fact that our churches, our faith and belief communities have become institutions and, like any profane or secular institution are governed by self-interest and self-preservation, all else playing a lesser role.  As a psychospiritual care provider it is my duty and obligation first to be tolerant and to recognize that it is arrogant to claim and impossible to be “interfaith,” “interreligious,” “interpath,” “interbelief,” and to claim to be any of these is to announce being nothing at all. Best to be wholly tolerant and wholly compliant with the explicit wishes of the deceased but even more so with those of the living, obviously, and to be guided by good and prudent discernment of the content of the sharing during the family conference.

The rites and rituals of funeralization should transform the dead into fonts of meaningful legacy and provide the living with psychospiritual nourishment and the opportunity for growth; this requires deep listening, sensitivity, creativity, humility, compassion, and patience. Ours is a vocation, not a job, that’s why the FD or some funeral home dilettante should not, must not be put in the position of providing psychospiritual care as a funeral or memorial officiant. Doing so simply makes the statement either that the funeral director or the funeral home does not know its limitations or boundaries, or that they simply are indifferent to the harm they can do by providing care outside of their competence, or both. Offering quick fixes like direct burial or direct cremation are careless and insensitive alternatives to providing the care and attention necessary for healing grief work and transformational mourning; even direct disposition services should offer, promote and encourage the services of a professional bereavement chaplain, even if it’s only to meet with the survivors in an informal environment and simply chat; the chaplain will know how to steer the sharing.

Epilogue

It’s astounding how few FDs actually make it a point to offer or even mention chaplain services. It’s even more disappointing to have to admit that most clergy never have a pre-funeral or pre-memorial meeting with the family to discuss the rites and rituals and why things are being done a certain way. Even fewer enlist the family’s participation in the actual service. This is a travesty of deathcare services both by the FD and by so called clergy. We owe the dead, the bereaved, mourners in general better treatment than this, especially if we are receiving a fee or a stipend to provide psychospiritual care!

In this article I have used the word sentimental and its derivatives but have not really defined it as I am using it. I owe you, my patient reader, the fairness of a definition. Sentimentality is fooling yourself into thinking there are easy answers. Sentimentality gives free rein to rank simplification, excessive feeling, particularly emotions, that have no place in actuality Sentimentality is a form of defense, a self-deception just like denial, and is used in order to avoid acknowledging more painful emotions, particularly anger, shame or guilt. So what would I propose to you as the opposite of sentimentality? My reasoned suggestion of an antonym for the term “sentimentality” would be “mature realism.” Mature realism Mature realism steering clear of cheap idealization just as we would steer clear of cheap grace; such realism requires the courage to examine the good and bad of everything, and further demands that we to search beyond the superficiality of our own emotions, motives and those of others that mislead us to think that there are easy answers to complex problems.[8]

Rev. Ch. Harold Vadney MDiv
Bereavement Chaplain/Thanatologist

 


[1]DAVOS-KLOSTERS/SWITZERLAND, 30JAN09 – Lord Carey of Clifton (VLTR), Archbishop of Canterbury (1991-2002), United Kingdom, Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, United Kingdom, Mustafa Ceric, Grand Mufti of Bosnia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Jim Wallis, Editor-in-Chief and Chief Executive Officer, Sojournes, USA, , captured at the press conference ‘Religious leaders call for the peace in the middle east’ at the Annual Meeting 2009 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 30, 2009. ©World Economic Forum. swiss-image.ch/Photo by Andy Mettler.
[2] Source: Archdiocese of Chicago (http://legacy.archchicago.org/departments/ecumenical/Relations.htm, last accessed on October 22, 2017)

[3] The Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) describes itself as “”… a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to research at the intersection of religion, values, and public life…PRRI’s mission is to help journalists, opinion leaders, scholars, clergy, and the general public better understand debates on public policy issues and the role of religion and values in American public life by conducting high quality public opinion surveys and qualitative research”

[4] “How Religious Affiliation and Attendance Influence Likelihood of Divorce.” (https://web.archive.org/web/20160202185558/http://publicreligion.org/2014/07/the-morning-buzz-how-religious-affiliation-and-attendance-influence-likelihood-of-divorce/ last accessed on October 24, 2017)

[5] “Minnesota Interfaith Group Changes Its Name to Become More Inclusive of Atheists” (

[6] “St. Paul’s atheists are coming out of the closet” (http://legacy.archchicago.org/departments/ecumenical/Relations.htm, last accessed on October 24, 2017).

[7] Interfaith IMPACT of New York State (www.interfaithimpactnys.org, last accessed on October 24, 2017).

[8] I would strongly recommend the book Faking It by Digby Anderson. In that 1998 book Anderson and contributors present a scathing assessment of sentimentality in most of today’s institutions of modern culture. (Anderson, D., P. Mullen, Faking it:  (1998) The sentimentalization of modern society. London: St Edmundsbury Press.)


Message to Kirsten Gillibrand: Stop sending the message enabling personal depravity!


Republished with Permission, unedited, from the Smalbany Blog.

The opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily represent those of this blog; we do, however, appreciate the underlying principle of the author and his/her condemnation of Gillibrand’s fundamental evil and hypocrisy.

We have done our usual fact checking and find that the quotes and the emails are factual, as are the definitions and other references cited by the article’s author.


In our recent article, Kirsten Gillibrand is a Spammer, in which we blast the biatch for her onslaught of incessant bitching emails we were, and still are, finding in our e-mailbox, we suggested that “it’s election time” and that Gillibrand, like a cockroach, has come out of the woodwork. We were right, as most of you already know, she’s revving up her hormones for the 2018 election.

It’s disgusting how careless and stupid Kirsten Gillibrand can be. She doesn’t even know the difference between contraception and birth control; they’re very, very different, Ms Senator from New York. You have so much to say about the subject and women’s rights to make decisions about their bodies but you don’t even know what you’re talking about. What’s even more tragic and disgusting is that most of the women you’re talking about don’t know either! We are in favor and wholly support informed decision making. Unlike you, Ms Gillibrand!

We’d like to help educate our U.S. Senator from New York, the alleged woman, Kirsten Gillibrand. Here are some basic definitions you should learn, Ms Gillibrand:

Basically, contraception is technically “birth control” because if you prevent preventing the male’s sperm from meeting with the female’s egg you prevent pregnancy. No pregnancy, no birth. Contraception prevents pregnancy by interfering with the normal process of ovulation, fertilization, and implantation. There are different kinds of birth control that act at different points in the process, including: moral decision making ability, abstinence, the “pill”, condoms, diaphragm, IUDs, Norplant, tubal sterilization, spermicides, vasectomy.Basically, contraception is technically “birth control” because if you prevent preventing the male’s sperm from meeting with the female’s egg you prevent pregnancy. No pregnancy, no birth. Contraception prevents pregnancy by interfering with the normal process of ovulation, fertilization, and implantation. There are different kinds of birth control that act at different points in the process, including: moral decision making ability, abstinence, the “pill”, condoms, diaphragm, IUDs, Norplant, tubal sterilization, spermicides, vasectomy.

Birth control is more specifically defined as control of the number of children born especially by preventing or lessening the frequency of conception, preventing gestation (contragestation) or pregnancy after the egg and sperm meet, or the various forms of abortion. Generally technically, birth control is preventing the fetus from being born by killing it at some stage in its development, up to and even after it is full-term and partially out of the womb!

Is Kirsten Gillibrand a man in drag?
Gillibrand doesn’t respect women; she just want’s a cheap vote.

On October 8, 2017, Kirsten Gilibrand proves she’s got her head deep in her panties (if she wears any). She writes to her ignorant, irresponsible, dumbass supporters:

You need to see this news: Republicans in the House of Representatives just passed a ban on abortion after 20 weeks. Now, this disastrous bill is heading for the Senate – and the White House has said it “strongly supports” it!

This is a 20-week human being.
Kirsten Gillibrand wants to kill it.

Click here to read a truthful article, “This Baby is the Face of 18,000 Unborn Babies the 20-Week Abortion Ban Would Save Every Year,” about the 20-week abortionists, the one’s like Kirsten Gilibrand who want to kill babies.

And so do all people of values, people of faith, people of morals. Yes, even some Democrats, Kirsten. Beneath your message of diabolical scam concern for women, you’re hiding the pitch for money for your re-election campaign! Deceitful trollop!

“Really?! Instead of acting on gun safety, hurricane relief for Puerto Rico or any of the dozens of things we could do to actually help people, Republicans made THIS a priority? It’s unbelievable, and it’s downright dangerous.”

Excuse me! Uh, but are you suggesting that government should pass legislation banning guns or “gun safety,” as you so deceitfully put it, and punish the law-abiding majority for the actions of a tiny handful of lunatics or criminals”? That’s the Democrat way, isn’t it, Kirsten?  Or sure, Congress should pass legislation controlling the weather, and prevent hurricanes! The U.S. government has already crippled Puerto Rico by removing from the people any notion of self-respect by depriving them of any initiative. Part of the Puerto Rican debacle is your doing, Ms Gillibrand! Now you want to hand decision-making power to the ignorant, unwashed, and immoral. Yeah, Kirsten,— like affirmative action was a great idea —  we’ve got plenty of money to support more idiotic government failures. And pigs have wings!

She’s desperately trying to confuse issues and misinform her e-mail victims by attacking anything and everything going on in Washinton and in the country, following her diatribes with a pitch to send her money to support her campaign(s). Don’t fall for it. She likes her power and her tush in a cushy senate office, where she can pose and putz, acting out her despicable narcissism.

Her latest e-mail (October 9, 2017) s the most disgusting, in which she writes:

Republicans’ desire to impose their beliefs on what women can do with our own bodies is astounding and never-ending. But I have news for them: Women will NEVER stop fighting to make our own decisions for our own bodies.

Kirsten Gillibrand is sending a message that we’d expect from some sex-starved adolescent. “Let’s be have our fun! You may get pregnant but Kirsten will fund killing the baby for us. We don’t have to think. We’re covered. Let’s f**k!”

You stupid cow, Gillibrand! It’s not just Republicans, it’s people of faith, anyone with any morals and a sense of decency who want to stop the reckless and wanton irresponsible promiscuity of the poorly educated, badly informed, unparented, liberal breeding sows out there who can’t or won’t say NO! Stop promoting the liberal materialistic consumerism that keeps you in office and start promoting family and family values, parenting, schools and teachers interested in teaching and not focusing only union politics and their pensions!!!

Gillibrand’s plan for our young women!
Act like pigs and dogs.
Gillibrand’s plan will pay when you play.

You stupid cow, Gillibrand! You miss the point! The point is that when your stupid breeding sows don’t have the brains or are too drunk to wake up and say NO! to unprotected sex, that’s when someone else has to make the decisions for them: Keep your legs closed! That’s the decision you should be making with your body! Let me repeat: Say NO! and Keep your legs together! That’s pretty simple.

Your party, Ms Gillibrand, the liberal Democrap party, has destroyed the center of morality and education with your myriad failed so-called social justice programs; you and your Democrap party have destroyed the foundation of anything that used to be good in America, the family!!!

Yeah! You got it, Kirsten. Just cross your legs!
Why not wear a shorter skirt while you’re at it? Don’t you have any sense of modesty, dignity?

You stupid cow, Gillibrand! Say it outright! You want our daughters and sisters to be out there acting like whores, prostituting themselves for a drink or a meal, or just being stray dogs and humping any bastard that staggers into their loose embrace. Right, Kirsten? What you want is government funded promiscuity and forget the responsibility that goes along with the decision-making. Right, Kirsten? What you want is a good f**k any time, anywhere, anybody, and when things go wrong, you want a quick fix. Contraception. Birth control. Abortion.


You stupid liberal Democrat cow, Kirsten Gillibrand! Your political dirt is showing on your soiled immoral panties, again. If you missed it the first time, let us repeat it for you: It’s not only Republicans who demand that women act responsibly and morally, it’s people of faith, and all moral persons. We say if you want decision-making power, you have to be a responsible citizen. But you, Kirsten Gillibrand, probably wouldn’t understand that word, “responsibility.”

Gillibrand’s Message:
Trick for a Treat!

Now, let us anticipate the liberals’ response to our demand for women’s responsibility and moral behavior: But what about the male? OK. What about the male? You dress like a slut, you’re going to be treated like a slut. Get with the program. You act like a dog in heat, you’ll be treated like a dog in heat. Get a grip. You act like you have self-respect, you’re likely to get respect from others. Get your act straight.

Just say NO!
Say NO! to Kirsten Gillibrand!

The Editor

 


Not Anti-Catholic Sentiment; Just the Truth!


The Roman Catholic church has been steeped in its Roman origins for almost two millennia. Rome was obsessed with order and hierarchies, legalisms and an emperor cult, very similar to the Roman Catholic church.

Not Anti-Catholic Sentiment: Just Examples of RC Indifference & Indiscretion

Like the ancient Roman obsession with order and legalism at the expense of anything like spirituality, the Roman Catholic church today is obsessed with order, including hierarchies, and what is tantamount ot an emperor cult — it has an obsession with secularism.

He sure does like to play 'dress-up' but what does it say about Catholic social teachings on poverty?

He sure does like to play ‘dress-up’ but what does it say about Catholic social teachings on poverty?

If anyone has been present at a Wednesday public audience in St Peter’s square, you’d wonder, “Is this a three-ring circus, a Superbowl homecoming, a Roman triumph? Or is this something to do with idolatry?” Yes, it would make the impression that the Emperor were arriving and the expressions on the pious populace would indicate a certain attitude of awe, even worship of an idol, a man whom they have never met and many have not even come within 100 feet of but whom they embrace as if he were a god. It’s no wonder these poor wretches are labeled superstitious, idolaters.

Has the emperor arrived?

Has the emperor arrived?

The Roman Church has followed a path so different from the Eastern Catholic churches in that while Constantinople was at a peak of resplendence, Rome and the Western Church we a backwater trying to survive the barbarian invasions. The Roman Church was always in politics and nothing much has changed; needless to say, if the Church was in politics it follows reasonably that it was up to its neck in intrigues and hypocrisy, as any Church scholar worth is opinion would have to admit.

Having noted Pope Francis’s hypocrisy in his recent comments about walls and Mr Donald Trump’s questionable Christianity, I received some flack from just a couple of annoyed RC’s — all well meant, I can assure you — but nonetheless making the impression of the defensiveness of the guilty.

I’ve written extensively on popular piety and idolatry of parish priests, and how those priests use and abuse their privileged status. I’ve also written on the ignorance and abuse of parish priests who do as little as possible to extract as much as possible. I’ve also written on the ruthlessness of parish priests who squeeze parishioners for all they can get.

the old-boys’ club called the permanent diaconate

Somewhere along the line, Roman Catholic priests and bishops —I won’t even get started on the old-boys’ club called the permanent diaconate and how that’s been perverted by the privileged few—have lost their sense of spirituality and have turned careerist, just as any corrupt politician does once he’s tasted power. Unlike the Eastern monastics who have retained their deep spirituality and have survived even as counterculturists, Western religious have either prostituted themselves or taken a turn for the secular, at least in appearance.

One apparent Roman Catholic presbyter (a.k.a. priest) admonished me for being anti-Catholic, and disrespectful in my opinions. He may have been correct and I respectfully acknowledged his well-meant opinions. I even thanked him for the charity of his fraternal correction, although there’s nothing anti-Catholic in my writings, it may be an indication of simplistic thinking when some misapprehend my critiques or rather observations to be anti-Catholic diatribe. Anti-Catholic they are not; anti-hypocrisy they are.

One of Fr Louis Guardiola’s remarks on LinkedIn regarding my comments on Francis’ imprudent remarks was that I may not have been familiar with the Roman Church’s teachings on social justice. Of course, Fr Louis could not possibly be aware of the fact that I am very, very familiar with Catholic social teachings from the question of the “morality” of war to the “morality” of poverty, from Leo XIII Rerum Novarum (1891) commenting on the condition of labor and workers, to Pius XI’s Quadragesimo Anno,  “Forty Years After [Rerum Novarum] (1931) to Mater et Magistra, “On Christianity and Social Progress” (John XXIII, 1961), to Pacem in Terris (“Peace On Earth”) (John XXIII, 1963); Dignitatis Humanae (“On Human Dignity”, a declaration on religious freedom) (Vatican II, 1965); Gaudium et Spes (“On Hope And Joy” a Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World) (Vatican II, 1965); Populorum Progressio (On the Development of Peoples) (Paul VI, 1967); Octogesima Adveniens (A Call to Action on the Eightieth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum) (Paul VI, 1971); Justitia In Mundo (“Justice In The World”) (Synod Of Bishops, 1971); Familiaris Consortio (Apostolic Exhortation on the Family) (John Paul II, 1981); Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) (John Paul II, 1987); Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (“On Social Concern”) (John Paul II, 1987); Centisimus Annus (On the Hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum (John Paul II, 1991); The Challenge Of Peace: God’s Promise And Our Response (U.S. Catholic Bishops, 1983); Economic Justice For All (U.S. Catholic Bishops, 1986), and so many more were required reading and study during my divinity studies. Yes, Fr Louis, I am very, very familiar with the Roman Catholic Church’s teachings on social issues. (For those of my readers who are interested, please see the attached bibliography.)

My concern arises when the church, any church, leaves their familiar island paradises and make sorties out to navigate the perilous waters of secular politics in a world of mind-boggling complexity. My concern arises when a faith leader makes an imprudent statement that can be misconstrued to be an endorsement or a condemnation of a potential foreign leader, especially when that faith leader’s statement can easily be shown to be hypocritical (I think some circles have gotten excess mileage from the palaver of the Vatican’s high walls in response to Mr Trump’s statements on building border walls.) That is the gist of my commentary on Pope Francis’ imprudent statement that Mr Trump is un-Christian. It appears that statement actually backfired on the Supreme Pontiff. Do you wonder?

My critiques of the United States bishops like the ultra-liberal Matthew Clark and Howard Hubbard were in their time welcomed by many concerned Roman Catholics.

The well-wrought points of the illicit practices of parish priests perverting the liturgy and their ignorance of the doctrines regarding the liturgy and homiletics as in my article on one RC priest in the RC diocese of Albany, Mario NAME, and his playing the secular song, “So this is Christmas,” in lieu of a Christmans homily!

Careerist priests with little or no spirituality are anathema

I have pointed out the avariciousness and mercenary attitudes of priests who race to the bedside of the dying elderly to ensure a shot at the estate; those very priests, like Richard Carlino, a Roman Catholic priest doing his unholy mischief at St John the Evangelist RC church in Schenectady, New York, who loves his travels abroad and their fine dining. Careerist priests with little or no spirituality are anathema to me.

At least the heretics and heresiarchs of Church history performed a vital function in raising questions that needed deliberation in solidifying dogma and doctrine. Careerist priests do nothing but scar the Mystical Body.

During one of my pastoral formation years I was in a Maronite parish in Troy, New York, where the small but very pious and dedicated parish community was scandalized by one priest, George Bouchaya, only to be bullied by a monkish priest imported from Lebanon, unable to preach in English, totally ignorant of American culture, only one year after ordination, who specialized in hiding money in a money belt on trips to Lebanon, while packing all sorts of electronic devices and cell phones for distribution in Lebanon. When questioned about this and admonished, he ignored good counsel. Ultimately, he engaged the support of a couple idolaters and his bishop, Gregory Mansour, Maronite bishop of the eparchy of Brooklyn, supported him and his activities. In this case, as in so many other cases, the ignorant parishioners closed their eyes because they wanted to keep their parish. Bouchaya later returned (or was he sent back?) to Lebanon to assume an administrative position at his Lebanese monastery. (Editor’s note: The Maronites are an Eastern Catholic sect native to Lebanon, established by Mar Maron, a Lebanese saint. The Maronite Church is one of the 21 or so Eastern Churches in full communion with Rome.)

Ignorance or indifference of the church’s ministers is one of the problems the RC and other denominations are facing. So many RC’s are disillusioned by the inconsistencies, the uncertainties, the scandals, the indifference of the presbyters, that the RC church is hemorrhaging the faithful; the faithless seem to be hanging in there, after all that’s where all your friends hang out, isn’t it?

Ignorance or indifference of the church’s ministers

We recently reported on one Mario Julian, pastor of St Anthony of Padua RC Church in Troy, New York, who was apparently too busy to prepare a homily for Christmas midnight mass and chose to play a secular Christmas carol instead. If you haven’t already, please read our article: The Outrageous Ignorance: Instead of a Homily a Pop Tune at Christmas!

And Yes! even the Western religious life has gone to hell in a handbasket. We have written extensively on the decline of women’s religious communities and their secular capitalistic, heretical mediocrity. Even the Franciscans have gone awry, prostituting themselves to the diocesans. Mario Julian even has his own Mini-me in his assistant, Franciscan brother Phillip Hira.

Julian & Hira

Julian & Hira

We understand that Mario Julian has recently had bariatric surgery, that is, he’s had his stomach stapled. Catholic social teachings, again.

There is also some similarity between American politicians and the American RC church. If you take, for example, two of the present presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Ben Carson, the former a billionaire who made his money in real estate and the latter (Carson) a Black millionaire surgeon, need one final power trip, a trophy position. That’s the position of POTUS, president of the United States. In many cases, similar things can be observed in the Church in the permanent diaconate, for example, or worse still in the priesthood. One glaring example of personal experience would be the recent ordination of a former equine veterinarian, who was married for several decades, has grown children, but was able to cozy up to ultra-liberal bishop of the RC diocese of Albany, New York, and managed to get himself sent to John XXIII seminary, a seminary for elderly men who want to become priests, that is, men who have amassed enough money and influence to be sent by their bishop. We won’t mention Mr Lesser’s decades of flying in the face of the Roman Catechism or the fact of his coziness with the incompetent pastor of St Patrick’s Roman Catholic Church in Ravena New York, James Kane, who is also head of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany’s Office of Ecumenical and Interreligious  (one of the great jokes of modern church). Talk about politics! One such example is our fat little veterinarian friend, Frederick Richard Lesser, who retired as a veterinarian, sold his practice, cuddled up to ultra-liberal bishop Howard Hubbard, and got himself ordained at about 60. I attended an RC divinity college with Lesser and knew him rather well. I also knew for a fact that our pastoral formation supervisor advised him against seeking ordination. Lesser was arrogant, had a mean side to him, was a bit schizoid, and had enough psychological baggage to make Imelda Marcos look like a barefoot peasant. I was absolutely shocked when I observed Lesser as cross-bearer at the current RC diocese of Albany bishop, Edward Scharfenberger but I knew what was going on behind the scenes. Scharfenberger ordained Lesser in 2015, despite quite a number of reasons why Lesser should not have been ordained.

Veterinarian Lesser in his new priest outfit.

Veterinarian Lesser in his new priest outfit.

Finally, and probably most illustrative of a sicko church or at least a sicko diocese — but who can say with certainty that the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany is the rare exception with these several glaring examples — is the image of the current bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, posing with an Episcopal bishop and holding Denver Bronchos chasuble. Yes, Albany’s chief Roman Catholic pastor and teacher holding up a sacred vestment adorned not with any symbol of the Trinity or the Pascal Mystery, but a symbol of depravity, excess, capitalistic secularism, a symbol of a professional football team. Do we have to say another word about wrong messages?

Albany's E. Scharfenberger, bishop, sending the Wrong Message. Again!

Albany’s E. Scharfenberger, bishop, sending the Wrong Message. Again!

So, NO! brother Louis! It’s not anti-Catholic sentiment at all. It’s the fact that from within the Roman Catholic church has been a three-ring circus since the 70’s and it’s not getting any better. After almost 50 years since Vatican II officially arrived on these shores in the official English language translation, the confusion and scandal has steadily increased from the very lowest level of ministry to the top, from the diaconate, to the presbytery, to the episcopy, even to the papacy. It’s become a veritable bad joke with no boundaries. It’s sending wrong messages. It’s indifference and indiscretion abounding. No! It’s not anti-Catholic sentiment, it’s the truth.

Pax et Bonum! Heresiarch

Pax et Bonum!
Heresiarch

Click Copy of catholic social teachings to download the Catholic Social Teachings bibliography.


Pastor or Chaplain, or Both?


Is There a Distinction that Needs to be Drawn Between a Practicioner’s Playing the Role of Pastor or that of Chaplain?

I was a bit bemused by the persistence of the tendency to Bible-thump one’s way through any such discussion

I recently engaged several colleagues on the question of chaplaincy or pastoring. I was a bit bemused by the persistence of the tendency to Bible-thump one’s way through any such discussion, while advocating an interfaith approach as advanced by the adherents of the CPE agenda. I thought I’d share my contribution to the discussion.

listen-with-heartIt is my contention that we should not advance the notion of a “versus” or “as opposed to” when discussing chaplaincy or pastoring. While it is true that some traditions, the Hebrew and Islamic, for example, eschew the notion of “pastor” or “shepherd” for cultural or traditional, even ethical reasons, in the broader sense all chaplains are in fact “pastors,” while all pastors (in the conventional sense) are not necessarily “chaplains” (or critically speaking, even pastors!). In fact, I object in principal to the biased terminology we so frequently use in our vocations, “pastoral care” department, because it tends to be exclusive. I personally prefer spriritual care provider (although in my professional materials I do use pastoral care). Moreover, most people, even those in the vocation, tend to associate pastoral with pastors and thus with some sort of clergy or ordained service provider (usually with no questions asked and we all know about the profanation of ordination); that in itself is a misfortune for all concerned. But the much-touted CPE doesn’t do much to clarify the issues for interns or residents, and we still see chaplains “certified” by the self-proclaimed arbitors of chaplaincy who are just as ignorant after several years of “education” as they were before.

A case in point is taken from the scenario presented by the initiator of the discussion who describes walking into a Jewish patient’s room with a Christian clerical collar, which I characterized as benign “ignorance” but in reality was outright insensitive and would indicate that the “chaplain” in question did not do any initial preparation before launching out on rounds or visitations.clerical collar pc I might fraternally suggest that in future, whether you are a chaplain or a pastoral care associate, to check the chart briefly or dialogue with the nurse assigned to that patient before you visit. The offending chaplain actually says that he was aware that the patient was dying and had no family, so it seems rather odd that the chaplain did not appreciate the patient’s faith tradition and, if it wasn’t in the chart, that he didn’t consult with the immediate caregiver (nurse or LPN).

I also questioned the fact that the visiting chaplain was aware that the man was “Jewish”. Being Jewish immediately identifies one as being associated with a certain cultural, socio-religious tradition, after all, one does not call one’s self “Jewish” except to identify one’s self as a Jew. So this also raises the question of whether the chaplain in question was indifferent to the possibility that this dying man might have welcomed a visit by a rabbi, or that the chaplain did not make or offer to make a referral. Such sensitivity may have been a great comfort to the man, who might have found great refuge in his tradition and prayers. So I identify a boundary issue in this behavior, too; an issue of knowing one’s limits.

This situation also sends up red flags in that it clearly indicates that the institution did not do a spiritual assessment of this patient, much less a spiritual evaluation or history, which also reveals a glaring ignorance of the now widely inaugurated JCAHO and HIPA scoring categories relating to patient spiritual care.

The scenario I describe above should be instructive to us all and I thank the so-called chaplain for the inadvertent teaching/learning moment he has provided.

Finally, in the dying process I don’t feel there’s a heck of a lot of “pastoring” left to be done, unless it’s for the survivors. In my experience, in end-of-life situations I am more of a presence and spiritual guide/companion. While that may arguably be part of pastoring in a general sense, I feel that the actual mission of pastoring contrasts in praxis with the mission of spiritual accompaniment at end-of-life or in an existential crisis.

plant in handIt’s rather like the difference between evangelization and catechesis, if you have that in your tradition. One takes care of the basics and gets the seed started (evangelization), the other (catechesis) ends in the care and nurturing to harvest time.

Listening to hearAnother colleague mentioned in a rather cliché fashion with which we are all familiar when listening to the CPE crowd, that CPE trains one to listen. I disagree with such responses such as “CPE “teaches” one to listen.” I’m not quite sure how that works but in my divinity training and three years of supervised pastoral formation, and my participation in and disappointment with a rather popular CPE program in a large trauma center in Albany, New York, which fell far short of even my minimum aspirations, I don’t think that people can be “taught to listen” they may listen, but they don’t listen deeply. I know that from experience the deep listening skill comes from deep within one’s self, once one is comfortable with one’s self, and can leave one’s self for the time it takes to absorb and process the patient’s narrative. It’s that kind of listening that might be part of qualifying an aspirant to be spiritual care provider but it certainly isn’t the be all and end all.

The serene face of the large Buddha his long wise curvaceous ears at once loving and open to the woes of the world: Compassionate.

The serene face of the Buddha, his long wise curvaceous ears at once loving and open to the woes of the world: Compassionate.

Deep listening is the act of sinking into a serene quiet place, and awakening a receptive awareness of the other. By entering quiet and becoming aware of the other, we move out of and beyond our ego-driven chaos to become open to the divine messages within us and shared with us by the other. Imagine the irony here is that we so often complain of the pain of not having been heard, but we are so guilty ourselves of being deaf to, not hearing the innate wisdom from within ourselves and shared with us by others. When we learn to accept emptiness, when quiet, we instinctively trust in the guidance of sacred voices far more profoundly than what our bullying brains and the busy buzz of life would have us hear. And we listen, respond with silence.

In fact, having examined quite a number of CPE curricula and having developed continuing quality improvement curricula for the healthcare chaplaincy department, I find that the current CPE programs and their associated certification elements serve only to promote a burocratic and very branded form of “pastoral” care, and that branded product falls short of most suffering persons’ real needs. helpingIt’s the proprietary nature and standardization (viz. uniformization, homogenization) of the learning that deals the death blow to an appreciation (1) of the universal truths and values shared by all human beings, (2) the beauty in the diversity of traditions and how to appreciate and be enriched by a certain mutuality, (3) the possible pitfalls of an interfaith approach to faith traditions that may adhere very loyally to their dogmas. There are other reasons I could enumerate but regrettably (or fortunately for the readers) space is limited.

I think that an overwhelming majority, too, of CPE students come with excess baggage and too little self-death–I’ve observed interns, residents, even certified chaplains who have a great potential to do considerable damage…and do. The situation is not unlike seminary, you can do much to scrutinize, to form, to standardize but Whoa! when you turn them loose on the world, watch out! (A Roman Catholic diocesan priest, who also serves in the chancery tribunal, remarked ironically to me one day, “They’ll ordain anybody these days.” Which is probably true given the shortage of priests today.)

The so-called supervisors of the CPE programs almost invariable have their own biases and agendas, and these tend to impair good formation.
In some, not all instances, too, CPE programs have become “pay-to-work” programs in which minimally screened individuals, wet behind the ears and green, are turned loose on the floors to deal with sophisticated staff and human beings in existential crisis. I don’t feel that’s right. And I have also observed that interns are exposed to the same curriculum content for three or four years, and unless they have the academic predisposition to independently advance their armamentarium of experience through narrative and study, many don’t build their foundations. Some interns do not have theology or pastoral studies to help them through the necessary processing, and almost all have a depraved Western bias to their spirituality that tends to act as a speed bump when offering care to Non-western recipients. These programs tend to be “chaplain mills.” CPE does not fit the bill on its own to form professional, well-rounded spiritual care providers, but does excel in churning out multitudes of volunteers for greedy institutions. That may be one of the reasons it has survived this long.

On another level, some practitioners involved in the discussion advocated that the “Gospel” or, by extension, holy scriptures, has no firm place in chaplaincy. I do differ in that the fundamental ethics of the “Gospel” (not as understood principally by the evangelicals or fundamentalist among us) is a major part of chaplaincy. servant leadershipI cite particularly the beatitudes and the teaching of discipleship and servant leadership (chaplaincy is certainly not limited to the sick and dying but to the suffering generally). While I abhor the notion, and even more so the practice of proselytizing to captive audiences, and would hasten to emphasize that evangelization and catechization is not a fundamental role of the chaplain, ethics, discipleship, and servant leadership all play a special role in the myriad activities of the professional chaplain. (Note also that I do distinguish between the “professional chaplain”, the pastoral/spiritual care associate, and the visitor providing spiritual support.) To advocate that the truths and values espoused by the “Gospel”, the holy scriptures of any faith or spiritual tradition might have no place in chaplaincy is to advocate a position, I believe, of a chaplaincy practice devoid of ethics (and religion) (I do realize that this is a particularly “Christian” approach and my Judaic, Islamic and Buddhist colleagues may not necessarily agree with the religion-ethics statement, but I make the statement here somewhat loosely for convenience sake).

I’m not judging colleagues in chaplaincy or Clinical Pastoral Education too severely at all. In fact, I’m simply sharing my own observations and opinions based on personal experience. I am not a bit surprised when some readers tend to take these observations personally, as if they were meant to make an ad hominem stab at the straw[wo]men of CPE; I usually anticipate that persons in our line of work have a bit more self-awareness not to take every facially severe remark as a lancet thrust to the heart, however.

Rather than play an offended person’s role, perhaps we all would benefit by admitting that we may have learnt something about one’s self as through another’s eyes.

We Respond, We don't React.

We Respond, We don’t React.

Our role is to humbly respond, not to knee-jerk react. After all, to paraphrase the prophet Martin Luther King, Jr.: ‘We are all wrapped in the same cloth…when we directly hurt another we indirectly hurt ourselves.” (I do hope I did that statement justice!). So, when one party to the conversation called such a response arrogant, and a failure to simply accept some responsibility in relationship to colleagues’ responses, I merely responded, “My point indeed. The mouth loves the feel of words.” Instead we minimize, rationalize and justify our behavior, making certain to protect one’s self. This particular correspondent insists that “our patients have thick enough skins to handle a collar.”panda overload My response was tantamount to the fact that I don’t think that we have any right to expect patients to have “thick skins.” Some practitioners in pastoral care seem to admit patients’ strengths but underestimate their sensitivity and vulnerability. Many of the patients I see have lost their thick skins and in fact are pretty bruised in terms of dignity, autonomy, fortitude, patience, etc. I see no reason to add another straw to the pile. And Yes! It’s not about us, it’s about patient-centered, family-focused, inter- and multi-disciplinary care.

bedside prayerWhen we adopt such an approach we appreciate that, whereas many of our colleagues practice their spiritual care ministry in acute care settings or in crisis settings, many colleagues may find themselves–particularly in the scenario of the long-term care setting–in the position of playing both the role of chaplain and pastor to some residents in those longer-term care facilities. Regrettably, many of these residents lived their lives unchurched or churched with infrequent interaction with their faith community; more regrettably, some faith communities have disappeared or simply no longer continue a ministry of visitation of the sick and homebound who were once part of their faith community. It’s in such situations that the chaplain may very well become the pastor, and have to function in both roles. I don’t feel that this should be a major stumbling block nor even a concern to the well-formed spiritual care provider, who is responding to a true call to spiritual care ministry.

We're all wrapped in the same cloth...

We’re all wrapped in the same cloth…


It’s No Longer a Question of Social Justice…It’s a Question of Amorality!


While New York Governor Cuomo is eroding the rights and morals of American citizens and patriots in New York, his bedfellow in Washington, Obama, is promising rights to illegal immigrants!

Obama_Immigration_Policy

The Illegals’ Choice!
The Arriba! President

Obama’s Got Something for Everyone
(but can’t deliver anything)

You're the target!

You’re the target!

The United States Congress Took More Than 90 Days to Pass Funding to Aid those Suffering from the Rampage of Hurricane Sandy…It Took Mere Days to Push Through the TARP Bailout funding for the Banks and Corporations Whose Dishonest Practices Caused the Recession We’re Still In. Where Do You Think this Government’s Priorities Are? Do You Really Think That King Obama or the Crooks in Congress Thought to Postpone Aid to Israel and Divert those Millions a Day to Americans Suffering the After-effects of Sandy? Where do WE, as citizens, actually figure in Big Brother’s worldview? Not only are the Coeymanazis eroding your rights but the unconstitutional, immoral criminality appears to be trickling down from the New York State Legislature and our Mafioso Governor, Andrew Cuomo! Read on, if you dare…


You may want to print out a copy of this article and send it to Governor Cuomo and to your elected legislators (state and federal) as an statement of protest! Send a link of this article to your relatives, friends, neighbors so that they also know the true facts. Thank you!


Closer to Home, Our Darling Governor Andrew Cuomo Has Been Trying to Collect Brownie Points by Harvesting Political Capital over the Bodies of Dead Children.

(Bad Move, Andy! Your Popularity Plummeted a Serious 15 Points!)

The Face of Attitude.Cuomo to Citizens & the Constitution: Go F*** Yourselves!

The Face of Indifferent Arrogance.
Cuomo to Citizens & the Constitution:
Go F*** Yourselves!

Andrew Cuomo and His DINOs (Democrats In Name Only; there’s not an iota of democracy in them) is a political whore and worse still, he’s turned prostitute: He’s selling principle for politics!

Here’s how:

It looks like Andy Cuomo can’t wait to become President (Yes! That’s Cuomo’s latest crazy wet dream.) before trashing the United States Constitution, Cuomo rushes the SAFE law through the rubber-stampers in the New York State Legislature, trashing the 2nd Amendment and the right to own firearms, using the imagery of dead children, not logic, to bypass any public input. IMPEACH CUOMO and give the DUMBASS RUBBER-STAMP LEGISLATORS the BOOT!

Of course the dimwit liberals and the pablum-puking bleeding hearts are going to say, “Great! Who needs guns anyway?” Of course, the police and law enforcement are just creaming their jeans at the thought of citizens without defense! But the real point is this: non-criminals obey the law and acquire guns and ammunition lawfully. It’s the criminals who will get all the guns and ammunition they need by whatever means necessary–and it’s the criminals who kill people! If the police and other law enforcement were doing their jobs they would be catching the criminals and seizing the illegal firearms. But no, that’s not in the plan, instead they’re out on the streets harassing and coercing generally law-abiding citizens and dragging them into court on…traffic violations and for smoking weed or some old-fashioned domestic ruckus. Just read the police blotters.

Forget the so-called War on Drugs–it was and continues to be a smoke screen– (they know where the crack houses are and where the dealers are but use them as bait for the dumbasses who drive thru the areas. After all, it’s the dumbasses who get stopped, it’s the dumbasses who have the cars to impound, the assets to seize, and it’s the dumbasses who will hire the defense lawyers at their own expense (the drug dealers don’t usually have cars, run like hell and get away, don’t have assets, and get public defenders!)).

Cuomo's got a fish story for you...and I have a bridge to sell you.

Cuomo’s got a fish story for you…and I have a bridge to sell you.

And talking about traffic tickets, our darling NYS governor has yet another citizen-hating scheme to cover the state’s crazy spending:

traffic ticketCuomo now is telling the Judicial Branch, the Courts, how to decide in traffic cases. In other words, Andrew Cuomo, the Executive Branch, has already commandeered the wussies in our State Legislature to dump the 2nd Amendment rights of New York citizens, and now is violating another well-established–or so we were taught to believe–concept of American freedom: the Separation of Powers! The Executive branch (governor, attorney general, district attorneys, police and other law enforcement), was to be separate from the Legislative and Judicial branches. This ensured the necessary “checks and balances.” But now, Cuomo is instructing judges not to plea bargain traffic violations such as speeding tickets, and wants to impose mandatory fines and force judges to collect money for the state. Of course, his office denies that this will cost local government anything because they will be free to impose surcharges, in addition. This is a direct violation of the doctrine of separation of powers and the principle of “checks and balances.” It’s a total smokescreen and is designed to squeeze even more money out of citizens for a totally bankrupt and corrupt government in Albany. IMPEACH CUOMO and the career politicians before they start drawing their outrageous pensions!

its outright theft legislation

New York State’s Robbing You Of Your Rights!

We have previously published an interesting article on town and village courts and how ignorant the justices are and how primitive the justice (I shudder to use that term when referring to these kangaroo courts) meted out. Read Justice in Name Only: Town and Village Courts for a real eye-opening exposé of the town and village court system in New York.

I don’t know about you but I am offended by the government’s jumping over dollars to pick up pennies, and digging further into my pockets to offset shoddy management!

But the disgusting hypocrisy and immoral deceit doesn’t stop there, Cuomo has plans for the most despicable practices in the state: abortion!

But First Let’s Do A Little Quiz…

Quiz Question: Which of the above are children?

Quiz Question: Which of the above are children?

Answer: All of them are, or were, before the abortionist got to them!

Putting the murder of children in some perspective, let’s look at some real statistics and leave the politics and the emotional flooding out of the picture, just for a moment. Consider these numbers:

Ceaselessly in the news and on the politicians’ lips: 20 children killed in Newtown, CT (and 6 adults). But is that in perspective?

Now compare that with:
United States Abortion Statistics
54,559,615 abortions 1973–2011

Reported abortions in the United States, by year

The Alan Guttmacher Institute (a special affiliate to Planned Parenthood), which actively collects the abortion data directly from providers.  All numbers reported are voluntary; there are no laws requiring abortionists to report to any national agency the numbers of abortions they perform. 2009-2011 are estimates of 1,212,400 annually.

The Alan Guttmacher Institute (a special affiliate to Planned Parenthood), which actively collects the abortion data directly from providers. All numbers reported are voluntary; there are no laws requiring abortionists to report to any national agency the numbers of abortions they perform. 2009-2011 are estimates of 1,212,400 annually.

In the United States in 2011 more than 1,200,000 (that’s one million two hundred thousand) abortions were reported.

Need some more figures on abortion? We’ll be happy to satisfy your curiosity:

Americans’ views concerning abortion:

  • 79% do not support the current abortion-on-demand policy, saying abortion should be legal only in some circumstances (68%), or illegal in all circumstances (11%). (Marist Poll, December 2011)
  • 78% believe that women who have abortions commonly experience moderately severe to very severe negative emotional reactions to abortion. ( Medical Science Monitor, 2003)
  • 95% of women want to be informed of all risks of a medical procedure; 69% want to be informed of all alternatives. ( Journal of Medical Ethics, July 2006)
  • 64% of women who experienced one or more abortions “felt pressured by others” to have the abortion. (Medical Science Monitor, Oct. 2004)

So you ask yourself, Why do women have abortions?

  • 74% say having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities.
  • 73% say they cannot afford to have a child.
  • 48% say they do not want to be a single parent, or have relationship problems with husband or partner.
  • Less than 2% say they became pregnant as a result of rape or incest.

(Source: The Alan Guttmacher Institute, Perspective on Sexual & Reproductive Health, Sept. 2005)

Those are some mightily compelling reasons to kill a child, wouldn’t you agree?

And I’d like to repeat: Those are the reported, official figures. The Chicago Tribune did a study and found some very scary facts:

“A great many abortions go unreported. In a recent report, a state system for monitoring abortions in Illinois reports that as many as 17,000 of the procedures may go unreported each year, according to the Chicago Tribune. The Chicago Tribune newspaper has released the details of a new investigative report revealing the number of abortions in the state has been massively underreported. Those numbers include six women who have died from botched abortions and 4,000 who were injured.”

“State abortion records full of gaps. Thousands of procedures not reported to health department. ”

(Source: June 16, 2011 by Megan Twohey, Chicago Tribune. The Tribune found: “State regulators have documented between 7,000 and 17,000 fewer abortions a year than a national research group found in Illinois.”)

The dismal statistics for New York, not New York state, New York City read like science fiction:

“2009 statistics for abortions in New York City found that “87,273 abortions in that year, meaning that 41 percent of all pregnancies that didn’t end in miscarriage were ended by abortions,” Lipsky explains. “In some ZIP codes and among African-Americans, the abortion rate reaches a ghastly 60 percent.

[In that same report: “For every 1,000 African-American babies born in the city that year, 1,448 were aborted. To the publication of these numbers the mayor [Michael Bloomberg] stood mute.” Does this sound like ethnic cleansing to you?]

(Source: “Andrew Cuomo’s Thirst for Killing More Babies in Abortions”, Dave Andrusko (Washington, DC: LifeNews.com (1/28/13))

Now, let’s look at some statistics about guns and gun deaths:

Mortality Figures for 2011 (US only)

(Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Deaths: Final Data for 2010, table 10, 11 Adobe PDF file [PDF – 3.1 MB])

All homicides

  • Number of deaths: 16,259
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.3

Firearm homicides

  • Number of deaths: 11,078
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.6

Mortality 2011

All injury deaths

  • Number of deaths: 180,811
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 58.6

Motor vehicle traffic deaths

  • Number of deaths: 33,687
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.9

All poisoning deaths

  • Number of deaths: 42,917
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.9

All firearm deaths

  • Number of deaths: 31,672
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.3

Compare to 1,200,000+ reported abortions in the US in 2011!

So, my point is this: Looking at what the Gutterman Institute study found as the reasons women have abortion and the official abortion figures for 2011, and comparing those figures (for example, 1,200,000+ abortions in 2011) with the firearm homicide figures for the same period (11,078 homicides) and the figures for motor vehicle deaths (33,687) and all firearm deaths (31,672), simple reasoning would say that if we proactively ban or want to control firearms because of the deaths they cause, we should be just as willing to ban or increase control over motor vehicles! After all, motor vehicle deaths in 2011 exceeded all deaths caused by firearms (self-inflicted, murder, accidents). And what is the next step? Background checks for new car purchases? Registration of gas purchases?

And, when you compare all deaths by injury in the US in 2011 (180,811) with the number of reported deaths by intentional abortion (killing the child) in that same period (1,200,000+ children), you really have to ask yourselves: “What is the big stink about 20 children being killed in Newtown, CT, and is it really fair to misuse that event politically to unlawfully deprive citizens of a constitutionally granted right?”

I am not a callous animal and I’m not trying to minimize the moral wrong or emotional effects of the Newtown, CT, tragedy. I empathize with those parents and the community just as much as I do with Iraqi, Afganistani, Egyptian, Mexican victims of insanity and crime. But the absolute and statistical numbers speak louder than I could ever attempt to do!

And so, we make a full circle back to deprivation of real rights and the interference of mindless criminal politicians to misuse events for their own agendas.

The reality is this: We have crazies on the streets because we threw them all out of the asylums a couple of decades ago. We have crazies on the streets because we send immature young men off to fight illicit oil wars and then abandon them when they come home nutz and with PTSD. We have crazies on the street because we elect them and put them in powerful positions and not in padded cells!

They all should be in an institution!

Your Rights Crying Out for Liberty!

It’s the crazies in government who are trying to tell us thinking, rational citizens that it’s not the inability of law enforcement to find and seize illegal firearms in the hands of gangs and criminals, nor the inability of law enforcement to stop the trafficking of ammunition for those illegal firearms, nor the inability of law enforcement to stop the influx of illegal weapons into this country…what they’re telling us is that those citizens who would obey the law anyway and are doing so right now, it’s those citizens who will be subjected to more intense scrutiny and tougher regulation! Go figure!

In fact, official government statistics collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and published in the weekly Mortality and MobidityWeekly Report (August 6, 2010 / 59(30);957) actually show a decline in firearm deaths in the period of 1979-2007!

The figure above shows death rates for the three leading causes of injury death in the United States during 1979-2007. In 2007, the three leading causes of injury deaths in the United States were motor vehicle traffic, poisoning, and firearms. The age-adjusted death rate for poisoning more than doubled from 1979 to 2007, in contrast to the age-adjusted death rates for motor vehicle traffic and firearms, which decreased during this period. From 2006 to 2007, the age-adjusted poisoning death rate increased 6%, whereas the motor vehicle traffic death rate decreased 4%, and the firearms death rate did not change.

The figure above shows death rates for the three leading causes of injury death in the United States during 1979-2007. In 2007, the three leading causes of injury deaths in the United States were motor vehicle traffic, poisoning, and firearms. The age-adjusted death rate for poisoning more than doubled from 1979 to 2007, in contrast to the age-adjusted death rates for motor vehicle traffic and firearms, which decreased during this period. From 2006 to 2007, the age-adjusted poisoning death rate increased 6%, whereas the motor vehicle traffic death rate decreased 4%, and the firearms death rate did not change.

Click the link to the right for the Full 2010 MMWR Article:
3 leading causes MMWR August 6 2010_59(30)_957

But all the political rhetoric and misinformation, and the misuse of a tragedy to push through more controls over citizens is totally unjustifiable given the scientific information and the government’s own numbers! If you want to increase control over firearms the government will logically have to do the same for automobiles, since they kill more people every year than firearms!

A traditional business facing extinction?

A traditional business facing extinction?

It’s also those crazies in government who are now telling our judges, as useless as most of them are, how to judge cases, how to interpret the law! Why? Because Mr Andrew Cuomo thinks that they are not sending enough fine-money to Albany and keeping too much for the local municipalities. So Cuomo is going to turn around and legislate how the judges decide your next traffic ticket and deprive you of your opportunity for justice, the common plea bargain. Do you like it so far?

abortion_setupSo we’re all appalled by the deaths caused in single incidents by single assailants killing multiple people. Are we just as appalled by the deaths by automobile or poisonings? Don’t they get any attention? OK. Every year we kill more than 1,200,000 children but do it legally. It’s done by medical doctors who make a quick buck by murdering babies. If you don’t believe that they are murdering babies, let me redirect your attention to a very informative page that tells you a little about the stages of the developing child’s life in the womb, before some licentious bitch with a sorry excuse has some murderer in a white coat, dismember it, and the state (= YOU) pays for it. Are you pleased with yourself? Click here to read the Horror of Abortion.

Cuomo as Neo-Hitler

Neo-Hitler Cuomo

What’s even worse is that this Democrat government wants you to continue paying for this mass murder and that satan Andrew Cuomo and that devil Obama want to make it even easier to kill even full-term infants! But Cuomo isn’t anyone’s fool, he planned to pander the women’s vote by packaging the abortion rights measure in a women’s rights package that included proposals to assure equal pay, workplace rights, and bills combating abuse against women. At this point, Cuomo has tied all the measures together, requiring the Legislature to approve all or none of the proposals.

Hitler, using the same gestures, advocated a pure race by abortions, too!

Hitler, using the same gestures, advocated a pure race by abortions, too!

Far from advocating any lunatic politician in Albany, I would like to share a statement by Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos says the proposal is just wrong. Skelos, who runs the majority with six independent Democrats, calls Cuomo’s proposal an extreme measure from the radical left. Skelos also says the change isn’t needed in New York, where abortion is legal, paid for by Medicaid, and requires no parental notification. I repeat: in New York abortion is legal, it is paid for by Medicaid, and requires no parental consent. Hell, the government takes care of it all for you!

You may want to read an article I wrote on another blog, Opinion: Abortion Issues. As usual, it’s an in-your-face, wipe-your-nose-in-it factual statement.

And so, loyal readers, whether you agree with me or not, you do have to admit that we have some very weird and bizarre ways of thinking in order to make the world fit our lunacy. Do you feel any smarter now? Do you feel any differently now? Please say Yes!

But let me leave you with one very serious thought: The longer you stay silent, the longer you let the crazies in Albany and Washington, or even the crazies in the village or town hall, play with your rights, the more blood of innocents will be on your hands.

<big>Does this mean satan is reconciled with God?</big>The Editor

Does this mean satan is reconciled to God?
What does this image do for RC credibility? Absolutely zilch, nada!
(In the days of credibility he would have been burned at the stake!)
The Editor

cross and swastikaSo, Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, are you still welcoming this hypocrite monster Cuomo to your liturgies, are you still allowing this demon to receive the sacraments alongside the pious faithful? How dare you! With the politics and hypocrisy, the pandering and the double-talk, is it any wonder that, like Cuomo’s approval ratings, you’re hemorrhaging numbers, too?!? And don’t smirk, Protestants, Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, and Jews; you’re all just as bad, but less visible!

Is this the real TRUTH?

Is this the real TRUTH?

Special Notice: We make every effort to be truthful, complete, fair, and balanced on this blog; therefore, if you see anything that you know to be false or incorrect, or if you have additional information to clarify any issue, please let us know by e-mailing your information or by leaving a comment. It’s very important to us that we don’t fall into the same category as those whom this blog is intended to expose. Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation and assistance!

You Are Not One Of US…


“Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward. (Mark 9: 38-41)

Pointing-finger

It would seem that Ms Kate Blain, editor of the Evangelist of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, and her mentors are shooting themselves in the foot! Not ony is Ms Blain and her mentors exemplifying and incarnating all the worst street wisdom about Roman Catholics, and playing into the hands of their worst detractors, but they are also turning their backs to the best of the Christian Tradition in terms of encouraging good works and works of mercy and charity. Judging from Ms Kate Blain’s response, if it is truly the position of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, no one but those associated with a Roman Catholic parish or receiving the support (just what the nature of the support should be is unclear) are licitly or legitimately practicing a ministry in pastoral or spiritual care to the suffering. What a pile of crapola!

So, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany’s Evangelist refuses to publish an advertisement because the advertiser is “not working through any parish or with the support of the Albany Diocese,” according to Ms Kate Blain, editor of the Evangelist.
Always the curious one, I thought something was very fishy with this whole affair and so I picked up an Evangelist to check out some of the ads that are being run in the rag. Here’s just a sample:

Fidelis Care, selling health insurance plans
McDonough’s Farms, selling trees and wreaths
Silver Parrot, selling jewelry items
Ross and Visconti, a law firm specializing in family law, general law and wills
Celtic Treasures, selling Irish gifts
Joe Mazzone Antique Services, buys and sells antiques
Eddy Senior Living, a secular assisted living facility
Marra’s, sells home healthcare items
Falcon Trace, a secular “active adult community”
The Spinney at Pond View, cottage rental community
Romanation Jewelers, buys and sells gold
Eastwyck Village, retirement living
Ohav Shalom Apartments, independent senior living
Adirondack Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Delmar Place, assisted living residence
Bob Tahlam, Inc., basement and cellar work
Advanced Hearing Aid Centers
Shaker Pointe at Carondolet, independent senior living
Mr Fix It, plumbing, electrical, carpentry
Wesley Woodlawn Commons, assisted living
Accent, healthcare services
Visiting Nurses Healthcare
A&B Stairlifts
Albany Housing Authority, Senior Housing
The Lira Ensemble, polish music
W.J. Lyons Funeral Home Inc.
Stefanazzi & Spargo, monuments
Wm. J. Burke & Sons Funeral Home

Yes, we thought you’d be a bit surprised., and we’re none the wiser for the effort. There’s no rhyme or reason behind these advertisements, they cover a wide range of services unrelated to a parish and certainly don’t need diocesan support. In fact, the ads are supporting the diocese to some extent.

So we have to look elsewhere for an explanation why an advertisement for genuine and much-needed services would be canned by the Evangelist.

A big question looms large in this consideration: Is someone at our sacred and holy Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany Pastoral Center playing a career assassination game? Are there personal or political motives behind the refusal. Does someone or several of our loving, charitable, good Christians at the Pastoral Center have an axe to grind with regard to the advertiser. It wouldn’t be the first time that some Church functionary saboutaged the work of ministry for personal reasons.Is this a form of cowardly punishment or retribution? But just the thought of the bad press, the damage to an already suffering image, the civil consequences that such stupid misconduct will entail is chilling.

This raises a number of troubling contradictions in this diocese, including but not limited to:

  • The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany sends its deacon candidates to a local secular hospital that epouses explicitly interfaith pastoral care to patients, and whose manager is of the Calvinist tradition, apparently loathes his own denomination (RCA, according to the AMC pastoral care manager, the “deformed” Church of America), and has no great love for Catholics, unless they’re female, “disgruntled””, outspoken and dissenting. Two Roman Catholic priests are on the hospital’s pastoral care team and paid by the RC diocese of Albany, and I have personally witnessed some very anti-Catholic and abusive treatment of those two clerics at the hands of some non-Catholics. Knowing the situation at the hospital and in the Pastoral Care department there, one wonders what the rationale is behind the diocesesan practice of sending deacon candidates to train there if interfait pastoral care is not supported by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany.
  • While I was completeing my master of divinity degree at the Roman Catholic school of theology and divinity supported by the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Albany (Bsp Howard Hubbard) and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester (Bsp Matthew Clark) and most recently in Syracuse, under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Syracuse, my pastoral formation supervisor encouraged me to participate in the clinical pastoral education (CPE) program at Albany Medical Center, which I did. In terms of experience it was incredibly edifying, that is, in terms of the direct clinical experience on the floors. The personal experience with the supevisor and the peer experience was frustrating to say the very least. It was not the place for a traditional or conservative Roman Catholic or one with weak faith or one with no guts. I was surrounded by feminazis, Calvinists, and sociopathic “disgruntled” female Roman Catholics/Episcopalians; a male Catholic was chum in shark-infested waters = I didn’t have the chance of a snowball in hell unless I put up a very strong front, and I stood by my faith, my Tradition, and my ethics. So, if the Roman Catholic school of theology and ministry sends its students to participate in the interfaith program at Albany Medical Center, knowing the the program is promoting the interfaith model of pastoral care, how is it reasonable that the editor of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany’s newspaper, Kate Blain, refuses to run an advertisement on interfaith pastoral care?

 

The Ultimate Perversion!<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
Female Gay Bishop!<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
How Close are We?
The Ultimate Perversion!
Female Gay Bishop!
How Close are We?
  • The very school of theology and ministry I attended and which awarded me the master of divinity degree is a former Roman Catholic seminary college that went Guess what! Interfaith in order to survive. Right in the middle of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany Pastoral Center we now find Roman Catholics sitting next to Baptists, Calvinists, Episcopalians reciprocally revealing their ignorance. Now the Protestants, Jews and Calvinists can experience first-hand the renowned infighting that goes on among Roman Catholics. They can, along with the now appalled traditional and conservative Catholics, experience the liberal priests and female religious dissenting, criticizing their Church, and hear the eunichs in the group pander to the instructors and to the wannabe women priests [and bishops]. Typical ambiguous and ambivalent American attitude, typical American “be politically correct or be shunned”, “How dare you have such an opinion!?!” type of Me First! exchange. But it’s all in the interest of unity, of ecumenism, of interfaith dialogue, of …or is it revenues?

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany appears to support the interfaith pastoral care effort…or does it?

(There are a number of discrepancies in the pastoral formation programs both in the diocese but most particularly at St Bernard’s School of Theology and Ministry that require review and correction. Those discrepancies have nothing whatsoever to do with the supervisor/director of the program itself but the way the students’ projects are selected and executed leaves a great deal to be desired. But this is something that we shall take up with the accrediting body itself.)

The Roman Catholic Church has spent a great deal of ink writing about the importance of care of the suffering, the sick, and the dying but it seems that much of what is written and prmulgated is contradictory in one respect or another. Or, in its slavish dedication to the principle of subsidiarity, the Church has delegated much of its authority to self-serving, poorly catechized managers and underlings. The Pastoral Center of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany lacks overall leadership, although it is figuratively headed by a brilliant saint of a man, somewhere along the line the minions and the satans have usurped power over their domains and the Center has turned into a collection of feifdoms, the Evangelist obviously being one of them.

samaritan

Our beloved bishop Howard Hubbard (RC Diocese of Albany) and his brother bishop Matthew Clark (RC Diocese of Rochester) are both nearing retirement and their personal pastoral ministries have been phenomenal in terms of goodness, charity, brilliance, but their legacies will be remembered for their excess liberalism. The buzz is that at the Albany Diocese the greatest fear is that a conservative bishop will succeed Hubbard. If this happens, say Bye! to the fiefdoms, the self-serving monopolies and nepotism, and to the women religious who have pretty much taken over running the place.

It’s not the Holy Spirit that moves the Roman Catholic Diocese at Albany, it’s the cliques. And it’s high time the Diocese and the departments and parishes were returned to the Church, to be run in accordance not with liberal agendas but with the Roman Catholic Tradition and the Magisterium. It’s time Christian kerygma becomes the modus operandi and not personal agendas or the like. The idiotic grins are a poor cover-up for the envy, the paranoia, the anxiety, the ambition beneath. How has it reached such a point, I have to ask?

(It’s not just in Albany, either. I spent years nurturing relationships in a local Eastern rite parish, St Ann Maronite Catholic parish in Troy. scary-clownsFor more than a decade I was part of the parish life, grew to become very close to its former pastor and its parishoners. The pastor was transferred and I asked to do a year of my pastoral formation with the new priest who was very young, from Lebanon, and not long in the USA. The young priest had a poor command of English, very little parish experience (about 6 months unter the supervision of a senior priest down south), couldn’t preach to save his own soul, and was culturally inept (the Church in the Middle East is incredibly different in Traditions, organization, and in its participation in politics). The wet-behind-the-ears monk thought he knew everything, though, except integrity, honesty, humility, and inclusiveness. He openly spoke hatefully of Muslims with parishoners and was inauthentic. I confronted him, he ran to his bishop, his bishop ran to my bishop, this bishop supported him, my bishop asked me to cool it. That’s the way it goes: the bishops support their priests regardless of the damage. I disappeared and was demonized. C’est la vie, c’est la guerre. But it shouldn’t have to be that way and wouldn’t be that way if the bishops would be bishops and stop pussyfooting around.)

According to the Chinese, “The fish rots from the head down.” Oh! How true! Look around you.

So, back to the Evangelist and editor Ms Kate Blain, now making policy for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany. What say ye, bishops?!?

Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.” (Mark 9: 38-41) Is that really so? Are we still preaching this (I know I am).

animated candle small

What’s important here? The fact that one operates out of a parish or the fact that one has the “support of the diocese” ( read that as “has not invoked the perfidy of someone with some power at the diocesan offices”). Who is this Kate Blain to make the determination that one does not have the support of the diocese. And if that is true, why does the Roman Catholic Diocese not support qualified spiritual care regardless of company or special-interest connections.

I’d be happy to discuss this dilemma with anyone from the Pastoral Center. Just give me a time and a date. According to Saint Bernard’s School of Theology and Ministry which awarded me the “gold standard” professional degree in pastoral and theological studies, the Magister Divinitatis, which I received from the hand of bishop Matthew Clark and the co-authentication of bishop Howard Hubbard, I should be qualified to engage in such a debate…and to provide qualified pastoral and spiritual care regardless of the faith or Tradition of the recipient.

But there’s still the question of why the editor of the Evangelist refuses to run my ad that is in full accord with express Church doctrine and policy, with the explicit teachings, and with the promulgations of the USCCB? Do we have female bishops in the RC Church already? Yes. But not officially, it seems.

Please share your thoughts on this subject matter. And stay tuned for the next installment: a discussion of Church teachings on the care of the suffering, sick, and dying (and how it’s falling on it’s egg-stained face).

Shut up! And do your homework!The Editor

Shut up! And do your homework!
The Editor


%d bloggers like this: