CNA Newsroom, Feb 16, 2024 / 22:15 pm (CNA).
A raucous funeral liturgy for a high-profile trans-activist and sex-worker advocate was held Thursday in New York City’s St. Patrick’s Cathedral, sparking an outcry on social media that the iconic church was misused to advance an ideological agenda at odds with Catholic teaching.
The Manhattan cathedral hosted the Feb. 15 funeral service for Cecilia Gentili, an activist who helped to decriminalize sex work in New York, lobbied for “gender identity” to be added as a protected class to the state’s human rights laws, and was a major fundraiser for transgender causes.
Organizers reportedly did not disclose to the cathedral that Gentili, who died Feb. 6 at age 52, was a biological man who identified as a woman.
“I kept it under wraps,” Ceyeye Doroshow, the service’s organizer, told The New York Times.
Doroshow said that Gentili’s friends requested that the funeral service be held at St. Patrick’s because “it is an icon,” which is how they thought of Gentili.
Throughout the liturgy, the presider, Father Edward Dougherty, referred to Gentili with feminine pronouns and described the trans-identifying man as “our sister.” Additionally, during the prayers of the faithful, the reader prayed for so-called gender-affirming health care, while attendees frequently and approvingly referred to Gentili as the “mother of whores.”
It was not clear if cathedral staff were aware that Gentili was a man who identified as a woman. St. Patrick’s Cathedral referred all media requests to the Archdiocese of New York, which did not respond to requests for comment before publication.
In remarks previously made to The New York Times, archdiocesan spokesman Joseph Zwilling said that “a funeral is one of the corporal works of mercy,” which are “a model for how we should treat all others, as if they were Christ in disguise.” Other than its spokesman’s comments, the New York Archdiocese had issued no official statement on the funeral service at St. Patrick’s as of Friday night.
Several mainstream media outlets have framed the event as a breakthrough occasion, and a sign of the Catholic Church shifting its teaching — or at least its tone —on sexuality and human anthropology.
Time magazine described the fact that a funeral service for a trans-activist was held in a Catholic cathedral as “no small feat,” while The New York Times described the service as “an exuberant piece of political theater.”
Jesuit Father James Martin, an LGBTQ advocate whose approach to pastoral inclusion has courted controversy in the Church, offered his approval for the service.
“To celebrate the funeral Mass [sic] of a transgender woman at St. Patrick’s is a powerful reminder, during Lent, that LGBTQ people are as much a part of the church as anyone else,” he told The New York Times. “I wonder if it would have happened a generation ago.”
Other Catholics, however, did not share the Jesuit priest’s position.
On X (formerly Twitter), Catholic Vote described the service as a staged “mockery of the Christian faith INSIDE St. Patrick’s Cathedral” by trans activists.
Others called for Cardinal Timothy Dolan and the Archdiocese of New York to respond to what they considered to be sacrilege.
“Is Cardinal Dolan planning to make reparations and exorcise and consecrate the altar and nave?” said one X user, apparently in reference to steps the Diocese of Brooklyn took when a pop star performed an inappropriate music video in the sanctuary of a parish church.
Many of the 1,000 in attendance wore drag and scanty outfits. At the foot of the altar stood an image of the Argentinian-born Gentili with a halo, surrounded by the Spanish words for “whore,” “transvestite,” “blessed,” and “mother.”
Trans-activist Oscar Diaz told Time it “felt appropriate” to say farewell to Gentili with a funeral service at St. Patrick’s, describing the event as an act of bestowing “sainthood” on the transgender advocate.
The service for Gentili was marked by several moments that were out of the ordinary for a Catholic funeral and have raised questions of irreverence and sacrilege.
For instance, during the liturgy, attendees cheered, applauded, and chanted “Cecilia!” and “madre de putas”— Spanish for “mother of whores.”
A rendition of the “Ave Maria” by the cathedral cantor was interrupted when an attendee shouted “Ave Cecilia!” and danced down the center aisle.
A mid-liturgy lay reflection given from the sanctuary compared Gentili’s advocacy for normalizing sex work and lobbying for gender-related healthcare to Christ’s ministry to prostitutes and outcasts.
In another reflection, Diaz described the deceased as “this whore, this great whore, St. Cecilia, mother of all whores.” Those assembled stood and applauded as Father Dougherty remained seated in the presider’s chair, his chin in his hand.
After attending Baptist and Catholic churches, Gentili had identified as an atheist though suggested a recent interest in God in a November 2023 interview.
“Religion has been such a foundational aspect of my life that I’ll always have some kind of connection to it. I still crave a sense of community and belonging that I know a lot of people find in faith,” Gentili said.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Was he Catholic?
From Gentili’s Wikipedia profile:
Gentili attended both Baptist and Catholic services during her life, but found the experiences traumatic and came to identify as an atheist. In November 2023, she said in an interview that she was exploring her relationship to religion.[5]
[5] Walker, Harron (November 1, 2023). “Cecilia Gentili Is Looking for God in Her New One-Woman Show”. Interview Magazine. Archived from the original on February 6, 2024. Retrieved February 7, 2024.
Well, now he’s found Him. As we all shall one day. May God have mercy on this troubled man’s soul.
If you are not practicing the faith are you of the faithful?
He was born Catholic but became an Atheist at the end and a homosexual/Trans-sexual Prostitute. The Family didn’t tell the Church about this. I don’t know what the Priest was thinking? Fr Martin praised this vile nonsense. When the Cardinal found out about it he ordered a Mass of Reparations for the sacrilege. But I don’t think he has commented on this but he should and he should and he should be harsh.
I am all for charity toward gays and other weird types and lovingly sharing the Gospel with them yada yade…
But this is out if line.
Demonic
Well, at least those in attendance were honest about the deceased”s profession. Unlike Catholic news sources that use euphemisms like “sex work. “
Another outrage. Although personally quite saddened by Cardinal Dolan’s apparent reticence, who when rector of the NAC in Rome was known by many of us as an affable, kind man, who also taught at the Angelicum and well appreciated for his orthodoxy. ‘Cecilia, mother of all whores’, an outstanding among many blasphemies to be allowed at of all places St Patrick’s Cathedral.
This is signs of the times in spades. It deserves much more than a few words of correction from Cardinal Dolan. A strange, here seeming accommodation of high ranking clergy for the obscenity of perverse behavior. Hopefully he will take serious corrective action.
Scantily clad and foul language types have no place in a church. They are making a political statement only, not an expression of ANY type of religious belief. They even lied about this dead person to get approval to use the facilities. The priest should have stopped the service as soon as the word whore was used, and used in an approving way. I am tied of hearing “we do not know the state of their soul”. No, we do not, but living your life to the end in complete defiance of church law gives us a pretty good idea. Its time to stop pretending that rejecting the rules has no meaning and no consequences. Stop acting like sin doesnt matter. Maybe if it had MORE consequences people would think twice. In any event the church and its leaders need to stop acting like willing fools.
Certainly it’s not our religion LJ. It’s a form of religion, an evil religiosity that’s being fomented during this pontificate with the gradual acceptance and approval of homosexual trans behavior in the Church. From code word irregular relationships in Amoris Laetitia to FS and blessings for gays,to ranking appointments, bishops and cardinals, some who have same sex predilection are being drawn in to a notion of compassion and mercy absent of repentance. It’s become a transparent effort to feminize and homosexualize Catholic Christianity as have some Protestant denominations already done. There are parishes in NYC that fly rainbow colors and similarly decorate the sanctuary. We have a handful of brave bishops and cardinals who as you know oppose, but are dismissed and marginalized.
First and foremost Christ would never identify and reorder His Beloved according to sexual desire/inclination/orientation in direct violation of God’s Commandment regarding lust and the sin of adultery and furthermore, it is blasphemy to even suggest that Christ would affirm the identification and reordering of His Beloved according to sexual desire/inclination/orientation, in order to justify the engaging in or affirmation of sexual acts that regardless of the actors, or the actors desires, are, in all cases, physically, psychologically, emotionally, morally, and spiritually harmful, and thus deny the inherent Dignity of every Beloved son and daughter.
I do not believe that this Marynoll priest, Dougherty, did not know what was truly going on. He should have given a stern warning after the first outburst. If the desecration did not cease, the “Mass” should have been stopped immediately. Everyone from the Cathedral staff who was assisting should have walked out if it continued. The New York diocese has issued a brief and totally inadequate statement on the travesty saying that a Mass of reparation has already been done. They surely intend for that to close the matter.
Interestingly, Time and the New York Times described much better what happened than Cardinal Dolan’s employees. If the Diocese takes the incident seriously, Dougherty will be punished. At the very least, he ought to be banned from celebrating Mass at any church in the Diocese. It won’t happen, though, so we can be assured that neither Dolan, nor anyone else there really cares. I hope I am wrong, but if the past is any guide, it will memory holed.
Toy are right Tony.
This is not of any from the POV of the Church establishment.
Not one bit.
The Archbishop yawns, and asks the staff: What’s for lunch?
“Not of any concern” that is…
As has happened at least once before, the Rev. James Martin, S.J., does not know what he is talking about. There was no mass at the improvised “liturgy”, just prayers, reading, singing, and a lot of attention-seeking.
From
Urge Cardinal Dolan to do exorcism and reparation after sacrilegious trans funeral in St. Patrick’s Cathedral
Excerpt:
Leading the funeral service, Fr. Edward Dougherty was also cheered when he made light of the attire on display, saying: “Except on Easter Sunday, we don’t really have a crowd that is this well turned out.” The priest is then overheard being reminded by an assistant that he is not to offer Mass.
Rorate Caeli has an article with a link to video of the entire disgraceful event, which they characterize as “very disturbing, and not recommended for most”.
The “Whore Funeral” in Saint Patrick’s Cathedral: The Inevitable End Game of Vatican II and the Ideological Novus Ordo Rite
I skimmed the video in increments of a few minutes, and there was definitely no mass.
I blame the Supreme Blasphemer Bergoglio (cf Pachamama idolizer) and his minion Cardinal Dolan for such a mockery of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.
When you come down to it, there’s no sin that the Bergoglian Church won’t ask God’s blessing upon.
Connect the dots…from admitting an LGBTQ presence, as such, in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade to now this. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/nyregion/new-york-st-patricks-day-parade-organizers-lift-ban-on-gay-groups.html
The Catholic Church is being annexed (!) by the homosexual lobby, and we still hear disoriented blather from on high about “blessing” such couplings. This must be what is meant and intended by the doctrine of “gradualism.”
As quoted in the linked article, “who am I to judge?”
Just curious where was the Cardinal when this was planned and then held? What is the purpose of the Priest using”pronouns” instead of the actual sex (M) of the person? Unfortunately another example not of “mercy” but one of “how do we change the Church’s teaching and get every Catholic to go along”. Sad times and unholy times too often unfortunately.
“Others called for Cardinal Timothy Dolan and the Archdiocese of New York to respond to what they considered to be sacrilege.”
A truly disgusting act of sacrilege. The appropriate response would be for Dolan to step down. Something like this would not have happened apart from his tacit approval.
Athanasius;
Re. – Your 2/17 2:37
Good points. Dolan MUST have had some inkling of what was about to happen, and if he DIDN’T that makes it that much worse. I don’t know wha he has had to say but if he says he didn’t know what was going to happen I would find it difficult to believe him.
The fact that this occurred just at the beginning of Lent reminds me of this – In the late 90s – early millenium the play ‘The Vagina Monologues’ was a fixture at the University of Notre Dame during the winter semester. This particular year (I can’t remember exactly which year) opening night was scheduled at Washington Hall on campus on – Ash Wednesday. That morning along with a few friends I went to Mass at the Basilica where – before Mass – we passed out small 3*5 cards stating our opposition to this and as we tried to do this we were told – gently but firmly – that this was unacceptable. We went to speak to a few Priests of our acquaintance and they said that they too were upset about it but there was nothing they could do. I got the distinct impression that they had been warned to keep their mouths shut. We tried to get on the campus radio but were blocked, and I got the distinct impression there that they really didn’t think it was a big deal.
Make no mistake – the imp is loose.
Rorate Caeli’s commentary: “The ‘Whore Funeral’ in Saint Patrick’s Cathedral: The Inevitable End Game of Vatican II and the Ideological Novus Ordo Rite” – is one of the more divisive, arrogantly self righteous remarks by presumed traditional persons I’ve read. All they achieve is a display of their hatred for those of us who revere God and serve Christ’s sheep following the written guidelines and dogmatic constitutions of Vat II. Rorate Caeli are the delusional, pharisaical counterpart of heretical sadducees Fr James Martin, Card Hollerich and company.
The use of the word “inevitable” allows the reader to run a diagnostic test on one’s non sequitur detector.
Father Z has posted the response from the pastor of St. Patrick’s Cathedral:
What happened at St. Patrick’s and what now won’t happen in Austin
The complete text is posted as a graphic on Father Z’s website.
Was the Sanctuary lamp lit at the time of the funeral?
(See the video below)
It appears that both the Sanctuary and the
Sanctuary lamp were not present.
It’s also pretty safe to say that God wasn’t present either.
Pretty sure God is omnipresent.
So you think that God was honored in what went on here?
The Archdiocese of NY spokesman Mr. Zwilling would be fired from an organization that took itself seriously.
But he represents what our Catholic Church leadership establishment are in a nutshell: men who at best are completely derelict in their duty to Jesus Christ and his flock, and certainly for many much worse, men who are themselves false shepherds who make their living in blatant mockery of Jesus and his apostles, and utter indifference (and we can be certain…in not a few cases…outright contempt) toward ordinary men, women and their children who are scorned for trying to follow Christ.
It is notable that Mr. Zwilling expresses not a word of disagreement or disapproval, much less any sense of outrage, about the abomination performed inside a Cathedral consecrated to God, and expresses nothing about the duty and justice owed to God, and to the faithful, who together with their Lord are the targets of this orchestrated photo-op stunt.
Apparently the rector of the Cathedral, the intrepid Archbishop of New York, and their professional spokes-mouther Mr. Zwilling think that faithful Catholic people can be expected to just conclude it was all just an unfortunate misunderstanding, because to men like the Archbishop, the rector and their spokesman Mr. Zwilling, God is no longer worshipped in his own Cathedral in New York, and the faithful are not really sheep, they are instead cattle.
“No one knew,” and “no one is responsible,” and this so-called priest Reverend Dougherty is a priest in good standing, because he stands for exactly what Archbishop Dolan and his spokesman stand for.
Eminence Dolan is frustrated that his abiding concerns, whatever those are now, must be interrupted by this event, but “the controversy” certainly doesn’t ascend to his heights, he will not condescend to say something himself, he simply has someone issue a statement, and checks today’s lunch menu.
And this is what is now on offer from the Church-led-by-the-Pontiff-of-the-McCarrick-establishment.
The Lady of the McCarrick Establishment, Her Occult Majesty Pachamama, is gratified.
Excellent comment Chris.
Rorate Caeli pursues a good within the Church as a traditional voice during a time of moral disorder, and in a certain understanding of
liturgical disorder. They have excellent contributors, Roberto Mattei, Diane Montagna among others. From a lesser, salutary perspective Rorate Caeli presents itself as superior to the Magisterium. That, seen in their recent title “The ‘Whore Funeral’ in Saint Patrick’s Cathedral: The Inevitable End Game of Vatican II and the Ideological Novus Ordo Rite”.
With those words V II is effectively dismissed as heretical. A liturgical change to the Mass, the Novus Ordo, admittedly initially deficient, was recognized as such but not removed, rather restored by Benedict XVI. Both John Paul II and Benedict approved and favored the documents of Vat II, in some instances restored deficiencies. Benedict restored the TLM as a most legitimate expression of Catholic Christian worship. Peace prevailed. To an extent. We had and have the apparently undying hatred, disavowal of Vat II and the Novus Ordo beginning with heretic Bishop Lefebvre, his SSPX movement, and those who claim to remain within the Roman Catholic Fold.
Unfortunately, Rorate Caeli despite their good intent are severely mistaken and divisive in their recalcitrant posture, not regarding the courageous, or justified criticism of this papacy, rather in their quasi Gnosticism. They represent a significant sector of anti Church, anti Catholicism, Catholicism understood as universal fracturing the unity of the universal Church in their self perception of superior knowledge, and a presumed right to condemn Vat II and the Novus Ordo. In doing so they surrender themselves to the pontiff’s designs by delegitimizing themselves.
Fr. Morello:
While I am not a member of SSPX, and I don’t cotton to some of the ideas that orbit inside that universe (like the imposition of a Catholic-Sharia-State), I do not believe that I have ever heard of Archbishop Lefebrve being called a heretic, as opposed to him being called schismatic.
Is heresy an issue wrt Archbishop L?
Bishop Lefebvre was never canonically convicted of heresy. That conviction is rare. As you correctly believe he was convicted of schism with the Roman Pontiff and excommunicated 1988 by Saint John Paul II for ordaining 4 new bishops for the SSPX. My calling him a heretic is a personal opinion based on his calling the second Vatican Council satanic and diabolic.
To be convicted of heresy he would have had to be required to recant. If after a given period he refused and remained adamant he could have been convicted. I don’t believe the Church [Paul VI simply suspended him] wished to take that route.
Thank you Fr. Morello.
And to state my own viewpoint clearly, I am not asking as to whether or not a man is “convicted of heresy,” but instead, whether he has written or spoken heresy or apostasy.
As the contemporary Church authorities have established, since the reign of Pope John XIII, that they in general reject and abandon their canonical duty to oppose heresy and condemn heretical behavior by men in the Church, it is impossible to confront heresy and apostasy if the basis must be first a “conviction” for heresy etc.
I am not making this point as a taunt.
We have outright heretics and/or apostates promoted as bishops and Cardinals, among these for instance being the case if the published heresy / apostasy of Cardinal Walter Kasper, who has published his apostasy in rejecting the Gospel accounts of the miracles of Jesus, and his bodily resurrection. All of this being done in 1974, before he was made Bishop, and thus promoted to episcopal teaching authority, and ling before he was elevated further to papal election power, despite the world seeing for itself that he denies the faith. Thus, the notion that such a church as ours would ever convict one man for heresy or apostasy is preposterous, since the same organization promotes men after the public fact of publishing their apostasy or heresy.
Returning to Archbishop Lefebrve, as he participated in the V2 Council and is reported to have approved its documents like SC, my strong sense, in the absence of any specifics, is that he may have committed schismatic acts later in ordaining Bishops without papal approval, but hebis slmost certainly not guilty of heresy. And I hold this sense because under the current Church establishment, heresy and apostasy are no offense whatsoever, they are appreciated by the contemporary Church establishment as signs of “progress” and “sophistication,” and as such, men who express heresy and apostasy are rewarded, and promoted, and reign supreme.
Chris. His, that is, Lefebvre’s attempt to establish a separate church as the true Church is heretical. His disobedience to Saint John Paul II and his ordination of bishops in violation of papal authority deserved excommunication and indicated his heretical desire to establish his own authority separate from the Chair of Peter.
Insofar as our Church during this pontificate there are instances when we’ve had heretical statements. Some prelates have held heretical views, but haven’t consistently insisted the Church change its doctrine. Regarding Pope Francis, he has not attempted to formally change doctrine. Again, in order to be canonically convicted of heresy it must be consistently and adamantly held. That has not occurred. Nor has anything heretical been formally pronounced to the entire Church.
Speaking of beasts. The snakes of St. Patrick received invitation for a Feb. 15 welcome and blessing at the cathedral of St. Patrick.
So when Catholics encounter beasts, the pope/s would have us welcome and bless them? So WWJD?
Pope John XXIII, in his ground-breaking encyclical “Pacem in Terris,” stated his hopes: “May the day be not long delayed when every human being can find in this organization [the U.N.] an effective safeguard of his personal rights” (Par. 145
Chris, there’s another story behind the story. Lefebvre began his priesthood as a Holy Ghost Father [today Spiritans] serving in Africa, eventually appointed as superior general. When I returned to Africa as a priest I taught at a Spiritan Missionary Seminary in Arusha Tanzania. My thoughts are of all the good Lefebvre could have achieved had he remained superior general, and remained in the Church, and fought for his principles [there are many with which I agree]. The order, from my perspective, would have benefited immensely as well as the Church universal. Instead he betrayed his commitment to Christ and Christ’s Church when making his vows for ordination as well as his religious vows. That became clear in more ways than one.
When studying in Rome for the priesthood I met some of his SSPX disciples, young seminarians. They were crew cut, prisoner like in appearance, frightened, suspicious young men who looked upon us as lepers. Would hardly utter a word when offered a few words of friendship. Immediately, it was apparent that there was something spiritually distorted within the movement.
Fr. if I say the good I feel about Lefebvre which restores him and SSPX and it makes me famous, it could be the death of me; so I am reluctant.
Chris, I concur wholeheartedly with your views. I too am neither sedevacantist nor member of SSPX parish. But I know and greatly value the spiritual gift of worship through the Vetus Antiquior. I understand Lefebvre’s actions. He truly believed that the spiritual good of many Catholics was harmed by the turmoil of the Church and its relegation of the TLM to the dustbin of Church history. He and many others were anguished by the simplified and banalized NO which was the only Mass allowed in many places in those many fraught years following the ‘hijacking’ of the meaning of VCII documents. The disallowance of the TLM was seen by many as a true break and a new direction for the church in the 1970s. My mother lost her fervor and many other family members outright left the pews never to look back.
It is incongruous that the late great St. Pope John Paul II deigned to ordain men as priests without ecclesial permission and then went on to excommunicate Lefebvre for the nearly same act. The great theologian Journet in 1952 claimed a distinction between the Petrine office and its exercise of that office through power. When men sincerely believe the spiritual good of the people is in danger, the canonical offense of ordaining without papal permission can be lessened. Both Wotyla and Lefebvre acted under the same belief that the spiritual good of the people was endangered.
I personally know of one young man who discerned out of seminary because he discerned ordination under the hands of a Franciscan papacy failed a certain test of legitimacy. Who can say that that young man of my acquaintance will not do as much or more good as a layman? Presumably only God knows the mind of God. I would not deign to suggest that this man’s ordination should have have brought about a greater good. GOD is responsible for the good that we do. We simply must let Him operate and effectuate His will in us. Sometimes that may mean going against a pope’s exercise of power.
Elias. Lefebvre’s story is an anomalous tragedy. Chris believes the injustices within the Church, this pontificate favoring heretical clergy while removing orthodox bishops, cardinals, priests for defending the faith justifies absolving Lefebvre. A pontiff’s unjust policies cannot validate unjust acts of disobedience. What good effect Lefebvre had outside the Church would have been greater within. We have to accept reality and ultimately we know God will be the just Judge. Dominican Savonarola had justification to criticize, remained in the Church, and was burned at the stake. Again. All will be brought to light by Christ in the end.
There. Lefebvre must be -would be- absolved on his own merits which escaped Paul VI and JPII. The lifting by Benedict XVI of the excommunications of the four Lefebvre bishops, suggests it to me very profoundly. This would be my saving grace and only protection from fame; Benedict XVI did it.
The other point is, that the issue is not that subsequent events to date make him right. These events evince his wisdom. Being too stalwart would be his human disposition deserving the Church’s ministry.
What subsequent events are showing is that Francis is inconsistent with himself coming on strong doctrinally and later after Benedict XVI is gone, making it into a great flap “in the name of Benedict and in others’ names”. Pope Francis is not extending or even sharing in what Benedict XVI inaugurates or progresses.
All due respect to Pope Francis who has asked for parrhesia.
Point of order, I would not draw Savonarola into the process or other “possible” comparators. That’s not the way for sorting Lefebvre.
It has to be from prayer.
Fr. Morello:
It is a misunderstanding to say that I believe that Archbishop Lefebrve is “absolved” of being schismatic. I instead simply observed that, absent some specific statement from Lefebrve that gives evidence of heresy, it is not possible to discern, or going further to assert, that he is a heretic. While I have seen scores of essays and articles pro and con about the schismatic actions of Archbishop Lefebrve, I have never seen anything attributing acts of heresy.
This points at some of the serious problems with faithfulness and authority in the Church, and looking back over 2,000 years, (e.g., during the reign of the Arian heresy, we had the established juridical powers persecuting and exiling faithful bishops, like Athanasius, who refused to submit to the will of heretical authorities).
Rather than go on down the mouse hole on this specific topic of heresy in connection with Archbishop Lefebrve, I simply believe that it is my duty to be like “a marine,” that is, to be “always faithful,” despite the readily discernible evidence that an outright heretic, such as Cardinal Walter Kasper, has “consistently” published (i.e., consistently held) his heresies, and taught them to thousands upon thousands of young Catholic people via his book of heresy (Jesus the Christ), published in 1974, and republished in 2011 without correction, and we know that despite these decades of actively promoting his heresies, he was made a bishop (i.e., given apostolic teaching authority) in 1989, and made a Cardinal in 2001.
Thus, since our Church has outright promoted to the heights of Church power men (such as Kasper) who have consistently held and taught heresies, it seems quite unlikely that the same Church would argue that Archbishop Lefebrve was somehow discerned a heretic.
In the end, I can understand the Archbishop L was in the wrong, but it was probably about obedience to authorities, authorities who themselves were derelict in their duty by not only refusing to correct priest-heretics like Kasper, but were 1000 times mire derelict in rewarding a priest-heretic to the office of bishop, and the papal election power of Cardinal.
So as to Archbishop L, I can see he committed an act of schism, for which he was excommunicated by Church authorities.
As to Cardinal Kasper, who denies the resurrection of Jesus (he only “obtruded in the spirit”), on top of denying (as he puts it, we “probably don’t need to believe”) the miracles Jesus (including in his list the Transfiguration, the raising of Lazarus and the widow’s son and the daughter of Jairus, wtc, etc), he is promoted despite denying the faith and despite teaching others to reject the authority of the Gospels.
Thus is revealed the corruption of the notion of authority in the Church: men who deny the highest authority of the Gospel can be promoted and rewarded, but men who oppose the lower authority of a Pontiff are cut off.
A perverse and inverted pathology of authority.
There is one Council issue that he contended, Religious Liberty, that I’ve also criticized here as it is described in Dignitatis Humanae [DH]. Lefebvre argued that the doctrine of religious liberty de jure incorporates the principle, The Rights of Man. Lefebvre believed that Religious Liberty would therefore affect those ‘within the Church’ [The Rights of Man referenced persons other than baptized Catholics]. That is exactly what occurred following publication of DH. Although I’m not sure Courtney Murray SJ the document’s major contributor intended that. Nonetheless many Catholics presumed they could pick and choose what they wished to believe. Catholics instead are required to assent to what the Church teaches as binding. Doctrine within the Deposit of Faith and doctrine directly related. Many of the periti wished to have DH declared a dogma of the Church, but the Church wisely refused. I believe DH should be revised.
It is not Rorate Caeli that is the problem. The problem is a mid-century council which was crafted in ambiguity to bring us to this moment. There is the nemesis. Rorate Caeli didn’t start the fire. It is merely announcing it to a crew composed of the likes you and me who invested our trust in the event which was designed to make way for a pontificate such as the one we shoulder. Those who honestly critique the mid-century non-doctrinal council are not bring it down. Its own character is toppling it. It is not those who hold the mirror up to the current pontificate who undermine the papacy, it is the current occupant of the Chair of Saint Peter who undermines the papacy – and quite deliberately so.
The abomination which was the funeral at St. Patrick’s would never have been imagined before this pontificate. Even without the deception employed no conscientious priest would have permitted the funeral of an unknown and unverified person in a parish not their own or without consultation with the deceased’s pastor. But we have abandoned conscientiousness for indulgence rendered “mercy.” There is no mercy without justice. Leon Bloy reminds us that justice and mercy are equal and consubstantial.
Roman Catholicism is a religion for adults. Christ’s admonition to be as little children had nothing to do with an infantilism which makes us vulnerable to mendacity whether is comes from the gutter or from the top.
James, your intelligent comments deserve attention. Yes, we can assume the ambiguities in the documents were causal. Or we may attribute causality elsewhere. Would the avalanche that occurred have happened if there weren’t the existing potential?
Having lived through it there were indicators. Hans Kung prof Tubingen 1960, wrote the same year “The Council, Reform and Reunion”, already had a following. Vat II began 1962. Kung’s theme, the Church and Freedom was preached in the US 1963. At the time 1960 Kung published The Council book, the FDA approved the sale of Enovid for use as an oral contraceptive. Catholics were largely on board with contraception. Had the Council not occurred it would seem that the availability of the pill, Kung’s popular advocacy of enhanced ecclesial freedom along with many other clerics, laity who were harping for changes may well have erupted without a council to contain it. At least it seems plausible, as you hold, that the Council did trigger the avalanche of heterodoxy, although if there weren’t the Council it would have occurred later on a wider, less manageable scale.
Agree James, and particularly on your observation about infantalization.
To my mind, anyone is joining a vector towards a heresy when he pushes God away from the center.
A priest who allows “a whore funerary service” with “an icon” of the diseases pictured with a halo pushes God away and places in the center a conformity with blasphemy. If he has Christ in the center he would throw away “an icon” and call all to focus on the reality of death and pray for the diseased. He would also call for repentance.
A traditionalist who believes that NO is “satanic” even when it is done extremely reverently and beautifully like in Notre Dame de Paris or Westminster Cathedral pushed God aside and has TLM in His place.
A priest who utilized NO to be “pleasant” and “entertaining” for a congregation instead of leading it to God also pushed God away and placed himself there where God should be.
So, all ugliness in the Church comes from swapping God with something or someone else.
Pope Benedict XVI wanted two forms of Mass to be present in each parish, mutually enriching each other. Now we see his vision is being destroyed.
NB: I can understand the anger of TLM-goers because TLM is being suffocated right now and this action is purely diabolical. It is hard to be objective when you are being abused.
Yes Anna. Especially the last point.
The abuse is what resonates…evincing the malice of the abusers.
Fr James Martin SJ also should have his faculties revoked. He knew this this travesty was coming ahead of time and was fully supportive. The world is watching Cardinal Dolan.
James Martin has the respect of the current pontiff. It is highly unlikely that any member of the episcopate will render him the rebuke his enterprise requires, indeed, demands.
Was this clandestinely approved by the Vatican for a fellow countrymen from Argentina?
Are the “wild beasts” located in the Vatican?
Tragic and unnecessary failure to protect the faithful American Catholics
yes.
Your opening question is very apt.
All one has to do is look at the Holy Scriptures to see it is plain and clear that the deplorable ungodly acts by these people will keep them from entering the Kingdom of God. Sodomy, beastiality, men becoming inflamed with men with passion, likewise women with women…Disgusting….
What do you think Jesus would do if he was here to see this? Most likely he would be inflamed with rage, as he was in the Temple when they made a flea market out of his Fathers house!
America is and has become the Modern Day Sodom and Gomorrah…! Christianity is slowing decaying in this country. Lord God, thru your Son Jesus Christ, please save us….
RB
Converted Catholic RCIA 1993
The Temple of God was profaned much earlier.
First, via the abuse of children (and not only children) in the Church and, worst of all, via non-repenting it.
Second, via gladly accepting abortion-tainted vaccines and then not repenting it again.
Third, via accepting the closure of all churches, not putting up resistance and then not repenting it again.
The major sin of the Church is silence (which suffocates victims of abuse) and duplicity (which makes the modern Church a whore – sounds disgusting but it is what God said about Israel and we are no better). Those two sins should have been repented decades ago but since it has not been done, they escalate and incarnate.
The objective of a funeral service is to ask for mercy for the sins of the departed soul, not to canonize him for activism purposes.
Either we stand in the Church Christ instituted, or we stand outside it.
Either we fight the good fight in the Church, or we fight against it.
Either we stand with Christ, or we stand against Him.
Amen.
We do not deny Jesus because of Judas.
Semper Fidelis.
Yes Chris. We stand shoulder to shoulder.
Gabriel above – Thank you.
The purpose of the funeral Mass is being frequently forgotten and not just in NYC.
The model for me is Fr. Scalia’s funeral oration for Justice Scalia.
Benedict XVI removed the penalty of excommunication in 2009 of the four bishops ordained by LeFebvre. Archbishop LeFebvre died 1991:
LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERNING THE REMISSION OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE FOUR BISHOPS CONSECRATED BY ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE
Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim him and, with him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them. Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things – arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc.
Although some may evaluate the papal differently, we have two Roman Pontiffs who perceived a break with the Church. Not simply schismatic, which would relate to one issue of disagreement, rather a form of Apostasy noted in the tone of SSPX response to both pontiffs John Paul and Benedict. It’s unreasonable to hold that tone did not exist with the founder of SSPX. Pope Benedict recognized other good elements within the community. His lifting of the excommunication was apparently more an act of mercy than strict justice.
Fr. Benedict XVI is saying it’s not an anomalous tragedy.
There are deeper positive strains I don’t want to say.
It has to be defended from contortions and has to be from prayer.
And sacrifice. And love. And justice.