Skip to main content

Is Fr. Z's "Niceness" showing True Charity to McCarrick & his Pro-Gay Bishop's Network Destroying the Church?

Fr. Z recently compared faithful Catholics fighting to save the Church to the pro-homosexual dissenter Michael Winters because they were not being nice to Cardinal McCarrick and his pro-gay bishop's network who cover-up sex abuse and are trying to destroy to Church.

Apparently, Fr. Z thinks the best way to end the greatest crisis in the history of the Church is to be nice.

According to him, it appears that it's nice to call for less money to be given to McCarrick's pro-gay bishops network who cover-up sex abuse, but apparently he doesn't think it's nice to call for their removal from the episcopate or to be laicized.

Fr. Z even thinks it might be nice for Pope Francis, which the Catholic Monitor and others have presented evidence which strongly suggests he has been involved in cover-up, to appoint a canonical Special Prosecutor who would be under Francis's influence.

He probably doesn't think it's nice for McCarrick's pro-gay bishop network to be legally prosecuted as apparently might happen in Pennsylvania and for bishops to be jailed for sex abuse cover-up and other crimes.

Scholar Fr. Chad Rippinger, P.hD., in "Introduction to the Science of Mental Health" explains what charity to our enemies or sinners means:

"[C]harity is not divorced from supernatural prudence, not only for our sake but also for the sake of our enemies or sinners. At times, the most charitable thing that can happen to a sinner is to be cut off from certain effects or manifestations of charity so that he may come to his senses about his sinful life. Extending certain effects of charity may confirm him in his sin, and thereby do him harm."

"From this we understand that charity is not merely being nice, rather niceness is the effect of charity which is extended to people based on prudential judgment. This avoids a spirit of falsity which we find in certain people who are always nice, even when their niceness is out of place, unsuitable or even false." (Page 379)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Comments

Kathleen1031 said…
Laicize McCarrick. To do otherwise is an incredible scandal for Catholics and tells the world all Catholic priests are homosexual predators. Only laicization sends the message this is not tolerated any longer. It is a horror it has been.
Zero tolerance of any homosexual activity, even consensual between adults. These priests are the dissenters, they are tearing the church apart. They are the ones misappropriating funds for cabana boy parties and goodies for the boys. They are lousy spiritual fathers. We won't miss them.
Zero tolerance of men with any homosexual inclination admitted to seminary. First hint of homosexual behavior, OUT. To see this not yet done after all we have seen and all poor boys have experienced is crazy making. Cdl. O'Malley has unmitigated gall to suggest at this point there needs to be any discussion on "practices". Practice this! ZERO TOLERANCE FOR HOMOSEXUALITY. That should do it.
6:17 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
6 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more