Thomas A. Droleskey
|
August 27, 2006
Rand=
y Engel's
massive book, The Rite of Sodomy<=
/span>,
is an exhaustive examination of the history of the devil's infiltration i=
nto
the ranks of the Church's hierarchy and clergy. Saint Peter Damian was
particularly unstinting in his condemnation of the vile crimes against the
Sixth and Ninth Commandments committed by bishops and priests in his own =
day.
His prescriptions for dealing with the problem were very severe, causing a
great deal of controversy. Pope Leo IX more or less confirmed the
prescriptions, starting the process of weeding out the offenders and
exhorting clerics to strive for the heights of personal sanctity. Clerical
corruption remained, of course, for some time thereafter. The We a=
re
living in a time very much different than that of Saint Peter Damian. How
many priests are there in the conciliar structures calling for severe
punishments of clergy steeped in the vice of unnatural perversion against=
the
Sixth and Ninth Commandments? How many bishops in the conciliar structures
are doing so. The recent popes? One, Paul VI, as Mrs. Engel documents in =
her
concluding chapter, was a practicing homosexual who put his fellow perver=
ts
in positions of authority throughout the conciliar structures Another, Jo=
hn
Paul II, enabled the perverts and their enablers at every turn, appointing
them, promoting them, protecting them. Who is the Archpriest of the Basil=
ica
of Santa Maria Maggiore? Bernard Cardinal Law, who enabled one sodomite
priest after another. Who is the Bishop of Rockville Centre, New York?
William F. Murphy, who did Law's bidding as an enabler of the perverts. W=
ho
is the recently appointed Bishop of Cleveland, Ohio? Richard Lennon, who =
participated
in the sordid mess of the To w=
it,
this author, who did the initial reporting for The As c=
an be
seen in the case of the episcopal appointment of Father Kevin Vann, Bened=
ict
XVI has played his own role in all of this, albeit with this typical
inconsistency and contradictions. As the Prefect of the Congregation for =
the
Clergy the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger sometimes warned diocesan bis=
hops
about the problems of priest perverts. On the other hand, he refused to a=
ct
against the corrupt founder of the Legionaries of Christ, Father Marcel
Maciel Dellogado, sitting on the case for years, telling ABC-TV news at o=
ne
point that "it is best not to dishearten the faithful." It was =
only
recently that a "compromise" in Father Marcel's case, which is
handled very thoroughly in Mrs. Engel's book, has permitted him to
"retire" without any finding of fact against him. Neve=
rtheless,
as has been pointed out on this site in the past seventeen months, Benedi=
ct
has appointed homosexual-friendly bishops (William Levada and George
Niederauer) to key positions. Much unlike the days of Pope Leo IX and Sai=
nt
Peter Damian, we live in a day when the perverts hold most of the key lev=
ers
of ecclesiastical power. Is it any wonder that there is such hostility to=
the
Faith of our fathers emanating from our chancery offices and parish pulpi=
ts
and schools and universities and colleges and seminaries and convents? Is=
it
any wonder that the average lay Catholic is so totally bereft of the sens=
us
Catholicus, being bombarded with the propagandizing efforts in behalf of
immorality all throughout the popular culture and hearing endless
justifications for such immorality in "Catholic" institutions,
which themselves are the prisoners of the anti-Catholic conciliarist para=
digm? With=
a
very few exceptions prior to the explosion of these scandals in the secul=
ar
media in early 2002 (after years of reporting by The No o=
ne,
least of all those who are the ostensible stewards of ecclesiastical powe=
r,
can ignore the gravity of this situation and claim to be a friend of soul=
s,
starting with the souls of those who are steeped in lives of gross
perversion. Immersion in an unrepentant life of perversion leads one all =
too
naturally to a more deadly perversion, that of the Faith itself, eerily
imitating in perverse matters Martin Luther's own immersion in natural vi=
ce
that was to a very large extent responsible for his creation of a
"Christian theology and ecclesiology" that is from the devil and
has been designed from its outset to lead souls to Hell for all eternity.=
A Concern for the Sinner Mrs.=
Engel
prefaces her massive book, which is certainly not light "bedtime&quo=
t;
reading, with a deep and an abiding concern for the welfare of those who =
have
been caught up in the ravages of unnatural vice: As f=
or the
individual homosexual caught up in this vice, I love him more than ever. =
For
I now have a greater understanding and appreciation of the terrible
all-embracing hold that this vice can have on a man and an even greater
conviction that one should move heaven and earth to prevent any souls from
being sucked into the homosexual vortex. (pp. xxiii-xxiv) Mrs.=
Engel
also expressed that her book is not for the faint of heart. Indeed, it is
not. This book must be kept out of the reach of children and young
adolescents. Anyone of any age who is easily scandalized should not read =
it.
And some of the book's more graphic chapters dealing with the specifics of
the vice of sodomy are not of themselves are not absolutely necessary for=
one
to read in order to appreciate the enormity of the problem and the clever=
ness
of what Mrs. Engel terms quite rightly "The Homosexual Collective.&q=
uot; Inde=
ed,
the ideal audience for The Rite of Sodomy is to be found in the ranks of
priests in the conciliar structures. Perhaps one or two priests might com=
e to
understand the he simply cannot participated any more in the undermining =
of
the Catholic Faith, submitting himself to the dictates of ecclesiastical
tyrants who hate the Faith and who have gone the extra mile to prove
themselves to be friends of the devil himself. Perhaps some wealthy
individual who reads this article might see to it that a bulk purchase of=
The
Rite of Sodomy is made and then distributed to every priest in the Mrs.=
Engel
addressed the need for care in reading her book. This is what she wrote in
the book's Introduction: By a=
ny
standard, this book is not for the faint of heart. The subject of
homosexuality is understandably distasteful Its connections to the priest=
hood
and the Catholic Church make it doubly so. To t=
hese
difficulties one can add the presence of explicit sexual language used to
describe certain types of homosexual acts and practices. On this point I =
can
assure the reader that out of a sheer sense of decency I have fought to k=
eep
these explicit references to a minimum. Howe=
ver, I
believe that it is not crude language but the horrendous issues raised in
this book that will make it difficult reading for any faithful Roman
Catholic. In h=
is
Epistle to the Romans, Mrs.
Engel's closed her Introduction with an explanation that she hopes that h=
er
book, which contains over 1,500 chapter notes and an extensive bibliograp=
hy,
will move the Holy See to "take whatever actions are necessary to
restore sanctity and sanity to the priesthood and religious life." Mrs.
Engel's efforts in this regard are offered as a daughter of the Catholic
Church that she has served so well in her efforts to oppose sex-instructi=
on
and to expose those, such as the late Bishop James T. McHugh, responsible=
for
cooperating with the enemies of the Faith, such as Mary Calderone, the
founder of the Sex Information Caucus of the United States, to underline =
the
innocence of young Catholics. Putting aside for a moment the questions th=
at
have been raised on this site recently concerning the legitimacy of the
conciliar officials, there is little evidence, at least humanly speaking,
that there will be any reaction from the Vatican concerning Mrs. Engel's =
work
of love for the Church other than an attempt of silence, which will be
followed by condemnation in short order if silence is not successful in
burying the facts that she has unearthed. The Early Church Speaks: The Fathers Condemn Sodomy After
reviewing the practice of unnatural vice and attitudes about it in the pa=
gan
world of antiquity, Mrs. Engel provides a cogent summary of the Church's
consistent condemnation of all unnatural vice. Mrs. Engel quotes from &quo=
t;Still
thou dost punish these sins which men commit against themselves because, =
even
when they sin against thee, they are also committing impiety against their
own souls. Iniquity gives itself the lie, either by corrupting or by
perverting that nature which thou hast made and ordained. And they do thi=
s by
an immoderate use of lawful things; or by the lustful desire for things
forbidden, as 'against nature'; or when they are guilty of sin by raging =
with
heart and voice against thee, rebelling against thee, 'kicking against the
pricks'; or when they cast aside respect for human society and take audac=
ious
delight in conspiracies and feuds according to their private likes and
dislikes." Mrs.=
Engel
then examined the commentaries of Saint Basil and Pope Saint Siricius on
"homosexuality in the religious life:" With=
an
all-male clergy, it is not surprising that the issue of homosexuality and
pederasty in the religious life should have been a matter of serious
consideration and deliberation by early Church Fathers. Then as now, the =
problem
of predatory homosexuality in clerical circles was more of a reflection of
the general moral corruption of the day rather than the specific failing =
of
clerics and monks. Howe=
ver,
if the instructions of Saint Basil were the norm, we can surmise that whe=
re
the accused cleric was found guilty of engaging in or attempting to engag=
e in
same-sex activities, the consequences were swift and painful. Saint
Basil of Cesarea, the 4th century Patriarch of Eastern monks and one of t=
he
four great Doctors of the East held that: &quo=
t;The
cleric or monk who molests youths or boys or is caught kissing or committ=
ing
some turpitude, let him be whipped in public, deprived of his crown (tons=
ure)
and, after having his head shaved, let his face be covered with spittle; =
and
[let him be] bound in chains, condemned to six months in prison...after w=
hich
let him live in a separate cell under the custody of a wise elder with gr=
eat
spiritual experience...let him be subject to prayers, vigils, and manual =
work
always under the guard of two spiritual brothers, without being allowed to
have any relationship ... with young people." It s=
hould
be noted that the exposition of a public flogging which exposed the offen=
ding
cleric or monk to open ridicule would virtually insure that the offender =
would
never rise to hold an office in the Church. On t=
he
questions of whether or not a layman who had committed acts of pederasty =
or
sodomy could apply for and receive Holy Orders, we can refer to the
directives on the norms for priestly ordination issued by Pope Saint Siri=
cius
(384-399) on 10 February, 385: &quo=
t;We
deem it advisable that, just as not everyone should be allowed to do a
penance reserved for clerics, so also a layman should never be allowed to
ascend to clerical honor after penance and reconciliation. Because althou=
gh
they have been purified of the contagion of all sins, those who formerly
indulged in a multitude of vices should not receive the instruments to
administer the sacraments." Thus=
, any
layman having been caught up in the vice of sodomy in any form, even thou=
gh
he had served out his penance, by implication, would not be permitted to
enter the clerical state. The =
text
of Pope Siricius's decree on key aspects of church discipline and clerical
celibacy is of special importance because it is the oldest completely
preserved papal deceretal (edict for the authoritative decision of questi=
ons
of disciple and canon law). and reflects the pope speaking with the
consciousness of his supreme ecclesiastical authority and of his pastoral
care over all the churches. (pp. 41-42) Mrs.=
Engel
also documented Pope Saint Gregory the Great's admonition that the civil
state has a responsibility to punish clerical sodomites: Pope
Gregory I began his 14-year reign as supreme pontiff in 590 (the first mo=
nk
to become pope), with his Liber pastoralis curae on the role of the bisho=
p as
the pre-eminent physician of souls entrusted by God to his care and
supervision, a doctrine he practiced as well as preached. His sermons, ba=
sed
largely on Holy Scripture drew immense crowds and set the pattern for the
future pattern of many famous preachers of the Middle Ages. His indelible
influence in the areas of Church doctrine, organization and discipline ma=
ke
him one of the most remarkable figures in ecclesiastical history. Pope
Gregory held a distinctive view of Church-State relations. He saw the
Imperial government centered at Pope
Gregory's teaching on sodomy did not break new ground, but rather reflect=
ed
the summing up of the teachings of the earlier Fathers of the East and We=
st
at the beginning of the Middle Ages on the nature of the crime. Using the=
Old
Testament text from Genesis 19:1-25 describing the terrible fate of &quo=
t;Brimstone
calls to mind the foul orders of the flesh, as Sacred Scripture itself
confirms when it speaks of the rain of fire and brimstone poured by the L=
ord
upon The =
reader
will note that Pope Gregory not only condemned the act of sodomy as a
"crime," but also denounce the desires of the sodomites as
"perverse." Thus, lustful homosexual thoughts and desires,
willfully entertained, are not only sinful (even where the act is not car=
ried
out), but they are unnatural and perverse as well. (pp. 46-47) This=
is
very important to note as Catholics have been bombarded for over twenty y=
ears
now with propaganda from the "official" institutions of the
conciliar church into accepting the lie that it is indeed perfectly
"natural" for people of the same gender to "love" each
other, that such "attractions" should never prohibit a man from
being ordained to the priesthood, that a "gay priest" who is
celibate is just as capable as a "straight priest" who is celib=
ate
of discharging his priestly duties admirably. Pope=
Saint
Gregory the Great put the lie to these assertions, made repeatedly by so =
many
bishops in our own day, including the notorious Theodore Cardinal McCarri=
ck,
the retired Archbishop of Washington. D.C., who came out of the nest of v=
ice
that was fostered during the twenty-eight year reign (1939-1967) of Franc=
is
Cardinal Spellman in the Archdiocese of New York. McCarrick, who invoked =
the
name of the false god "Allah" in the presence of King Abdullah =
of
the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in September of 2005 at The Catholic
University of America, said in 2002 that "gay" men should not be
barred from the priesthood. McCarrick, who once forbade a mere
"indult" Mass in the Saint Peter Damian and Pope Leo IX on the Problem of Unnatural Vice in the Cler= gy Repr=
ising
her two-part series that Catholic Family News in June and July of 2003, M=
rs.
Engel outlines, as noted at the beginning of this review, the approach of
Saint Peter Damian (1007-1072) and Pope Leo IX (who reigned between 1049 =
and
1054) to the problem of unnatural vice in the clergy. Quite unlike the
conciliar popes, Pope Leo IX took the matter very seriously and sought to
implement real reforms, not cosmetic tricks designed to appease a "c=
onservative"
constituency while maintaining the status quo (as occurred last year when
William Cardinal Levada issued a document requiring men inclined to
perversity to demonstrate an abstinence from perverse acts for three years
prior to be ordained to the priesthood; that such men can be admitted to =
the
priesthood at all is a scandal, compounded by the fact that the actual
decisions are still left up to the ordaining bishop and/or to the superio=
rs
of religious communities, an absolute farce of what the word "discip=
line"
means). Mrs.=
Engel
noted the following: Acco=
rding
to Damian, the vice of sodomy "surpasses the enormity of all
others," because: &quo=
t;Without
fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes
the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from
the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the
stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the del=
uded
mind ... It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise ... It is this
vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and
slaughters virginity ... It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollu=
tes
all things ... This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the
Church ... it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. Th=
is
utterly diseased queen of No,
dearest St. Peter Damian, I think not. Like=
every
saint before him, and every saint that will ever come after him, St. Peter
Damian exhorts the cleric caught in the vice of sodomy to repent and refo=
rm
his life and in the words of the Blessed Apostle Paul, "Wake up from
your sleep and rise from the dead, and Christ will revive (enlighten)
you." (Eph 5:14) In a remarkable affirmation of the Gospel message, =
he warns
against the ultimate sin of despairing of God's mercy and the necessity of
fasting and prayer to subdue the passions: &quo=
t;...
beware of drowning in the depths of despondency. Your heart should beat w=
ith
confidence in God's love and not grow hard and impenitent, in the face of
your great crime. It is not sinners, but the wicked who should despair; i=
t is
not the magnitude of one's crime, but contempt of God that dashes one's
hopes." Then=
, in
one of the most beautiful elocutions on the grandeur of priestly celibacy=
and
chastity ever written, Damian reminds the wayward cleric or monk of the
special place reserved in Heaven for those faithful priests and monks who
have willingly forsaken all and made themselves eunuchs for Christ's sake.
Their names shall be remembered forever because they have given up all for
the love of God, he says. One =
of the
very interesting historical sidebars to Damian's treatise is that he made=
no
preference to the popular practice of distinguishing "notorious"
from "non-notorious" cases of clerical immorality--a policy whi=
ch
can be traced back to the 9th century and the canonical reforms on
ecclesiastical and clerical discipline by the great German Benedictine
scholar and Archbishop of Mainz, Blessed Maurus Magnentius Rabanus
(776?-856). Under this policy, the removal of clerics found guilty of
criminal acts including sodomy, depended on whether or not his offense was
publicly known, or was carried out and confessed in secret. In c=
ases
that had become "notorious," the offending cleric was defrocked
and/or handed over to the secular authorities for punishment. But if his
crime was known only to a few persons such as his confessor or religious
superior, the offending cleric was privately reprimanded, served a penance
and then was permitted to continue at his post, or transferred to a simil=
ar
post in a different diocese. Given the aggressive and predatory nature of=
the
vice of sodomy, it is highly likely that such a policy contributed to, ra=
ther
than inhibited, sodomical practices among clerics and religious between t=
he
mid-800s and the early 1000s. In any case, it was unlikely that Damian, w=
ho
openly expressed his condemnation of too lenient canonical regulations
related to the punishment of clerical sodomites and was so judicious in
preserving the integrity of the priesthood and religious life, would have
approved such a policy. Sain=
ts are
realists, which is no doubt why St. Peter Damian anticipated that his
"small book" which exposes and denounces homosexual practices in
all ranks of the clergy including the hierarchy, would cause a great
commotion in the Church. And it did. In
anticipation of harsh criticism, the holy monk puts forth his own defense=
as
a 'whistle-blower'. He states that his would-be critics will accuse him of
"being an informer and a delator of my brother's crimes," but, =
he
says, he has no fear of either "the hatred of evil men or the tongue=
s of
detractors." Hear=
, dear
reader, the words of St. Peter Damian that come thundering down to us thr=
ough
the centuries at a time in the Church when many shepherds are silent while
clerical wolves, some disguised in miters and brocade robes, devour its l=
ambs
and commit sacrilege against their own spiritual sons: &quo=
t;...
I would surely prefer to be thrown into the well like Joseph who informed=
his
father of his brothers' foul crime, than to suffer the penalty of God's f=
ury,
like Eli, who saw the wickedness of his sons and remained silent. (Sam 2:=
4)
... Who am I, when I see this pestilential practice flourishing in the
priesthood to become the murderer of another's soul by daring to repress =
my
criticism in expectation of the reckoning of God's judgement? .. How, ind=
eed,
am I to love my neighbor as myself if I negligently allow the wound, of w=
hich
I am sure he will brutally die, to fester in his heart? ... "So let =
no
man condemn me as I argue against this deadly vice, for I seek not to
dishonor, but rather to promote the advantage of my brother's well-being.
"Take care not to appear partial to the delinquent while you persecu=
te
him who sets him straight. If I may be pardoned in using Moses' words,
'Whoever is for the Lord, let him stand with me.' (Ezek 32:26)" As he
draws his case against the vice of clerical sodomy to a close, St. Peter
Damian pleads with another future saint, Pope Leo IX, urging the Vicar of
Christ to use his office to reform and strengthen the decrees of the sacr=
ed
canons with regard to the disposition of clerical sodomites including
religious superiors and bishops who sexually violate their spiritual sons=
. Dami=
an
asks the Holy Father to "diligently" investigate the four forms=
of
the vice of sodomy cited at the beginning of his treatise and then provide
him (Damian) with definitive answers to the following questions by which =
the
"darkness of uncertainty" might be dispelled and an "indec=
isive
conscience" freed from error: 1) I=
s one
who is guilty of these crimes to be expelled irrevocably from holy orders=
? 2) W=
hether
at a prelate's discretion, moreover, one might mercifully be allowed to
function in office? 3) T=
o what
extent, both in respect to the methods mentioned above and to the number =
of
lapses, is it permissible to retain a man in the dignity of ecclesiastical
office? 4) A=
lso,
if one is guilty, what degree and what frequency of guilt should compel h=
im
under the circumstances to retire? Dami=
an
closes his famous letter by asking Almighty God to use Pope Leo IX's
pontificate "to utterly destroy this monstrous vice" that a
prostrate Church may everywhere rise to vigorous stature." (pp. 53-5=
5) A ve=
ry
thoughtful reader of this site expressed a concern to me that Catholics m=
ight
come away with the impression that our day, therefore, is little different
than previous days, including those in Christendom. Well, human nature is
flawed. The devil wants to tempt men into sins, especially those of a
perverse nature from which it is impossible to escape without the help of=
Our
Lady's graces and a desire to embrace personal penances and mortification=
s to
help to undo the effects of these sins of one's immortal soul, purchased =
at
the cost of the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood =
of
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Thus=
, yes,
there was corruption of this sort in the Middle Ages. This is documented.=
It
is incontestable. The difference between then and now, however, is demons=
trated
quite amply by Mrs. Engel, who discusses how Pope Leo IX intervened to
correct matters with the full weight of the papacy: The
approximate date that Damian delivered the Pope=
Leo
IX opens his letter to "his beloved son in Christ, Peter the
hermit," with warm salutations and a recognition of Damian's pure,
upright and zealous character. He agrees with Damian that clerics, caught=
up
in the "execrable vice" of sodomy "Ö verily and most
assuredly will have no share in his inheritance, from which by their
voluptuous pleasures they have withdrawn. Ö Such clerics, indeed
profess, if not in words, at least by the evidence of their actions, that
they are not what they are thought to be," he declares. Reit=
erating
the category of the four forms of sodomy that Damian lists, [59] the Holy
Father declares that it is proper that by "our apostolic authority&q=
uot;
we intervene in the matter so that "all anxiety and doubt be removed
from the minds of your readers". &quo=
t;So
let it be certain and evident to all that we are in agreement with everyt=
hing
your book contains, opposed as it is like water to the fire of the
devil," the Pope continues. "Therefore, lest the wantonness of =
this
foul impurity be allowed to spread unpunished, it must be repelled by pro=
per
repressive action of apostolic severity, and yet some moderation must be
placed on its harshness," he states. Next=
, Pope
Leo IX gives a detailed explanation of the Holy See's authoritative rulin=
g on
the matter. In l=
ight
of divine mercy, the Holy Father commands, without contradiction, that th=
ose
who, of their own free will, have practiced solitary or mutual masturbati=
on
or defiled themselves by interfemoral coitus, but who have not done so for
any length of time, nor with many others, shall retain their status, after
having "curbed their desires" and "atoned for their infamo=
us
deeds with proper repentance". Howe=
ver,
the Holy See removes all hope for retaining their clerical status from th=
ose
who alone or with others for a long time, or even a short period with man=
y,
"have defiled themselves by either of the two kinds of filthiness wh=
ich
you have described, or, which is horrible to hear or speak of, have sunk =
to
the level of anal intercourse." He w=
arns
potential critics, that those who dare to criticize or attack the apostol=
ic
ruling stand in danger of losing their rank. And so as to make it clear to
whom this warning is directed, the Pope immediately adds, "For he who
does not attack vice, but deals with it lightly, is rightly judged to be
guilty of his death, along with the one who dies in sin." Pope=
Leo
IX praises Damian for teaching by example and not mere words, and conclud=
es
his letter with the beautiful hope that when, with God's help, the monk
reaches his heavenly abode, he may reap his rewards and be crowned,
"Ö in a sense, with all those who were snatched by you from the
snares of the devil." Clea=
rly,
on the objective immorality of sodomical acts, both Damian and Pope Leo IX
were in perfect accord with one another. However, in terms of Church
discipline, the pope appears to have taken exception with Damian's appeal=
for
the wholesale deposition of all clerics who commit sodomical acts. I say,
appears, because I believe that even in the matter of punishing known
clerical offenders, both men were more in agreement than not. Cert=
ainly,
Damian, who was renown for his exemplary spiritual direction of the
novitiates and monks entrusted to his care, was not unaware of certain
mitigating circumstances that would diminish if not totally remove the
culpability of individuals charged with the crime of sodomy. For example,=
as
with certain clerical sex abuse cases that have come to light today invol=
ving
the Society of St. John and the Legionaries of Christ, which the Holy See=
has
yet to investigate, some novices or monks may have been forced or pressur=
ed
by their superiors to commit such acts. No doubt, it is circumstances suc=
h as
these that prompted Pope Leo IX to use the term, "who of his own free
will" in describing a cleric guilty of sodomy. [66] Also among the f=
our
varieties of sodomy Damian discusses in his treatise, he states that
interfemoral and anal coitus are to be judged more serious than solitary =
or
mutual masturbation. All =
in
all, what this writer found to be most remarkable about the pope's letter=
to
Damian, was the absolutist position Pope Leo IX took concerning the ultim=
ate
responsibility of the offending cleric's bishop or religious superior. If=
the
latter criticized or attacked this apostolic decree, he risked losing his
rank! Prelates who fail to "attack vice, but deal lightly with it,&q=
uot;
share the guilt and sentence of the one who dies in sin, the pope declare=
d.
(pp. 57-58) Pope=
Leo
IX understood that the salvation of his own immortal soul depended upon
attacking vice and not dealing lightly with it. How can there be any talk=
at
all of canonizing the late John Paul II, who refused to attack vice and
consistently promoted and rewarded men who were caught up in it themselves
and/or who were indifferent, at best, about it in the lives of their brot=
her
bishops and priests, men who attacked the integrity of the Faith, both in
matters of worship and doctrine, with a savage fury? As a former colleague
and, it appears, a former friend of mine noted shortly after the death of=
the
not-so-great pontiff, "I just hope that he was wearing his Brown
Scapular when he died. Our Lady did say, 'Whosoever shall be clothed' in =
it
shall not know eternal hellfire." Mrs.=
Engel
demonstrates that the contemporaries of Saint Peter Damian, including thr=
ee
future popes, one of whom, Stephen X (1057-1058), made him the
Cardinal-Bishop of Also=
, the
probability that Damian was, in fact, speaking the full truth concerning =
the
extent of this plague in the Church can be discerned from a number of
subsequent events including the condemnation of clerical immorality inclu=
ding
sodomy at the Synod of Florence attended by Damian in June, 1055, under t=
he
pontificate of Pope Victor II (1055-1057). Almost 50 years after Damian's
death, the Council of Nabus assembled in 1120 under the direction of Garm=
und,
Patriarch of Jerusalem and Baldwin, king of Jerusalem, continued to issue
edicts and penalties against the vice and crime of sodomy. We a=
lso
knew that Saint Anselm (1033-1109) as the Archbishop of Canterbury, Engla=
nd,
confirmed Damian's thesis of the wide-spread practice of sodomy not only
among clergy, but commoner and courtier as well, when he started that &qu=
ot;
...this sin (sodomy) has been publicly committed to such an extent that it
scarcely makes anyone blush, and that many have fallen into it in ignoran=
ce
of its gravity." (p. 59) From
Christendom to the Rise of the Mrs.=
Engel
provides a comprehensive historical review of the influence of sodomy in =
the
Renaissance and the subsequent rise of the modern secular state that
encompasses two riveting chapters in The Rite of Sodomy. Much as we would
like to assure ourselves that the unchecked spread of this vice has occur=
red
only in our own day as a result of "activist judges" and a few
activist organizations, the truth is that devil took full advantage of the
overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King during the Protestant Re=
volt
and thereafter to spread all manner of poisons abroad in one nation after
another. While some of those poisons would only come to the surface at the
end of the Nineteenth Century and become quite in their boldness for all =
to
see at the end of the Twentieth Century, as the conciliar church was
enveloped from the top down in adapting itself to some of these poisons, =
the
poisons had been lurking underground for about half of a millennium. Mrs.=
Engel
devotes another chapter to the contributions made by sodomite behavior in=
the
case of the Cambridge Spies in the British intelligence service, men whose
lives of perversity were used against them by the Was =
the
official cover-up by the British Establishment of the horrendous deeds of=
the
Mrs.=
Engel
continued a few paragraphs later to note: Ther=
e is a
similarity between a secular traitor's hatred of the Social Order and nat=
ion
that nurtured him, and the homosexual priest's hatred of the Roman Cathol=
ic
Church with its moral absolutes and restrictions and authority figures. O=
nce
the homosexual priest or religious is absorbed into the Homintern, his
allegiance and subservience to it supersedes all other former loyalties. =
His
devotion to his family and his faith is atrophied. As F=
ather
[Enrique] Rueda [the author of The Homosexual Network: Private Lives and
Public Policy, 1982] has charged, this new allegiance is capable of
functionally dissolving the normally stronger bonds of religious affiliat=
ion.
Homosexual priests and religious not only foster dissension within the Ch=
urch
in matters of sexual morality, they also use the Church and its resources=
to
spread the teaching and propaganda of the Homintern. Neit=
her
the State nor the Church can afford to ignore the presence of vice in its
midst. The
treacherous exploits of the As M=
rs.
Engel notes in two chapters at the end of her book, the betrayal of the F=
aith
by the contemporary sodomites is but part and parcel of the larger agenda=
of
Revolution in the very structures of conciliarism that began with the
pontificate of Angelo Roncalli, John XIII. Indeed, as will be seen later,
Mrs. Engel relies upon Mary Ball Martinez's The Undermining of the Cathol=
ic
Church that was cited on this site four months ago in an initial review of
the words and the work of a priest who had helped to plan the Revolution's
agenda, one Father Joseph Ratzinger. The Methods of the Homosexual Collective Sect=
ion II
of The Rite of Sodomy: Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church contai=
ns
three chapters that deal with some pretty graphic material on the nature =
of
the vice under review. A great deal of scientific data is presented here.=
As
noted at the beginning of this review, this section might be useful to he=
lp a
relative or a friend caught up in the grip of unnatural vice to see the
objective evidence about its inherent degeneracy and the harm that it doe=
s to
his own body, no less his immortal soul. Ultimately, though, it is not th=
is
sort of graphic material that is going to convert anyone out of a life of
persistence in vice, whether natural or unnatural. One must come to love =
God
as He has revealed Himself exclusively through His Catholic Church and
resolve never to offend Him again by falling into Mortal Sins of any kind,
relying upon the supernatural helps He has left us by means of the sacram=
ents
to leave a world of vice and perversion and corruption and to scale the
heights of personal sanctity. Admi=
ttedly,
of course, this is all the more difficult to stress as Benedict XVI wrote=
in
Principles of Catholic Theology that the sacraments are not to be viewed =
in
an "individualistic" way, a total denial of the dogmatic teachi=
ng
of the Council of Trent on the nature of the sacraments, which were
instituted precisely to bestow and to increase the life of Sanctifying Gr=
ace
in the souls of individual men. How can those steeped in sin today be ins=
pired
to quit their sins for the right reason, that is for love of God and by a
fervent cooperation with the graces that flow to us from Our Lady's hands=
in
the sacraments, when many, although certainly all, bishops and priests in=
the
conciliar structures believe that it is not truly necessary to reform one=
's
life by the rooting out of sin, that we should take comfort in the abject=
lie
that God loves us "just as we are." He does not. He wants us to=
be
saints. The =
devil
wants us with him in Hell for all eternity. He hates God. He hates each o=
ne
of us because our souls are made in the image and likeness of God. The de=
vil
will seek to use all manner of tricks to keep us from going to Heaven,
sparing no efforts, along with his other fallen angels, to lead us to the
point of despair as we take our dying breaths. The adversary, who prowls
about the world like a roaring lion seeking the ruin of souls, has used a=
ll
different guises to promote evil in all of its various forms, including
unnatural vice. The methods, therefore, used by the Homosexual Collective=
, as
Mrs. Engel terms it, are just part and parcel of the adversary's plan for=
the
ruin of souls for all eternity and the downfall of men and nations in this
passing world. Mrs.=
Engel
describes the basic organizational goals of the Homosexual Collective as
follows: The
Homosexual Collective's overall political base is constructed on a refine=
ment
of Hegelian and Marxist-Leninist theories and practices. It is first and
foremost through this political prism that all of its pronouncements,
actions, and institutions must be viewed if one hopes to gain a true
understanding of the movement. Much=
of
the Collective's success thus far in advancing its revolutionary agenda h=
as
been due to its continued ability to: Conc=
eal
its ultimate goals from the general public. The
"vanguard" or shock troops of the Gay Liberation Movement are d=
rawn
from the hundreds of international, national, state and local organizatio=
ns
and coalitions that form the Homosexual Collective. Their main task is the
total infiltration, colonization, and subversion of all social institutio=
ns
that are deemed useful in moving the revolution forward. As t=
hese
mass organizations are brought under the control or influence of the
Collective, they are transformed into "fronts" that can be read=
ily
manipulated by a relatively few members of the vanguard. In addition to
expanding the Collective's sphere of influence, these front organizations
provide numerous fellow travelers and useful idiots that are so essential=
to
advancing the primary objectives of the sexual revolution. They also swell
the Collective's political and financial power base, provide an unlimited
source of potential recruits, and serve as a transmission belt for
"gay" propaganda. (pp. 473-474) Mrs.=
Engel
demonstrates that the Homosexual Collective is very much allied with the
occult and so-called Eastern"mysticism." For
homosexual men and women who prefer a more serene, meditative
mystical/magical approach to spirituality, occult sects that Theosophy and
its modern-day progeny, the New Age Movement, offer homosexuals still oth=
er
alternatives to Christianity. Sinc=
e the
late 19th century, theosophy, as proclaimed by its most famous proponent
Helen Petrovna "Madame" Blavatsky (1831-1891) has attracted a
number of spiritual and moral renegades from Christianity. Theo=
sophists
proclaim the universal brotherhood of humanity without distinction of rac=
e,
creed, sex (or sexual orientation), caste or color and embrace an ecumeni=
cal
spirit of indifferentism with regard to specific religions or philosophic=
al
movements. The
theoretical framework for theosophy incorporates all of the ancient heret=
ical
occult systems including Pantheism, Gnosticism, Jewish Kabalism and Europ=
ean
Neoplatonist Hermeticism as well as elements of the Eastern mysticism of
Hinduism, Buddhism, Yogaism and Brahmanism, overlaid with a heavy mantle =
of
good-old-fashioned Spiritualism. (p. 486) Wher=
e I
have read about Catholics praising Neoplatonist Hermeticism and citing
Catholic Judaizing Kabalists favorably? Hmmm. Oh, never mind. Back=
to
Mrs. Engel: Mrs.=
Engel
explained the reason for her providing this background for her readers: My b=
rief
reference to theosophy most likely would have ended here were it not for =
the
appearance on the English Theosophical scene at about the time of another
famous convert to theosophy, one Charles Webster Leadbeater, who in a
relatively short period of time managed to draw the society into a major
pederast scandal. Consider the facts that at least two Catholic religious
orders, the Legionaries of Christ and the Society of St. John, have been
accused of harboring clerical pederasts whose modus operandi bear an unca=
nny
resemblance to that of Master Leadbeater, I think it is a story worth
telling. (p. 487) Mrs.
Engel's description of Theosophy could pass as well for a description of
Judeo-Masonry. Birds of a feather do flock together. Charles Webster
Leadbeater, who had been "ordained" to the Anglican
"priesthood" in 1879 but joined the Theosophical Society in 188=
3,
was initiated into a Masonic lodge in June of 1915, becoming a thirty-thi=
rd
degree Mason in short order. She went on to describe how the case of
Leadbeater, who was a pederast, teaches us lessons today about the
infiltration of sodomites of what she so aptly names as Am-Church, a phra=
se
that I believed was coined first by Paul Likoudis of The Here=
are
the parallels that Mrs. Engel draws between the case of Charles Leadbeater
and the recently exposed scandals of the pederasts in the conciliar struc=
tures: Firs=
t,
yesteryear, as today, young male victims of clerical sex abuse rarely rep=
ort
the crime against them. Second, for the homosexual pederast, the priestho=
od
is an ideal cover. Third, clerical pederasts, like all perverts, lie about
their activities. Fourth, young boys with religious vocations are likely =
to
believe anything that their religious superiors tell them; Fifth, parents=
of
clerical sex-abuse victims are wont to recognize, much less admit, the
existence of the crime. And, finally, the Homosexual Collective, then as =
now,
is quite capable of colonizing and exploiting the religious life for its =
own
ends. By t=
he
time Leadbeater and Wedgwood and Company were through with the Liberal
Catholic Church [schismatic and heretical sect based in Alth=
ough
Mrs. Engel does not draw the conclusion at this point in her book, the
parallel here is glaringly obvious: the whole thrust of the Liturgical
Movement, after it had been co-opted by the Modernists in the early Twent=
ieth
Century, that is, within the Catholic Church was to eliminate all referen=
ce
to man's sinfulness and to the possibility of the loss of his immortal so=
ul
for all eternity. As I demonstrate in G.I.R.M. Warfare, the whole ethos of
the liturgical revolutionaries was to reaffirm man in his essential
"goodness," one of the chief ideological underpinnings of
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and thus of the French Revolution (as I quoted from
Father Fahey in From His Mother's Knee a few days ago). Consider this
telling--and, yes, oft-quoted on this site, passage from Paragraph 15 of =
the
General Instruction to the Roman Missal: The =
same
awareness of the present state of the world also influenced the use of te=
xts
from very ancient tradition. It seemed that this cherished treasure would=
not
be harmed if some phrases were changed so that the style of language woul=
d be
more in accord with the language of modern theology and would faithfully
reflect the actual state of the Church's discipline. Thus there have been
changes of some expressions bearing on the evaluation and use of the good
things of the earth and of allusions to a particular form of outward pena=
nce
belonging to another age in the history of the Church. Mode=
rn
theology? A particular form of outward penance belonging to another age in
the history of the Church? Who believes such things except those who are
themselves steeped, objectively speaking, in states of Mortal Sin and who
want to create a false religion and a false liturgy to reaffirm themselve=
s in
their self-justified states of moral degradation? Penance belongs to every
age in Church history, whose theology needs no "building stones"=
; to
"unify" it with the beliefs of those outside of the ranks of the
true Church, a belief that implies that Holy Mother Church does not have
everything in her Divine Constitution, including the entirety of the Depo=
sit
of Faith, to know the truth of the Divine Redeemer and to proclaim it
infallibly without "outside" assistance from heretics. Sain=
t John
Marie Vianney feared that he had not done enough for souls, that he had n=
ot
done enough penance for his sins and to save the souls of his beloved
parishioners from Ars, from whom he tried to flee on three separate occas=
ions
in order to live a more penitential life as a hermit. God willed for him,
however, to continue his life of penance as a priest. It is precisely the
exorcising of penance and penitentially-laden prayers in the Novus Ordo
Missae that is both a sign of the moral corruption at its very foundation=
and
an expression of its desire to eradicate penance in blitzkrieg from the l=
ives
of ordinary Catholics. This was and remains nothing less than diabolical.=
Oh, =
yes,
there is, as will be pointed out at the conclusion of this review, it
mattered quite a bit that the man who personally approved the work of the
Consilium and foisted the liturgical revolution upon Catholics, Paul VI, =
was
himself a practicing homosexual. The liturgical "renewal" in the
conciliar church had everything to do with reaffirming men in their sins.=
Mrs.=
Engel
also details the work of a very important cog in the Homosexual Collectiv=
e,
the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches ((UFMCC): The =
most
prominent and politically active homosexual alternative church is the
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (UFMCC) founded by
Reverend Troy Perry, an avowed homosexual, in The =
UFMCC
teaches that homosexuality is "not a sin and not a sickness," a=
nd
that homosexual relationships should be celebrated and affirmed! It depen=
ds
heavily upon the questionable research findings of the so-called "so=
cial
sciences" to validate what it calls its "elastic theology."=
; Acco=
rding
to Perry, the UFMCC is committed to confronting "the injustice of
poverty, sexism, racism and homophobia through Christian social action. On
the other hand, [Father Enrique] Rueda states that the primary function of
the UFMCC is to subvert Catholic, Protestant and non-Christian religious
institutions and transform them into political and ideological allies. The =
UFMCC
has acted as a battering ram against the Roman Catholic Church and more
traditional Protestant denominations and evangelical sects. In this ventu=
re,
the UFMCC's Department of Ecumenical Relations, headed by R. Adam DeBaugh,
has proven to be demonstrably effective in establishing "gay"
cooperative political networks within these churches. An examination of
DeBaugh's extensive memberships in a wide-range of "ecumenical"
organizations and enterprises amply demonstrates how the system works. Prio=
r to
his joining the UFMCC in Washington, D.C., in 1973, DeBaugh served as the
director of the Center for the Study of Power and Peace, and was
Administrative Assistant to Congressman Acco=
rding
to Rueda, during his employment at the UFMCC Washington Field Office, DeB=
augh
worked closely with the little known but powerful Washington Interreligio=
us
Council on Human Rights and helped found the Interfaith Council on Human
Rights. He maintained close contact with the National Council of Churches
(NCC), the National Council of Community Churches, the World Council of
Churches, the Ecumenism Research Agency, the NCC Commission on Women in
Ministry, the NCC Joint Strategy and Action Coalition and the Washington
Interreligious Staff Council, reported Rueda. DeBa=
ugh
had a particularly close working relationship with New Ways Ministry,
formerly headed by Sister Jeannine Grammick of the Catholic School Sister=
s of
Notre Dame and Rev. Robert Nugent, a Catholic priest of the Society of the
Divine Savior. In the spring of 1980, Nugent assist DeBaugh in putting
together a series of "Denomination Statements" that the UFMCC u=
sed
to lobby for a Congressional National Gay Rights Bill. Rueda
noted that one of the lesser known activities of DeBaugh's ecumenical off=
ice
was the infiltration of seminaries and schools of theology across the [In =
light
of Mrs. Randy Engel's The Rite of
Sodomy and the material she included about the Universal
Fellowship of Metropolitan Churches, I thought it appropriate to post No =
to
Father Zigrang, Yes to Eric Law (2003) as sidebar material. [This
article was published on The Remnant website in July of 2003, a few weeks
after Bishop Joseph Fiorenza had threatened to suspend Father Stephen P.
Zigrang for offering the Immemorial Mass of Tradition at Saint Andrew's
Church in Channelview [New=
s came
to me a few weeks after Father Zigrang had been placed on an involuntary
leave of absence by Bishop Fiorenza, who was part of the Joseph Bernardin
axis of power in the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/United States
Catholic Conference, that Fiorenza was permitting an Episcopalian
"priest" of Eric Law to speak at a conference being promoted by=
his
diocese that was to take place in Houston, Texas. Eric Law, it turned out,
spoke regularly at conferences sponsored by the Homosexual Collective
chronicled so well by Mrs. Engel in The
Rite of Sodomy. Thus, Bishop Fiorenza was saying no to Father
Zigrang and yes to Eric Law, which became the basis for the following art=
icle
that appeared on The Remnant website and, in truncated form, in the August
31, 2003, issue of The Remnant newspaper. [Rea=
ders
can judge the relevance of the article to the facts in Mrs. Engel's <=
span
style=3D'font-family:Verdana'>The Rite of Sodomy.] The =
final
part of Mrs. Engel's section dealing with the Homosexual Collective deals
with how the sodomites have used blasphemies about Our Lord to advance th=
eir
agenda, citing the case of the now former Jesuit priest, Father John McNe=
ill,
among others, to illustrate her point: In t=
he
Spring of 1981, New York Native, a homosexual bi-weekly (now defunct),
carried an interview with Jesuit priest John McNeill, an openly homosexual
priest and co-founder of Dignity [which supports Catholics who lead lives=
of
active homosexual behavior--TAD], and Dr. Lawrence Mass who helped establ=
ish
the Gay Men's Health Crisis. In 1=
976,
Pedro Arrupe, Father General of the Jesuits, gave McNeill's book, The Chu=
rch
and the Homosexual, a nihil obstat and permission to publish, even though=
the
book clearly dissented from Church teaching on homosexuality and even tho=
ugh
McNeill had made it perfectly clear that he had committed himself to the
Homosexual Collective--both publicly and privately. The
following is a portion of the New York Native interview with McNeill: &quo=
t;Interviewer:
You are a practicing psychotherapist as well as a Jesuit scholar. Are you=
a
Jungian?" &quo=
t;McNeill:
My psychotherapeutic orientation, at least for now, is in the object
relations school--more Sullivanian. But Jung had much to say. Each of the
special qualities he attributes to the homo-sexual community is usually
considered a striking characteristic of Christ himself, like the
extraordinary ability to meet an individual's unique person free of
stereotypes, or the refusal to accomplish goals by violence. The point I'm
trying to make here is not, of course, that Christ was a homosexual any m=
ore
than he was a heterosexual. His example clearly transcends our current
homosexual-heterosexual dialectic. My point is that Christ was an
extraordinarily free and fulfilled human being." &quo=
t;Interviewer:
What bout the many scholarly observations (including McNe=
ill:
"I think what I see in Jesus, is the total freedom to love, to relat=
e to
any human being. Many priests have succeeded in incarnating these positive
qualities of Christ. And, as we've said, many priests in many denominatio=
ns
are homosexually oriented. The gay community, if it were allowed to be
itself, to develop its special qualities, has a major role to fulfill to
bring about the ideal that Christ represented." The
statement by McNeill that Jesus was neither heterosexual nor homosexual i=
s an
obvious denial of the Incarnation, that Jesus is True God and True Man, n=
ot
some kind of sexual hermaphrodite male. Further, instead of an outright
denial to the suggestion that Iron=
ically,
it took ten years before McNeill's superiors and the Vatican Congregation=
for
Religious officially dismissed him from the Jesuits and deprived him of h=
is
priestly faculties after determining that his public dissent from the
Church's moral teachings on homosexuality caused "grave scandal,&quo=
t;
was "injurious to the teaching authority of the Church," and was
"potentially as injurious to the salvation of souls." When they
did, it was with the greatest reluctance on their part. Indeed, it was Mc=
Neill
who made the final choice to remain with Collective and leave the Catholic
priesthood. (p. 496) Ten = years to act against Father McNeill? Ten years? How long did it take Paul VI to= act against Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre when he publicly offered the Immemorial Mass of Tradition thirty years ago this year, that is, in 1976? Instantaneously. And for good reason. A practicing homosexual could not a= bide the return of "that" Mass that reminded him of his own sinfulne= ss and of the possibility of going to Hell for all eternity. "That" Mass had to be suppressed. The corruption of religious communities and the spread of sodomite propaganda throughout the Catholic Church during the pontificate of Paul VI and throughout that of John Paul II continued while warfare against the Church's authentic patrimony was waged relentlessly.<= o:p> Ther=
e is
an interesting story to tell about Father McNeill, who was quite the media
darling in the 1980s. Fath=
er
McNeill appeared on Cable News Network's Larry King Live in 1989, debatin=
g my
late-friend, Father Vincent Miceli, who had been a Jesuit for many years
before being forced to leave the Society of Jesus in the wake of the
publication of his book, The Antichrist, in 1981. Father Miceli was a
masterful debater. Although he was ordained for the Yes,
blasphemy is par for the course for the Homosexual Collective. It is also=
par
for the course for conciliarism and its apologists, which have derived so
much inspiration from the heresy of Americanism, critiqued so thoroughly =
and
irrefutably by Mrs. Engel in her book. Paving
the Way for AmChurch and the Conciliar Church: The Potomac Flows into the=
Mrs.
Engel's section on Americanism must be read by every serious traditional
Catholic. There are far too many traditional Catholics, priests and laity
alike, who have convinced themselves that the false foundations of the No o=
ne can
read these chapters and contend thereafter that the framework of the Amer=
ican
constitutional regime, to which Baltimore Archbishop John Carroll, the fi=
rst
bishop and archbishop of the Inde=
ed,
the "AmChurch" desired by John Carroll and the Americanists who
populated a good portion of the hierarchy was a model for the counterfeit
church created by conciliarism. It was the Americanists among the bishops=
and
clergy in this country in the Nineteenth Century who paved the way for the
conciliarist notions of ecumenism and religious liberty. The moral corrup=
tion
of the clergy that has come into full view in the past few years (but had
been reported for a long time in some Catholic publications) was in large
measure, although certainly not entirely, the result of the gradual
corruption of the Faith in the United States of America as its holy tenets
were surrendered little by little to the exigencies of pluralism and
religious indifferentism. Espe=
cially
important for the Americanist bishops was the desire for Catholics to
"fit in" with Protestants and others, convincing Catholics that=
it
was perfectly acceptable to be immersed in the anti-Catholic culture (an
uncritical acceptance Calvinist capitalism its resulting consumerist
materialism, the belief that partisan politics, especially by means of a
slavish attachment to the Democrat Party, would "save" the coun=
try
and help Catholics "achieve success," the desire to let others
"live and let live" in their false religions) during the week w=
hile
assisting at Mass on Sundays. While individual converts were won for the
Faith in the Nineteenth Century, most of the bishops and priests believed
that that there was no need to Catholicize the country. Indeed, the rever=
se
was true. Catholics had to be "Americanized," and we can see the
devastation of souls that has taken place as a result of this
Americanization. Here=
are
some salient passages from Mrs. Engel's work concerning the early influen=
ces
of Americanism on Catholics in the The
American hierarchy came into being with the creation of the primal See of
Baltimore on November 16, 1789 by Pope Pius VI, the first and only Cathol=
ic
diocese in the infant nation, followed by the consecration of American Je=
suit
John Carroll as Catholic bishop-elect of Baltimore at Lulworth Castle,
Dorset, England on August 15, 1790. Bishop Carroll enjoyed full centraliz=
ed
powers over all the territories, properties, parishes and priests in the =
Cont=
rary
to popular opinion, any revolution worth its salt always begins at the to=
p. Sinc=
e the
Roman Catholic Church is, for better or worse, a hierarchical church, its
structure was well suited for John Carroll’s vision of a new Americ=
an
Church (AmChurch) of which he was to be a prime architect - a Church made=
in
the likeness of the New Republic – unfettered by Roman chains. His
first salvo against the Roman Church was launched at his consecration whe=
n he
deleted the ritual oath to “extirpate heretics” so as not to
offend Protestants. . . . On M=
arch
12, 1788, the priests of the On M=
ay 12,
1788, after implicitly rejecting the concept of a democratically elected
bishop, Pope Pius VI gave the Acco=
rding
to Catholic historian Hugh J. Nolan, “Politically, he (Carroll) was
most acceptable to the Founding Fathers.” He also had the imprimatu=
r of
Freemason occultist Benjamin Franklin who had connections to all the Maso=
nic
Lodges in Acco=
rding
to Hertz, Carroll never concealed his unbridled enthusiasm for the Americ=
an
principles of “the separation of Church and state, sovereignty of t=
he
people, freedom of conscience, universal equality…” and for t=
he
application of those same democratic principles to ecclesiastical
administration including the popular election of bishops by diocesan prie=
sts
rather than by the Holy See. Arch=
bishop
Carroll envisioned the R=
20;Adaptation”
to the dominant Protestant secular culture meant the end of an unsightly =
and
unwashed ghetto Catholicism in favor of a more refined gentile homogenized
and secularized population despite the fact that non-assimilation was the
Catholic immigrant’s strongest guarantee of the continuance of his
strong faith. Carr=
oll
held great stock in the virtue of religious tolerance. Unfortunately,
religious tolerance is not a Catholic virtue. There are the theological
virtues of faith, hope, and charity and the cardinal virtues fortitude, j=
ustice,
prudence, and temperance, but tolerance as a virtue is not to be found am=
ong
them. As t=
he
German church historian, Johann J. Ignaz von Döllinger wrote: &quo=
t;The
Apostles knew no tolerance, no leniency towards heresies. Paul inflicted
formal excommunication on Hymenæus and Alexander. And such an expul=
sion
from the Church was always to be inflicted. The Apostles considered false
doctrine destructive as a wicked example. With weighty emphasis Paul decl=
ares
(Gal., i., 8): ‘But though we or an angel from heaven, preach a gos=
pel
to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be
anathema.’ Even the gentle John forbids the community to offer
hospitality to heretics coming to it, or even to salute them." Among
Bishop Carroll’s many efforts to accommodate Catholicism to the
American “spirit,” something akin to putting a square peg in a
round hole, was his petition to the Holy See for certain dispensations fr=
om
the canonical norm including the use of the vernacular in public worship
rather than traditional Latin. None=
other
than one of Carroll's Americanist successors, John Cardinal Gibbons,
confirmed Mrs. Hertz's analysis of Carroll's deep admiration of the
principles of the American founding, including separation of Church and
State. A quotation contained in James Cardinal Gibbons, A Retrospective of
Fifty Years, which is cited in Christ in the Voting The
dominant idea in the mind of Bishop Carroll, who was as great a statesman=
as
he was a churchman, an idea that has remained the inspiration of the Chur=
ch,
and has dictated all her policy in the last century. . . . was absolute
loyalty to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution of the In h=
armony
in the spirit of the separation of Church and State. In harmony with the
spirit of pluralism. In harmony with the spirit of the belief that it was=
not
necessary to convert the nation to the true Faith so that it became
confessionally Catholic. No, Mrs. Hertz or other anti-Americanists, inclu=
ding
me, are not engaged in "special pleading" (tailoring the facts =
to
fit preconceived conclusions). Cardinal Gibbons's own words prove the
validity of the claim that the Americanist bishops did indeed want to fos=
ter an
American Catholic Church, something that Pope Leo XIII himself noted in
Testem Benevolentiae, January 22, 1899: But =
if
[Americanism] is to be used not only to signify, but even to commend the
above doctrines, there can be no doubt but that our Venerable Brethren the
bishops of the America would be the first to repudiate and condemn it, as
being especially unjust to them and to the entire nation as well. For it
[Americanism] raises the suspicion that there are some among you who conc=
eive
of and desire a church in Mrs.=
Engel
provides a very good summary of the battles between the Americanist bisho=
ps
and the anti-Americanist bishops. The open opposition of the Americanist
bishops to papal documents, such as Pope Gregory XVI's Mirari Vos, 1832,
condemning liberalism in all of its forms, including the separation of the
Church and State, was quite blunt. Bishop John Mrs.
Engel's narrative on this matter shows the parallel between the spirit of
Americanism in the Nineteenth Century and conciliarism in our own day: Shor=
tly
after the publication of the Syllabus, that was 12 years in the making,
Archbishop Spalding issued a Pastoral Letter in which he claimed that Pius
IX’s Syllabus did not apply to the United States under its free
Constitution, but to a form of European “false liberalism” of
“radicals” and hence there were no incompatibilities between =
the
Syllabus and the American way. Spal=
ding
said he believed that the Founding Fathers, Spal=
ding
was joined in his opinion that the Syllabus didn’t mean what it pla=
inly
stated by Bishop James Roosevelt Bayley of Unfo=
rtunately,
wishful thinking never changes reality, and the unpalatable reality for t=
he
opponents of the Syllabus was that the papal bull was a universally
promulgated document binding on all Catholics throughout the world, bisho=
ps
included, and that the separation of Church from State and State from Chu=
rch
was explicitly condemned without exception by Pius IX in proposition 55 of
the Syllabus. Indeed the Syllabus was exactly what the Church’s ene=
mies
said it was - a blanket condemnation and anathematization of religious
liberty, civil supremacy, and modern culture. Sepa=
ration
of Church and State not contrary to Catholic principles? Pope Leo XIII ma=
de
sure that the Americanist bishops understood that the American Constituti=
on's
separation of Church and State was indeed opposed to Catholic teaching, s=
omething
he made abundantly clear in a passage from Longiqua Oceani, January 6, 18=
94,
that is curiously admitted by reflexive Catholic defenders of the American
way: For =
the
Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your
nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by=
the
common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act
without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneo=
us
to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the mo=
st
desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or
expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divor=
ced.
The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even
enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the
fecundity with which God has endowed His Church, in virtue of which unless
men or circumstances interfere, she spontaneously expands and propagates
herself; but she would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to
liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public
authority. Pope=
Saint
Pius X reiterated this in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, commenting on the chi=
ef
goals of the Modernists in the secular realm: But =
it is
not only within her own household that the Church must come to terms. Bes=
ides
her relations with those within, she has others with those who are outsid=
e.
The Church does not occupy the world all by herself; there are other
societies in the world., with which she must necessarily have dealings and
contact. The rights and duties of the Church towards civil societies must,
therefore, be determined, and determined, of course, by her own nature, t=
hat,
to wit, which the Modernists have already described to us. The rules to be
applied in this matter are clearly those which have been laid down for
science and faith, though in the latter case the question turned upon the
object, while in the present case we have one of ends. In the same way, t=
hen,
as faith and science are alien to each other by reason of the diversity of
their objects, Church and State are strangers by reason of the diversity =
of
their ends, that of the Church being spiritual while that of the State is
temporal. Formerly it was possible to subordinate the temporal to the
spiritual and to speak of some questions as mixed, conceding to the Church
the position of queen and mistress in all such, because the Church was th=
en
regarded as having been instituted immediately by God as the author of the
supernatural order. But this doctrine is today repudiated alike by
philosophers and historians. The state must, therefore, be separated from=
the
Church, and the Catholic from the citizen. Every Catholic, from the fact =
that
he is also a citizen, has the right and the duty to work for the common g=
ood
in the way he thinks best, without troubling himself about the authority =
of
the Church, without paying any heed to its wishes, its counsels, its orde=
rs
-- nay, even in spite of its rebukes. For the Church to trace out and
prescribe for the citizen any line of action, on any pretext whatsoever, =
is
to be guilty of an abuse of authority, against which one is bound to prot=
est
with all one's might. Venerable Brethren, the principles from which these
doctrines spring have been solemnly condemned by Our predecessor, Pius VI=
, in
his Apostolic Constitution Auctorem fidei. How =
can
any traditional Catholic, including men ordained to the priesthood for the
Society of Saint Pius X, fail to recognize that the sainted pontiff whose
feast day is this coming Sunday condemned the very foundation of the Amer=
ican
constitutional regime? Why be opposed to conciliarism at all if one embra=
ces
its very Americanist roots? Mrs. Engel, therefore, does Catholics a great
service by providing the factual evidence concerning Americanism's
anticipation of the errors that have infected so many Catholics, includin=
g so
many traditional Catholics, as a result of the ethos of conciliarism in t=
he
past forty years. Prai=
sing
the Work of Revolutionaries and Consorting with the Enemies of Our Lord a=
nd
His Mrs.=
Engel
pointed out that one of the chief Americanists, Archbishop John Ireland of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, a man who once praised public schooling in an addr=
ess
to the National Education Association, provided an unabashed panegyric to=
the
joys of the American way that have so devastate Catholics in this
country--and which were foisted upon Catholics in Cuba and Puerto Rico and
The Philippines following the Spanish-American War in 1898. Lost on the
defenders of Americanism in our own day is this reality: the full might of
the Here=
is
the context Mrs. Engel gave for With=
14
archbishops and 61 bishops in attendance at the Third Plenary Council,
Archbishop &quo=
t;Republic
of &quo=
t;Thou
bearest in thy hands the brightest hopes of the human race. God’s
mission to thee is to show to nations that man is capable of the highest
liberty. Oh! Be ever free and prosperous that liberty triumph over the ea=
rth
from the rising to the setting sun. Esto perpetua! &quo=
t;Believe
me, no hearts love thee more ardently than Catholic hearts …no tong=
ues
speak more honestly thy praises than Catholic tongues; no hands will be
lifted up stronger and more willing to defend, in war and peace, thy laws=
and
institutions than Catholic hands. Esto perpetua!" Chri=
st the
King had been publicly dethroned by Archbishop Well=
, if
anything, the dethroning of Christ the King was merely ratified by the
American bishops. Our Lord's Social Kingship was first overthrown by Mart=
in
Luther, followed in rapid order by potentates eager to take advantage of =
his
heresies in order to aggrandize themselves. The Constitution of the Mrs.=
Engel
also documents that Cardinal Gibbons was not averse to giving scandal to =
the
faithful by consorting publicly with theosophists and Protestants and Jew=
s,
saying not a word about the necessity of their converting to the true Fai=
th
to save their immortal souls: In A=
pril
20, 1884 Pope Leo XIII issued Humanum Genus, the last in a long line of p=
apal
encyclicals condemning Freemasonry and secret societies that began with
Clement XII in 1738 and continued under Benedict XIV, Pius VII, Leo XII, =
Pius
VIII, Gregory XVI and Pius IX. Desp=
ite
this clear teaching of the Church for almost 150 years, Gibbons promoted =
the
Noble and Holy Order of the Knights of Labor, a highly secretive and
ritualized fraternal lodge that attracted a wide-assortment of Marxists,
anarchists, and free thinkers and all around revolutionary and anti-cleri=
cal
workers. The Knights of Labor was the precursor of the American Federatio=
n of
Labor that attracted many Catholic workers and became a hotbed of Communi=
sm
during the 1930s and 40s. As a=
young
man, Gibbons had become totally absorbed in the preaching and teachings of
Father Isaac Hecker, the founder of the Paulist Order in the Afte=
r his
ordination, Gibbons also committed himself to ecumenicalism. As Archbisho=
p of
Baltimore he repeatedly scandalized the Catholic faithful by preaching fr=
om
Protestant pulpits, using a Protestant Bible, and intoning Protestant
prayers. On
September 11,1893, Cardinal Gibbons gave the opening and closing prayers =
at
the World Parliament of Religions, a pre-Assisi happening held at the Chi=
cago
World’s Fair. Gibbons shared the “sacred space” with
Theosophist Annie Besant, Swami Vivekananda, and representatives of Judai=
sm
Protestantism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and a gaggle of pagan witches. One =
can
see that William Cardinal Keeler, the current Archbishop of Baltimore, is
simply carrying on the Americanist/Modernist legacy of John Carroll and
Martin Spalding and James Gibbons. The groundwork had been established for
aping the power of the Federal government itself within the Church: the
creation of a national episcopal body that would come to be dominated by
Modernist theologians of a decidedly leftist, if not Communist, political
bent. This national organization of bishops, first called the National
Catholic War Council and then the National Catholic Welfare Council befor=
e it
was reorganized in 1966 as the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/Un=
ited
States Catholic Conference (now called the United States Conference of
Catholic Bishops), became the principal voice of perverts within the Chur=
ch
in the The Bishops' Bureaucracy and Its Agenda of Modernism Alth=
ough,
as Mrs. Engel points out in The R=
ite of
Sodomy, the creation of the National Catholic War Council,
established to demonstrate the "patriotism" of Catholics in sup=
port
Woodrow Wilson's unjust involvement of the United States of America in Wo=
rld
War I, provided a vehicle whereby unseen, faceless bureaucrats would come=
to
dominate the life of the Catholic Church in this nation, a mirror of what
happened in the Federal government of the United States, especially durin=
g and
after the administration of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (March 4,
1933-April 12, 1945). Yes,=
the
National Catholic Welfare Council did oppose birth control and took effor=
ts
to support family life and to oppose indecency in the motion pictures. Ne=
vertheless,
the general thrust of the bishops' bureaucracy, which was unprecedented in
the history of the Church, was to support leftist policies of the Federal
government. After all, various Americanist bishops of the Nineteenth Cent=
ury
said that Mirari Vos and The Syllabus of Errors did not apply in our
"enlightened" land of religious liberty and cultural pluralism =
and
religious indifferentism. Why should the American bishops consider themse=
lves
bound by Pope Pius XI's Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, which stressed the princ=
iple
of subsidiarity (as opposed to massive government intervention in peoples'
lives) and his Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937, which opposed Communism
and forbade the provision of all assistance of whatever kind to governmen=
ts
run by Communists? Isn't the " Mrs.=
Engel
traced the immediate pre-Vatican II history of the National Catholic Welf=
are
Council: From=
the
late 1950s until 1965 when the NCWC closed its door to make room for the
newly-structured and expanded National Conference of Catholic Bishops/Uni=
ted
States Catholic Conference (NCCB/USCC), the NCWC refocused its attention =
on
domestic issues including the growing dangers of secularism to the family=
and
society and the issue of birth control as a private practice and populati=
on
control as a tax-subsidized program of government. Cons=
picuously
absent from the majority of these statements were references directly rel=
ated
to the practice of the Catholic faith, specifically the Mass, the Sacrame=
nts,
Scripture, vocations, the priesthood, converts, dangers of secret societi=
es
including Freemasonry, the missions, Mary, the Mother of God, the Saints,=
and
traditional Catholic devotions such as Forty Hours Devotion and the Rosar=
y. |