BISHOP DUNN ME-TOOS THE POPE: HOMOSEXUALS, 'DON'T WORRY, BE HAPPY'

 To comment please open your gmail account, use my email address juliedufresne@xtra.co,nz or Facebook, Messenger or Twitter. Scroll down for other comments.

So New Zealand's bishops have sided with sodomy. And with the pope - but of course. We saw that coming.

“I endorse the reported comments of Pope Francis," says Bishop Pat Dunn, somewhat obsequiously. "I know that he is anxious for LGBTQ people to know that they are valued members of the family of the Church as they are of their own families. We want their happiness, and for them to know that they are loved.” Well carry me home to die, as my mother would have said. What egregious and erroneous sentimentality. The happiness a good shepherd wants for his flock is, surely, happiness of the eternal variety. Practising homosexuals are committing one of those sins which "cry to heaven" (CCC 1867), and unless they repent (and can we imagine them repenting and confessing to +Dunn or his cohorts on the NZCBC, only to be told, "There there, don't worry, be happy"?) they will go to hell. Not much happiness there. Ever. We'd have thought Bishop Dunn had lived long enough by now to "mind the things that are above" (Col 3:2). Apparently not. Some people are slow learners and God is infinitely patient.  Homosexuals, like everyone else, need to know they are loved by God. Unfortunately - tragically - they won't find that out in the Catholic Church in New Zealand, not under these bishops' watch. In fact they will be actively or subliminally deterred from doing what would lead them to find out how much they are loved by God: attending weekday Mass, praying the Rosary, practising meditation etc. In my parish such misguided persons (all three or four of them) have been called out as 'holy people' whose chances of heaven compare rather unfavorably with the usual Sunday Massgoer's. Pope Francis made the remarks in a new documentary film, Francesco, about his life and teachings. The full quote is: “Homosexual people have a right to be in a family. They’re children of God, have the right to a family. You can’t kick someone out of a family, nor make their life miserable for this. What we have to have is a civil coexistence law; they have the right to be legally covered.”  Ahem, your Holiness. Canon 223 states:    §1 In exercising one’s rights the Christian faithful, as individuals and as united in associations, must have the rationale of the common good of the Church, and the rights of others, and their duties for others. Even common sense tells us that an individual's 'rights' stop at the point where they collide with the 'rights' of other people. If an overtly homosexual adult family member were exerting a harmful effect on his/her siblings (who have a right to protection from moral harm), the parents would have the right to ask the homosexual to leave the family home. The parents then, would not 'make (the homosexual's) life miserable; an actively homosexual life is per se 'miserable' because it offends God. And "the common good of the Church" demands that God's Commandments be kept, and be seen to be kept - if only to avoid the sort of scandal that the pope himself (eagerly aided and abetted by Bishop Dunn) is visiting on the Church. It's Caesar's business (i.e. the government's business), is it not, to ensure the 'right' of homosexuals' 'to be legally covered', not the Church's business? The Church should stick to Her knitting, in particular attending to the massive holes in the warp and weft of Church life caused by all these dropped stitches.  Think how hard it is for priests faithful to Church teaching to get up into the pulpit (yes there are such priests still; not all priests stroll down into the nave to get comfy with the plebs) and contradict the Vicar of Christ - a title, by the way, which the pope refuses to go by. Think also of the blowback they'll get from parishioners who choose to be faithful to the NZ bishops and the pope rather than to the Church; in other words obeying man, not God.  I was privileged to hear one such sermon today, authoritative, clear, concise and referencing historical and theological sources of which alas, I can remember only one: St Vincent of Lérins.   Now I don't suppose Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Kazakhstan, would ever have heard of Bishop Pat Dunn of Auckland, so Bishop Schneider won't have anything to say about the latter's me-tooing the pope. But he has plenty to say about the pope in his latest verbal infelicities re civil unions.   Bishop Athanasius Schneider "The Catholic Faith in the voice of the perennial Magisterium, the sense of the faith of the faithful (sensus fidelium) as well as common sense clearly reject any civil union of two persons of the same sex, a union which has the aim that these persons seek sexual pleasure from each other. "Even if persons living in such unions should not engage in mutual sexual pleasure — which in reality has been shown to be quite unrealistic — such unions represent a great scandal, a public recognition of sins of fornication against nature and a continuous proximate occasion of sin. "Those who advocate same-sex civil unions are therefore also culpable of creating a kind of structure of sin, in this case of the juridical structure of habitual fornication against nature, since homosexual acts belong to sins which cry to heaven, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church says (see n. 1867). "Those who advocate same-sex civil unions are ultimately unjust and even cruel against those persons who are living in these unions, because these persons will be confirmed in mortal sin, they will be solidified in their interior psychological dichotomy, since their reason tells them, that homosexual acts are against reason and against the explicit will of God, the Creator and Redeemer of men." Not only, but also - Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, ex-papal nuncio to the US:   Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò "October 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Yesterday, on the occasion of the Rome Film Festival, the director Evgeny Afineevsky presented a documentary called Francesco,  Among other disconcerting statements, there are several about the legitimization of homosexual civil unions: “What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they [homosexuals] are legally covered. I stood up for that.” "I think that both the simple faithful as well as bishops and priests feel betrayed by what Bergoglio has affirmed. It is not necessary to be theologians to understand that the approval of civil unions is in clear contradiction of the Magisterial documents of the Church, including recent ones. Such approval also constitutes a very grave “assist” to the LGBTQ ideology which today is being imposed on the global level. "In the coming days the Italian Parliament will be discussing the approval of the so-called Zan law [against so-called “homophobia”] proposed by the Democratic Party (PD). In the name of protecting homosexuals and trans-sexuals, it will be considered a crime to affirm that the natural family is the building block of human society, and those who affirm that sodomy is a sin that cries out to God for vengeance will be punished. Bergoglio’s words have already been received by the gay lobby worldwide as an authoritative support for their claims.  "...The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has already unequivocally clarified that in no case may a Catholic approve of civil unions, because they constitute a legitimization of public concubinage and are only a step towards the legal recognition of so-called homosexual marriages. So much so that in Italy today it is even possible for people of the same sex to “marry” each other, after having been assured for years – even by self-styled Catholic politicians – that [civil unions] would in no way question marriage as it is defined in the Italian Constitution. "After all, experience teaches us that when Bergoglio says something, he does it with a very precise purpose: to make others interpret his words in the broadest possible sense. The front pages of newspapers all over the world are announcing today: “The Pope Approves Gay Marriage” – even if technically this is not what he said. But this was exactly the result that he and the Vatican gay lobby wanted. Then the Vatican Press Office will perhaps say that what Bergoglio said was misunderstood, that this was an old interview, and that the Church reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality as intrinsically disordered. But the damage has been done, and even any steps backwards from the scandal that has been stirred up will ultimately be a step forward in the direction of mainstream thought and what is politically correct. Let us not forget the nefarious results of his famous utterance in 2013 – “Who am I to judge?” – which earned him a place on the cover of The Advocate along with the title “Man of the Year.” "Bergoglio has declared: “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it.” All the baptized are children of God: this is what the Gospel teaches. But these children may be either good or evil, and if they break God’s Commandments, the fact that they are His children will not prevent them from being punished, just as an Italian who steals does not avoid going to prison solely because of the fact that he is a citizen of the nation where he commits the crime. The Mercy of God does not prescind from Justice, and if we think of how in order to redeem us the Lord shed His Blood on the Cross, we cannot but strive for holiness, conforming our behavior to His will. Our Lord has said: “You are my friends, if you do what I command you” (Jn 15:14). "If familial or social exclusion results from provocative behaviors or from ideological claims that cannot be shared – I am thinking of Gay Pride – this is only the result of an attitude of challenge, and thus such exclusion has its origin in those who use that attitude to hurt their neighbor. If instead that discrimination results only from being a person who behaves like everyone else with respect for others and without any imposition of one’s own lifestyle, it should be rightly condemned. "We know very well that what the homosexualist lobby wants to obtain is not the integration of normal and honest people but rather the imposition of seriously sinful, socially destabilizing models of life that have always been exploited to demolish the family and society. It is no coincidence that the promotion of the homosexual agenda is part of the globalist project, in conjunction with the destruction of the natural family. "One of the most ardent supporters of the LGBTQ agenda and of the indiscriminate welcoming of homosexuals in the Church, the Jesuit James Martin, has been made a Consultor in the Dicastery for Communication of the Holy See. As soon as the news came out about Bergoglio’s statements, Martin stormed social media with tweets, expressing his uncontainable satisfaction with this action which, in contrast, scandalized the majority of the faithful. "Along with Father Martin, there are cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests, and other clerics who belong to the so-called “lavender mafia.” Some of these have been investigated and condemned for very grave crimes, almost always linked to homosexual environments. How can we think that a clique of homosexuals in the command post does not have every interest in pushing Bergoglio to defend a vice that they share and practice? "In fact, I would say that it is part of Bergoglio’s intended behavior that he plays with equivocation and provocation – such as when he said, “God is not Catholic,” or when he leaves it to others to finish a discourse which he initiates. We have seen this with Amoris Laetitia: although he did not clearly contradict Catholic doctrine on the impossibility of the divorced and remarried accessing the Sacraments, he allowed other bishops to do so, later approving their statements and stubbornly remaining silent in response to the Dubia of the four Cardinals.   "It may be asked: why would the Pope act in this way, especially when his predecessors were always very clear on moral matters? I do not know what Bergoglio has in mind: I limit myself to making sense of his actions and words. And I think I can affirm that what emerges is an attitude that is deliberately two-faced and Jesuitical. Behind all of his utterances there is the effort to arouse the reaction of the healthy part of the Church, provoking it with heretical statements, with disconcerting gestures, with documents that contradict the Magisterium. And at the same time, his statements please his supporters, above all non-Catholics and those who are Catholic in name only. "By dint of provoking, he hopes that some bishop will grow tired of daily feeling afflicted by his doctrine and morals; he hopes that a group of cardinals will formally accuse him of heresy and call for his deposition. And by doing so, Bergoglio would have the pretext of accusing these prelates of being “enemies of the Pope,” of placing themselves outside the Church, of wanting a schism. Obviously, it is not those who want to remain faithful to the Magisterium who separate themselves from the Church: this would be absurd. "If canonically it is unthinkable to excommunicate a Catholic for the mere fact that he wishes to remain so, politically and strategically this abuse would allow Bergoglio to expel his adversaries from the Church, consolidating his own power. And I repeat: we are not talking about a legitimate operation, but of an abuse that, despite being an abuse, no one would be able to prevent, since “the First See is judged by none” – prima Sedes a nemine judicatur. And since the deposition of a heretical Pope is a canonically unresolved question on which there is no unanimous consent of canonists, anyone who would accuse Bergoglio of heresy would be going down a dead end and would obtain a result only with great difficulty. "And it is exactly this, in my opinion, that Bergoglio’s “magic circle” wants to achieve: to reach the paradoxical situation in which the one who is recognized as Pope is at the same time in a state of schism with the Church he governs, while those who are declared by him to be schismatic for disobedience will find themselves expelled from the Church because of the fact that they are Catholic. "Bergoglio’s action is above all directed outside the Church. The encyclical Fratelli Tutti is an ideological manifesto in which there is nothing Catholic and nothing for Catholics – it is the umpteenth embrassons-nous [“let’s embrace”] of the Masonic matrix, in which universal brotherhood is obtained not, as the Gospel teaches, in recognizing the common fatherhood of God through belonging to the one Church, but rather by the flattening of all religions into a lowest common denominator that is expressed in solidarity, respect for the environment, and pacifism. "With this way of acting, Bergoglio is a candidate for “pontiff” of a new religion, with new commandments, new morals, and new liturgies. He distances himself from the Catholic religion and from Christ, and consequently from the Hierarchy and the faithful, disavowing them and leaving them at the mercy of the globalist dictatorship. Those who do not adapt to this new code will therefore be ostracized by society and by this new “church” as a foreign body. "On October 20 in Rome, Pope Francis prayed for peace along with representatives of the world religions: the motto of that ecumenical ceremony was “No one is saved alone.” But that prayer was addressed indiscriminately to both the True God as well as to the false gods of the pagans, making it clear that the ecumenism propagated by Bergoglio has as its goal the exclusion of Our Lord from human society, because Jesus Christ is considered “divisive,” “a stumbling stone.” This modern man thinks that he can obtain peace by leaving aside the One who said of Himself: “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through Me” (Jn 14:6). It is painful to note that this apostasy of formerly Christian nations is accompanied by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who ought to be the Vicar of Christ, not his enemy. "Three days ago, the press announced that the Pope will not celebrate Midnight Mass on Christmas. I will limit myself to one observation: a few days ago, in the midst of the full-fledged “Covid emergency,” it was possible to celebrate an ecumenical rite in the presence of the faithful and the civil authorities, all wearing masks. And yet, on the contrary, someone has decided that it would be imprudent to celebrate the Birth of the Savior on the Holy Night of Christmas in the far vaster space of the Vatican Basilica. "If this decision is confirmed, we will know that Jorge Mario Bergoglio prefers to celebrate himself by supporting the mainstream thought and syncretistic ideology of the New World Order, rather than kneeling at the foot of the manger where the King of Kings is placed." + Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop 22 October 2020