Good Shepards and Bad Shepards

As it is just days until Good Shepard Sunday, listen to Fr. Pfeiffer's sermon and then read the story below for a practical application of what Father is saying.  What the SSPX will be counter-balancing when regularized is no less than 50 years of false catechization which has led to situations like this worldwide.
 
Catholic pastor applauded for shunning anti-gay marriage drive

 

The congregation at Seattle’s Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church gave the Rev. Tim Clark a standing ovation Sunday when he announced that the parish would not gather signatures for a referendum to repeal same-sex marriage.

The parish became the sixth in Seattle to opt out of the petition drive for Referendum 74 that has been endorsed and foisted on parishes by Archbishop J. Peter Sartain.

“I am happy to report that Our Lady of the Lake parishoners have been overwhelmingly and, thus far, unanimously supportive of the decision I made NOT to gather signatures in support of this Referendum,” Clark wrote in response to an e-mail.

“The standing ovation experienced during one of the Masses says less about me and much more about the health of this parish.  I only wished the archbishop could have experienced the sustained applause — the ‘sensus fidelium’ — of the people.  He needs to listen to this ‘voice.’ That is my prayer.”

Other parishes to shun the signature drive have includes St. James Cathedral, St. Joseph Church, St. Mary’s Church, St. Patrick Church and Christ Our Hope Catholic Church.

In several parishes, pastors have said that gathering signatures against marriage equality would, in the words of the Rev. Michael Ryan of St. James Cathedral, “prove hurtful and seriously divisive in our community.”

Archbishop Peter Sartain

Archbishop Sartain, in a letter that Clark will place in his parish bulletin next week, asked the Catholic faithful in Western Washington to support Referendum 74.

Opponents of marriage equality need to gather 120,577 valid voter signatures by June 6 to block the state’s new same-sex marriage law from taking effect and put the issue on November’s ballot.

The archbishop said that all persons “should be treated with respect, sensitivity and love,” but reiterated church teachings on sexuality that are eschewed by many American Catholics.

“It is important to remember that all Christians are called to chastity, and sexual intercourse is so intimate and significant that it is intended only for a man and woman in marriage,” said the letter, cosigned by Archbishop Sartain and Auxiliary Bishop Eusebio Elizondo.

“When I first read the archbishop’s letter I was troubled by the content and his intentions,” Clark wrote.  “In conscience, I could not allow signatures to be gathered, to allow the faith to be politicized in this way.
“What troubles me is the message this whole approach sends which I find discriminatory and insensitive.  To follow through with his wishes would be hurtful, divisive and a countersign to what we are trying to foster in this Catholic community in Wedgwood.

“I deeply believe, and say this with boldness, that this approach is not in the mind of Christ.”
Clark is grateful that Archbishop Sartain did leave the decision whether or not to gather signatures to the discretion of pastoral leaders.

The conscience-driven dissent expressed by Seattle-area Catholics has been stifled elsewhere in the nation.
The Rt. Rev. John Nienstedt, archbishop of St. Paul-Minneapolis, is pressing to amend Minnesota’s state constitution to define marriage as only between a man and a woman.

In a fiery letter to priests that also condemned no-fault divorce and cohabitation outside of marriage, Archbishop Nienstedt said he would brook no public dissent from any priest in the archdiocese.

“It is my expectation that all the priests and deacons in this archdiocese will support this venture and cooperate with us in the important efforts that lie ahead,” Nienstedt wrote.

“There ought not to be open dissent on this issue,” he added.  “If any have personal reservations, I do not wish that they be shared publicly.”

Archbishop Nienstedt has also mailed out 400,000 anti-gay DVDs to Catholics in his diocese and refused communion to students wearing rainbows at a diocesan mass.

New Deal? No Deal?

Around the SSPX water cooler, there is definitely a buzz.  Some wring their hands and wonder how the SSPX can be an ally of Rome.  Others speak in excited tones about the canonical recognition of marriages and ordinations not encumbered by a latae sentiae suspension.  Priests range from indifferent ("What will it change?") to excited ("Finally .. after so many years").  The faithful, used to instant solution and resolution within the space of a twitter feed, want to know NOW.  Others who have been through it in 1988, 2000, 2005, 2009, etc, just continue to live their lives and raise their families and ask their friends to keep them updated.

Bishop Fellay sent in a reply.  He knew what was needed to pass muster but can't actually say that.  The Vatican knows what the bare minimum ante for admission is.  They held the envelope with the response up to the light and from the few words they can make out, it looks good.  The words apparently were Pope, good, Council okay, Kuhn nasty, "docs need work". Still not time for champagne but maybe, just maybe, Lent is over?

The winners? 

The modern church - get a counter-balance to the enormous pull from the leftists in Europe who openly threaten schism over women ordinations and homosexual marriage.

Pope Benedict - gains an ally from the conservative wing of the church and a hardened defender of the Papacy.  He also adds to his accomplishments, at 85 years old, of bringing Traditionalists and Anglicans into the canonical structure of the church, giving both, to coin a phrase, "canonical status and mission" And what a mission that is!

Bishop Fellay - against considerable dissent from within the ranks, particularly from the episcopate and the French clergy, finds a way for his order to remain the SSPX, regularize its priests, regularize independent priests who are just "friends", regularize Traditional Benedictines, Franciscans, Carmelites, Capuchins, and Salesians (no Jesuits to be seen for miles). And he may still be able to oppose the Council documents, adding his "now legitimately Roman" voice to those who use the Council Documents to perpetrate .. well, you know.

The losers?

FSSP - unless they can somehow benefit from this new structure - like maybe the same deal, why would future seminarians choose a priesthood where you reject modernism in the form of Catholic contraception, Catholic Divorce (annulment), and CINO Politicians who operate unfettered by their Bishops but cannot preach it from a diocesan pulpit without fear of censure?  Could the FSSP seminary become the alternative after rejection from the SSPX?

The ADL - they will be apoplectic and demand that Pope Benedict excommunicate himself.

The Diocese - who could have cozied up here and there to the Society and now finds itself with yet another missed opportunity for revenue.  And who will the SSPX attract from the diocese? Mostly conservative, upscale-trending thinking Catholics who want to escape the Obama-lovefest in the diocesan parishes. And, the SSPX will attract the young, newly married Catholics who rebel against the generation of their parents and their hippie, tree-hugging Our Fathers.  That will be the critical component in the demise of the diocese since this is where any prayer of a vocation will come from.

The Novus Ordo - whose demise would be hastened by the siphoning off of orthodox-minded candidates.  How many more years until there are no modern priests to man the handful of remaining churches?

The Casualties

Bishop Williamson - one of the best confessors who's ever forgiven me my sins.  Unfortunately, H.E. cannot accept the requests of the Superior General to lie low as his persona has been toxic since 2007. In past years, his eccentricities were "overlookable" but now they are so front and center that they distract from the mission of the priestly order.  He chose to be the voice against the canonical reconciliation and his fate, in this scene of the play, may only be retirement.  He could "venture out" as the leader of the band of independent priests and faithful who cannot stomach any association with the Vicar of Christ, fearing that they would eventually be "swallowed" whole by an apostate conglomeration and perhaps lose their faith, or perhaps conviction.  But this can only be a dead end since H.E. does not most likely aspire to be a modern day Archbishop Thuc.

The Reality - if you believe that Benedict XVI is the Vicar of Christ, how can you refuse a request that does not compromise faith or morals?  Is it not, in fact,  your duty to unite with him to help right the barque?

Methinks that the Pope (some Pope, anyway) will be God's tool to restore the faith.

I'll try and keep the lists updated, having a significantly vested interest in all this..