Fr. Thomas Rosica and Professor Gregory Baum: the crisis deepens

"... you have been for me and continue to be a real model of hope".
Fr. Thomas Rosica, addressing ex-priest/dissident theologian, Professor Gregory Baum.


Professor Gregory Baum

[originally published: 1/1/2013]

The words quoted above are from the Witness video interview that aired October 11, 2012 on Salt and Light Television (Canada's "Catholic channel of hope"). This post is about the truth. Albeit it involves persons - for truth is actualized via the person - but it is not an ad hominem attack. Nor should it be construed as such. It is, to adopt a quote from Msgr. Vincent Foy, "a search for the truth" about the identity of S+ L. It is to ask questions about a public interview, which, as a result, has resulted in confusion and scandal; a serious questioning of the Catholic identity of S + L.


“What is taught by the Church on contraception is not one of the matters that may be freely disputed by theologians. To teach the contrary is the equivalent to leading the conscience of spouses into error”.

Pope John Paul II, 1987

A little background. Back in the late 1960s, then Fr. Gregory Baum (having achieved some fame as a peritus at the Council) achieved far greater public notice in Canada with his opposition to Humanae vitae. Fr. Baum was amongst a number of well-known Canadian theologians who rebelled against the Pope with regard to Catholic morality (c.f. Foy, 1997). Msgr. Vincent Foy would eventually refer to the former priest as an "arch-dissenter" (Foy, p.33, 1997), a man who had inflicted incalculable harm on the Church in Canada, particularly as a theological advisor to the dissenting Winnipeg Statement. Regarding the 1968 attack and undermining of Humanae vitae, Msgr. Foy wrote: 'other signs of impending rebellion came from various dissident groups and from Fr. Gregory Baum, writing on August 1 in the Toronto Globe and Mail that "Catholics may follow their consciences" and that the Church could well be mistaken as it was not a case of infallible teaching' (Foy, pp.12-13). The rebellion continued in the Church since the issuance of the encyclical. Indeed, given wide spread dissent, the opposition of dissident theologians, the silence of priests in preaching and teaching on the sacredness of the marital act and the illicitness of contraception, the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith once again, in 1988, issued a statement on its evils. It is beyond this post to discuss Professor Baum's view of the Church, or his constantly evolving theology with respect to what is faith (immanentism), the authority of the Church, women as "priests" etc. It is enough to know that he was and remains a dissident in matters of faith and morals.


"Recently a group of priests from a European country issued a summons to disobedience, and at the same time gave concrete examples of the forms this disobedience might take, even to the point of disregarding definitive decisions of the Church’s Magisterium, such as the question of women’s ordination, for which Blessed Pope John Paul II stated irrevocably that the Church has received no authority from the Lord. Is disobedience a path of renewal for the Church"?
Pope Benedict XVI, Chrism Mass, 2012


Much has been, and will continue to be written and discussed on the internet about the S+L interview. Fr. Rosica, in an attempt to quell the rising chorus of criticism, responded in a blog by critiquing Mr. Michael Voris. The blog entry was a serious miscalculation as it raised more questions without answering any (the combox being closed after a strong reaction against the Rosica-Baum interview). The fact is, the controversy is not about ex-Fr. Baum's being a peritus, nor is it - contrary to what Fr. Rosica may write - about Mr. Voris. It is about what actually was said in the interview. Fr. Rosica did, in fact, admit this: "Let those who have eyes and ears to see and hear view the entire interview and not base judgments on others’ interpretation and distortion of my WITNESS interview with Professor Baum". We agree totally. As such, keeping in mind Professor Baum's long history of dissent (e.g. Dominus Jesus), and with the mind of the Church, let us review a number of gravely disturbing statements made in this interview.

At the commencement of the interview, Fr. Rosica addressed him as follows:

"I've certainly admired very much your theology, your writings; but also your love of the Church, your love of Christ, and you help to keep alive - not only the spirit of the Second Vatican Council - but the authentic teaching of the Council".

After a brief discussion of contemporary Catholicism and the rise of a return to orthodoxy, Fr. Rosica commented:

"... many of those who are on the front lines - the crusaders - of the orthodoxy today (I would call it a pseudo-orthodoxy) are among the most unhappy and sad and angry ..."


Developing from the discussion on the point of orthodoxy, Baum said:

"I don't think that we need this enormous unanimity about everything in the Church... I think we are united in the Creed; we're united in the kind of vision that we have of the world, and we work together. But this kind of unanimity - you know - elements, doctrines that are quite removed from the Scriptures - I don't really think this is such a good formula".


As the interview concluded - after having heard Professor Baum speak negatively about unity in the Faith [which is nothing but liberal-protestantism]; after Baum had just stated that the Church teaches doctrines not found in Sacred Scripture [ again, classical protestantism !!], Fr. Rosica addressed Baum thus:

"... you remain a faithful, deeply devoted Catholic; you love Jesus, the Church, the Eucharist".


What are we to make of all this? On the surface, this interview seems to portray Fr. Rosica as a man who leads with his emotions, not his intellect. While it is true that Pope Benedict can maintain a friendly relationship with Hans Kung, he is, nevertheless, aware of the theological differences between them. Fr. Rosica obviously has some positive feelings for Gregory Baum with whom he is a personal friend, and there is nothing wrong with that. Could it be that he seems to be incapable of separating his feelings from the intellectual content of Baum's position? Might Fr. Rosica actually disapprove of Professor Baum's dissident theology? Or, does the problem with the interview go deeper?


Might it be Fr. Rosica approves of Baum's theology (or aspects of it)? Might it be Fr. Rosica's position that it is possible to believe that the Church teaches doctrines "removed from Scriptures" and yet be a "faithful, deeply devout Catholic"? If so, such a position is contrary to the teachings of the Church (c.f. commentary on Ad Tuendam Fidem). With his concluding remarks (as quoted above) is Fr. Rosica implying that one may be a faithful Catholic yet hold the views that Professor Baum does? Let us be quite honest: this is the thought that many will be left with. Others may - at best - be utterly confused. Fr. Rosica has yet to explain himself. He has yet to explain how a dissenter from the Faith can be a "real model of hope" for a Catholic - indeed, for a Catholic priest. The Church is our Mother and Teacher, to reject Her is to reject Christ.

"...anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church." Ad Tuandem Fidem


This then begs the question: can Salt and Light continue to claim to be a "Catholic channel of hope", rooted in the teachings of the Church...? Tragically, unless Fr. Rosica explains himself, the answer is no.

The Witness "Team"

References:

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: The moral norms of Humanae vitae and pastoral duty

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: Ad Tuendam Fidem

Foy, V. (1997). Did Pope Paul VI approve the Winnipeg Statement? A search for the truth. Life Ethics Information Centre, Toronto.

Peters, E, N. (1998). A canonical look at Ad Tuendam Fidem

Posted by Barona 

Fr. Rosica’s Ironic Lawsuit

Rev. Thomas Rosica, president and vice-chancellor of Assumption University poses Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2013, at the Assumption chapel in Windsor, Ont. He is also president of the TV network, Salt & Light, a nationally televised Catholic network. (DAN JANISSE/The Windsor Star)

In 1962, the noted Thomistic theologian Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange wrote a book titled,The Priest in Union with Christ.  In chapter 3 of this marvelous work, Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange explains the important role of a Catholic priest as “victim.”  He says:

“The priest must be in his own way a victim. Why? Because Christ in offering himself during the sacrifice of the Mass offers also his entire mystical body, and especially his minister who is celebrating Mass. Therefore every priest has his own individual vocation to be a victim in order to become like to Christ.

The truth of this becomes even more evident if we consider the opposite error. Take the case of a priest who shares in the priesthood of Christ by virtue of his ordination and yet refuses to share in his state of victim. Such a priest is refusing the obligation laid on all the faithful of taking up the cross; and this obligation presses all the more urgently upon a priest in view of the fact that he is intended to be another Christ amongst the faithful. (emphasis added)”

So, if every Catholic priest has an obligation, by virtue of his ordination, to be a victim, and if refusing to do so is tantamount to refusing to take up his cross, what does this say about a priest who files a lawsuit against a lay critic? Such is the case of Vatican Spokesman, Fr. Thomas Rosica, who recently filed a lawsuit against David Domet, author of the Canadian-based blog, “Vox Cantoris.”  Can any priest, claiming to emulate the victimhood of Our Blessed Lord, truly be living his vocation as a victim by suing a blogger for criticizing his public statements?  Now, this is not to say that a priest may never defend himself, but as a victim, he has an obligation to assume a very humble role, striving for the good of the sheep, as opposed to himself.  However, since the letter from the lawyer appears to be the first time Fr. Rosica has had any contact with Mr. Domet, can he truly be said to have followed the precepts established by Our Blessed Lord in the Gospel of Matthew?  Our Lord instructed:

“If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.  If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’  If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17)

Whether Fr. Rosica is failing in his duty to be a victim after the model of Christ or failing to follow the instructions Our Lord gave for dealing with those who sin against us, there are two great ironies in Fr. Rosica’s lawsuit alone.  The first lies specifically with regard to Fr. Rosica’s constant (and inappropriate) appeal to “mercy,” and the second is written in the lawsuit itself.

On March 18 at Loyola University Maryland, Fr. Rosica gave his comments on “the uniqueness of Pope Francis and his amazing impact on the Catholic Church and the world in just one short year,” at an event called “The Francis Factor.”  In his comments, Fr. Rosica proclaimed, “We need the Francis revolution of tenderness and mercy now more than ever before.”

In discussing the mid-term Relatio of the 2014 Synod on the Family, Fr. Rosica spoke of mercy for same-sex couples, those in “irregular” relationships and the distribution of Holy Communion to divorced and re-married Catholics.  He said, “it [the Relatio]looked at themwith tenderness and mercy, while maintaining the clarity of a teacher and insisting on the importance of accompanying people in their different and often complex situations. This is not soft mercy or cheap grace, but blatant honesty that comes from the heart.”

In 2009, Fr. Rosica wrote an article about deceased Senator Ted Kennedy’s funeral titled,Senator Edward Kennedy’s funeral: On mercy and misery.  In that article, Fr. Rosica made multiple appeals to mercy with regard to the notorious senator, even to the point of calling out pro-lifers for their “lack” of mercy.  Here are a few excerpts:

• “As a Roman Catholic Priest who is pro-life, I was proud of my Church last week, and grateful for the courageous and gracious actions of American Church leaders in Boston and Washington, who opened the doors of their Church to reveal a Gospel of mercy and hospitality, in the midst of sinfulness and ambiguity of public leaders who are in need of conversion, forgiveness and prayers, like the rest of us.”
• “Civility, charity, mercy and politeness seem to have dropped out of the pro-life lexicon.”
• “To recognize and bring out the sin in others means also recognizing one’s self as a sinner and in need of God’s boundless mercy.”
• “Let us pray that we will become more and more a people, a church and acommunity overflowing with mercy.”

While Fr. Rosica is so concerned about extending mercy to those who are living in a state of grave sin, he seems to have forgotten about his desire that “we will become more and more a people, a church and a community overflowing with mercy,” as he files what looks to be a rather expensive lawsuit against a Catholic blogger.  In fact, according to Fr. Rosica’s lawyers, after making a bold demand that David Domet remove all references to Fr. Rosica from the blog and issue a formal apology to him, the lawfirm reserves the right to sue him anyway.  So much for mercy!

But the supreme irony of the whole thing is found in the list of three main complaints against Mr. Domet.  The list of complaints read, in part, “Each of the said statements, separately and collectively, expressly and by way of innuendo, are false and defamatory statements that … 3. They suggest that Fr. Rosica is willing to act unethically to further his own agendas and to do so at the expense of others.”

Really???  So, if we are to understand the complaint here in its proper context, Fr. Rosica is upset because a one-man blog has openly criticized Fr. Rosica’s public statements which conflict with the Traditional teachings of the Catholic Church.  And, in the act of complaining that Mr. Domet’s comments “suggest that Fr. Rosica is willing to act unethically to further his own agendas and to do so at the expense of others,” Fr. Rosica is willing to file an unethical lawsuit at the expense of a family man in order to further his own agendas.  Did Fr. Rosica approach Mr. Domet first in private, as Our Blessed Lord instructed?  Did Fr. Rosica extend mercy to Mr. Domet by saying that even if Mr. Domet complied with Fr. Rosica’s demands he reserves the right to sue him anyway?  Is Fr. Rosica acting in any way like the victim he was ordained to be?  If the answer to these questions is “no,” then Fr. Rosica has made himself guilty of the very thing he complains Mr. Domet of suggesting about him on the Vox Cantoris blog.

2015-02-19 BY MICHAEL HICHBORN

Really, Rev. Rosica?

Vatican Media Spokesman, Rev. Thomas Rosica is suing a Catholic blogger, Vox Cantoris. 

From what I know, Vox hasn't cast false witness at Rev. Rosica or anything illegal. It will be interesting to learn the basis of his lawsuit. It will also be interesting to see a counter-lawsuit. The last thing the Church needs is to pay out again, this time due to just retaliation rather than restitution. 

The difference between the Church today and the 1960/70's is the Internet, or as Michael Voris calls it - The Great Equalizer. Had this past synod occurred forty years ago, the midterm report would have gone unnoticed by the laity and possibly found its way into diocesan policy, like so many errors after Vatican II. However, the report was actually reported by bloggers worldwide which may have cut it off at the knees. Something did - Divine Intervention perhaps?

Perhaps this lawsuit is a shot across the bow at the Catholic blogging community. If we protest again, if we hold this 'particular' clergy cabal to Church teaching, if we voice an opinion, they will bury us in litigation.

Rev. Rosica takes issue with Vox Cantoris whom to my knowledge has never promoted anything contrary to Church teaching. Conversely, the rev gushes over public dissenters like Gregory Baum.

It's a historical fact Vatican II was hijacked on its opening day by a small group with ulterior motives. It's not reasonable to think they had no contact with each other before the council. Those change agents had a hidden agenda and it seems like their spawn have every intention of pushing the envelop further today.

What changes could Rev. Rosica be hoping for? Who's agenda could he be promoting?

Maybe he'll share his vision on Thursday, March 26 when he's in town.
St. Francis of Asisi Parish, Kitchener, 1:30 PM
St. Michael's Parish, Waterloo 7:00 PM

It's worth noting the Church's most destructive opponents have always come from within: Satan (fallen angel), Judas (an apostle), Arius (a bishop), Luther (a monk). Rev. Rosica is either fighting the forces of evil with us...or against us.

 "According to Rev. Thomas Rosica, president and vice-chancellor of Assumption University, the Catholic Church could be on the verge of its most radical changes since Vatican II 50 years ago.

Rosica, who also acts as the official English-language spokesman for the Vatican, was reacting to news out of Rome Tuesday that recently elected Pope Francis wants to revamp the church’s constitution.

“We are living through one of the most exciting periods in the history of the church,’  said Rosica, who also heads up Canada’s Catholic faith TV network, Salt & Light."

Stop Graphic Revisions to Ontario’s Sex Education Curriculum

Petition published by Teresa Pierre on Nov 01, 2014

1242 Signatures





Target: Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario
Region: Canada
Web site: www.p-first.com


Sign the petition
Sponsor


Petition Background (Preamble):
Premier Kathleen Wynne is preparing to reintroduce graphic changes to the sexual education curriculum in September, 2015.

Updates to Ontario’s sexual education curriculum have been dogged with controversy since they were last proposed back in 2010 when Kathleen Wynne was Education Minister under then-Premier Dalton McGuinty.

Parents objected to the young ages at which graphic content and morally contentious topics were being introduced.

Then, as now, Ontarians want to send the strongest possible message to stop the delivery of contentious and age-inappropriate material to our children at school. We urge concerned parents and grandparents to petition the Liberal government to drop the proposed changes by adding their signatures to this petition.

Please also share this petition link widely on social media and by email!!
Petition:
To:
Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario,
Liz Sandals, Ontario Minister of Education

We, the undersigned, petition your government to stop your plans to update the sexual education curriculum with changes that parents oppose because they are graphic and age-inappropriate and don’t align with the principles of many religious and cultural groups.

We do not believe that pre-pubescent children should be overloaded with graphic information about sex. As their parents and grandparents, we want to preserve their innocence as long as possible.

In the realm of the formation of our children, parents are the first educators and have the greatest authority over how and when sensitive material is introduced to them. We expect the schools to support and not undermine parental authority.

Sincerely,
The Undersigned
Sign the petition



The Stop Graphic Revisions to Ontario’s Sex Education Curriculum petition to Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario was written by Teresa Pierre and is in the category Education at GoPetition. Contact author here. Petition tags: sex education graphic content ontario sex-ed

THE PRICE OF PAPAL POPULARITY

By: Patrick J. Buchanan
10/21/2014 06:00 AM

RESIZE:AAA


Pope Francis 'rebrands' Catholic Church, but will there be deeper change?
WPIX - New York







Normally a synod of Catholic bishops does not provide fireworks rivaling the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, where Mayor Richard Daley’s boys in blue ran up the score on the radicals in Grant Park.

But, on Oct. 13, there emanated from the Synod on the Family in Rome a 12-page report from a committee picked by Pope Francis himself — and the secondary explosions have not ceased.


The report recognized the “positive aspects of civil unions and cohabitation” and said “homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community.” As for Catholics who divorce and remarry without an annulment, we must avoid “any language or behavior that might make them feel discriminated against.”

Hailed by gay rights groups, the document stunned traditionalists.

“Undignified. Shameful. Completely Wrong,” said Cardinal Gerhard Muller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and guardian of Catholic orthodoxy.

He was echoed by Cardinal Raymond Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. “The document lacks a solid foundation in the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium,” said Cardinal Burke. “It gives the impression of inventing … what one Synod Father called ‘revolutionary’ teaching on marriage and the family.”

Cardinal Burke called on the pope for a restatement of Catholic teaching on marriage and morality, saying, “It is long overdue.” The pope has relieved Cardinal Burke of his post.

Voice of the Family, a coalition of international pro-life groups, calls the document a “betrayal.”

Irish representative Patrick Buckley said it “represents an attack on marriage and the family” by “in effect giving tacit approval of adulterous relationships.” The report, he adds, “fails to recognize that homosexual inclination is objectively disordered.”

Cardinal Walter Kasper has been the prime mover of the liberalization of Catholic teaching on sexual morality. When an African bishop objected to the report, Kasper retorted, “You can’t speak about this with Africans. … It’s not possible. … It’s a taboo.”

Hearing this insult, Burke went upside the head of his brother cardinal:

“It is profoundly sad and scandalous that such remarks were made by a cardinal of the church. They are a further indication of the determination … to advance Cardinal Kasper’s false positions, even by means of racist remarks about a significant and highly respected part of the Synod membership.”

In the report voted on by the full synod and released this weekend, the language most offensive to orthodox Catholics was gone. But the synod meets again next year, and the stakes could scarcely be higher for the church and pope.

In his remarks at the synod’s close, Pope Francis mocked “so-called traditionalists” for their “hostile rigidity.”

That is one way of putting it. Another is that traditionalists believe moral truth does not change, nor can Catholic doctrines be altered.

Even a pope cannot do that.

Should such be attempted, the pope would be speaking heresy. And as it is Catholic doctrine that the pope is infallible, that he cannot err when speaking ex cathedra on faith and morals, this would imply that Francis was not a valid pope and the chair of Peter is empty.

We would then be reading about schismatics and sedevacantists.

The Catholic Church is not the Democratic Party of Obama, Hillary and Joe, where principled positions on abortion, homosexuality and same-sex marriage “evolve.” And when did flexibility in matters of moral principle become a virtue for Catholics?

Indeed, it was in defense of the indissolubility of marriage that Pope Clement VII excommunicated Henry VIII who held the title “Defender of the Faith” for refuting the heresies of Luther.

When Henry wished to divorce Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Boleyn, Pope Clement said this was not possible. His stand for marriage caused the Catholic Church to lose England.

One wonders what this pope thinks of Pope Clement’s “rigidity.”

While Francis I has nether denied not sought to change any doctrine, Cardinal Burke is correct. The pope has “done a lot of harm.” He has created confusion among the faithful and is soon going to have to speak with clarity on the unchanging truths of Catholicism.

In his beatification of Paul VI on Sunday, Pope Francis celebrated change. “God is not afraid of new things,” he said, “we are making every effort to adapt ways and methods … to the changing conditions of society.”

But among the social changes since Vatican II and Paul VI have been the West’s embrace of no-fault divorce, limitless promiscuity, abortion on demand and same-sex marriage.

Should the church “adapt” to these changes in society?

Should the church accommodate itself to a culture as decadent as ours? Or should the church stand against it and speak moral truth to cultural and political power, as the early martyrs did to Rome?

Pope Francis is hugely popular. But his worldly popularity has not come without cost to the church he leads and the truths he is sworn to uphold.

“Who am I to judge?” says the pope. But wasn’t that always part of the job description? And if not thee, Your Holiness, who?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

RIP Fr. Kenneth Walker, FSSP

14 June, 2014: 

Letter of the Superior General regarding the death of Rev. Kenneth Walker, FSSP

Dear Friends of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter,

In the midst of mourning for our dear confrere, Fr. Kenneth Walker, one great consolation has been the outpouring of prayers and condolences expressed by so many bishops, religious communities, fellow priests and faithful. Many of you have informed us of the hundreds of Masses which have already been offered for the repose of his soul and for the health of Fr. Joseph Terra. By the grace of God and thanks to your prayers, Fr. Terra’s life is out of danger and we expect him to make a full recovery.

By now you have read on various news outlets and websites about the virtues of Fr. Walker as a priest and how badly he will be missed by his confreres and parishioners. In an age where we seem so centered upon ‘clerical stars’ and are constantly searching for the ‘newest approach to evangelization’, the life of our confrere gave witness to one of the greatest priestly virtues, a quiet and consistent strength, which is a mark of the Good Shepherd who watches vigilantly over his flock in season and out of season.

He has been described by the parishioners he served in the same manner that he would be by his confreres; he was earnest: he was persevering; he was ready first to serve; nothing ever seemed to inconvenience him. Our Lord’s description of Nathaniel perhaps fits him best: he was a man without guile. He will perhaps be remembered as an example to us as confreres more for what he did not say; one would be hard pressed to find anyone who ever heard him complain or speak badly about anyone. As a former professor of Fr. Walker in the seminary, and as superior, I also knew him as one who took correction well; never pridefully objected; and sincerely sought to improve in all areas of formation both as a seminarian and a later as a priest.

In such tragic circumstances I realize that it can be easy to fall into hyperbole, but there was an innocence to Fr. Walker which is rarely found in this valley of tears.

His life and his priestly work here below have been cut tragically short – just two short years serving in the vineyard of Our Lord. But we are grateful for the time he had to serve in the Fraternity and that he was given the vocation that he sought. His reason for becoming a priest was already beautifully formulated in his application to the seminary:

“God, in His infinite love, desires all men to be saved and so achieve their true end. Along with the Church, then, I am deeply grieved by these errors concerning the nature and dignity of man accepted by so many people in the world, which deviate them from their supernatural end. In full view of the situation in the world, then, the only vocation that I could be satisfied with, as a work, would be one that would be dedicated to bringing people to salvation in whatever way God wills for me to do so.”

As confreres we know that Fr. Walker would not want us to waste our time in anger over what has happened; over the gross injustice which has been done. As great as this is a tragedy for us, so too it will bear great graces for our Fraternity: O altitudo divitiarum sapientiæ, et scientiæ Dei: quam incomprehensibilia sunt judicia ejus, et investigabiles viæ ejus! [1] The first grace will be as an encouragement to each of us to take nothing for granted in the call of Our Lord to the Sacred Priesthood. We are His instruments to serve, and must do so always more faithfully in accordance with His will and that of the Church for His greater glory. For the moment let us waste no time, and simply concentrate our efforts in praying for the repose of the soul of Fr. Walker.

We thank the many parishes which have organized Holy Hours and will hold Masses of Requiem on Monday; again, we are humbled by your charity. Fr. Eric Flood, District Superior of North America, will offer a Requiem in Phoenix on Monday in the presence of Bishop Thomas Olmsted, and I will offer one here at the Basilica of Notre-Dame in Fribourg on the same day. The funeral arrangements are on hold until the body of Fr. Walker can be transferred to Kansas. The Fraternity will of course publish these details when they are in place.

Veni Sancte Spiritus, Consolator optime;
In fletu solatium, reple cordis intima tuorum fidelium!

Mater Misericordiae, Ora pro nobis

Requiem Aeternam dona ei, Domine. Et lux perpetua luceat ei.
Requiescat in pace.

Ember Saturday of Pentecost, June 14, 2014

Very Rev. John Berg
Superior General FSSP


Very Rev. Fr. Berg will celebrate a Solemn Requiem Mass in Fribourg (Switzerland) on Monday, June 16, 2014, at 6:30 PM Local time. The Mass will be broadcast Live on www.LiveMass.net and the iMass apps at 11:30 AM Central, 12:30 PM Eastern Time.

Biography of Fr. Kenneth Walker

Rev. Kenneth Walker, FSSP, was born September 13, 1985, in Poughkeepsie, NY. He was baptized on October 13 of the same year at St. Mary’s Church in Wappingers Falls, NY. During his high school years, his family discovered and began attending the Traditional Latin Mass. He was strongly influenced by both the Mass and the devotion of his family, and began considering a vocation to the priesthood. After high school, he attended Our Lady Seat of Wisdom, Barry’s Bay, ON, pursuing a classical formation in liberal arts from the fall of 2003 until April 2005. After the influence of his parents, Fr. Walker always credited the College as being essential to his formation in the faith prior to entering the seminary.

By this time, he was dedicated to the idea of becoming a priest, and attended a vocations retreat with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. His motivation to become a priest is beautifully summarized in his own words, taken from his application to the seminary:

“God, in His infinite love, desires all men to be saved and so achieve their true end. Along with the Church, then, I am deeply grieved by these errors concerning the nature and dignity of man accepted by so many people in the world, which deviate them from their supernatural end. In full view of the situation in the world, then, the only vocation that I could be satisfied with, as a work, would be one that would be dedicated to bringing people to salvation in whatever way God wills for me to do so. This work is best carried out by the priesthood, which was instituted by Christ specifically for the care of souls; for by means of the Sacraments and the teaching of the Faith to the people, the people receive both the truths of the Faith and the sanctifying grace needed for the spiritual life.”

Fr. Walker was accepted to the Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary, the Fraternity of St. Peter’s International House of Formation for English speakers in Nebraska, in the fall of 2005, and began the normal course of studies and formation. His dedication to fulfilling the ideals with which he approached the priesthood was evident in his time in seminary. He performed very well academically, always receiving high marks in his courses. He immersed himself in the fullness of the program of formation, from the life of prayer and liturgy to recreation with other seminarians – especially in his love of playing soccer, a popular sport at the seminary.

After completing the First Year of Spirituality, he was first incorporated into the FSSP, received the cassock, and received Tonsure from Bishop Alvaro Corrada, SJ, on October 6, 2006. After five more years of prayer, work, and study, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz ordained him to the subdiaconate on January 29, 2011. He was permanently incorporated into the FSSP on March 18, and on the next day, March 19, 2011 – the feast of St. Joseph – he was ordained a deacon by Bishop Czeslaw Kozon of Copenhagen.

As a deacon, he traveled to our Fraternity’s other seminary in Wigratzbad, Germany for several months in order to complete further studies and gain the perspective of the Fraternity’s international presence. He also assisted for a number of months at the Mater Misericordiae Mission of the FSSP in Phoenix, AZ. Interestingly, he performed his first Baptism on October 13, 2011 – the anniversary of his own Baptism. Returning to Nebraska in May of 2012, he made a retreat in preparation for his priestly ordination, the culmination of his seven years of studies and prayer life.

On May 19, 2012, Kenneth Walker was ordained to the Holy Priesthood of Christ our Savior in Lincoln, Nebraska by Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz. He offered his first Mass at the Chapel of Sts. Peter and Paul at Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary, and was assisted by Fr. John Berg, Superior General of the FSSP. He received his first priestly assignment that summer, returning to Mater Misericordiae in Phoenix as an assistant priest under Fr. Joseph Terra, FSSP.

His priestly life and ministry at Mater Misericordiae was a continuation and affirmation of the ideals that led him to the priesthood. He dedicated himself to his priestly mission, offering Holy Mass in the Traditional Latin Rite daily and hearing confessions regularly. He was remembered for visiting parishioners often as both priest and friend. Desiring to spread devotion to Our Lady, he made a practice of personally bringing a replica of the “Pilgrim Virgin” statue of Our Lady of Fatima to the homes of parishioners. He also assisted in starting a Knights of Columbus council to aid and encourage the men of the parish in their prayer life and the works that they performed for the community. His works of charity among the homeless population in the area were well known by both attendees of the mission and the neighborhood community.

On June 11, 2014 – Ember Wednesday of Pentecost – Father Kenneth Walker was tragically and fatally shot in an incident at Mater Misericordiae Mission. Fr. Joseph Terra, critically injured in the same assault, was able to give Fr. Walker absolution and the Last Rites before being rushed himself to the hospital.

The members of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter join together in prayer and remembrance of the life and priesthood of Fr. Walker with his entire family, the members of the Mater Misericordiae Mission, and all those whose lives were touched by his. The great outpouring of prayers and Mass intentions gives us great hope and consolation that he may rest eternally in the Beatific Vision, one with the Divinity whom on earth he held in his consecrated hands.

We ask for your prayers for the repose of the soul of Fr. Kenneth Walker and that God in his Love and Mercy might grant great consolation to his family and his parishioners in this terrible tragedy.

Oremus:
O God, Who didst give to thy servant, Kenneth, by his sacerdotal office, a share in the priesthood of the Apostles, grant, we implore, that he may also be one of their company forever in Heaven. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Requiem Aeternam dona ei, Domine.
Et lux perpetua luceat ei.
Requiescat in pace.

Why is the Episcopal Church near collapse?

Prominent bishops are pulling out. Convention-goers were told headquarters had spent $18 million suing local congregations. Members are leaving at a record rate. This is no longer George Washington’s church – once the largest denomination in the colonies.

BY: Rob Kerby, Senior Editor

 

Share1.6K Tweet85 17 Email  Share

The headlines coming out of the Episcopal Church’s annual U.S. convention are stunning — endorsement of cross-dressing clergy, blessing same-sex marriage, the sale of their headquarters since they can’t afford to maintain it.

The American branch of the Church of England, founded when the Vatican balked at permitting King Henry VIII to continue annulling marriages to any wife who failed to bear him sons, is in trouble.

Somehow slipping out of the headlines is a harsh reality that the denomination has been deserted in droves by an angry or ambivalent membership. Six prominent bishops are ready to take their large dioceses out of the American church and align with conservative Anglican groups in Africa and South America.

^{Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies}

“An interesting moment came at a press conference on Saturday,” reports convention attendee David Virtue, “when I asked Bonnie Anderson, president of the House of Deputies, if she saw the irony in that the House of Deputies would like to see the Church Center at 815 2nd Avenue in New York sold (it has a $37.5 million mortgage debt and needs $8.5 million to maintain yearly) while at the same time the national church spent $18 million litigating for properties, many of which will lie fallow at the end of the day.”

^{New York City's “Church Center,” the national Episcopal headquarters, up for sale.}

This is no longer George Washington’s Episcopal Church – in 1776 the largest denomination in the rebellious British colonies. Membership has dropped so dramatically that today there are 20 times more Baptists than Episcopalians.

U.S. Catholics out-number the Episcopal Church 33-to-1. There are more Jews than Episcopalians. Twice as many Mormons as Episcopalians. Even the little African Methodist Episcopal denomination -- founded in in 1787 -- has passed the Episcopalians.

Among the old mainstream denominations reporting to the National Council of Churches, the Episcopal Church suffered the worst loss of membership from 1992-2002 — plunging from 3.4 million members to 2.3 million for a 32 percent loss. In the NCC’s 2012 yearbook, the Episcopal Church admitted another 2.71 percent annual membership loss.

Convention attendees were told that they had spent $18 million this year suing their own local congregations — those which have protested the denomination’s policies by trying to secede. The New York hierarchy has consistently won in court – asserting that the local members signed over their buildings decades ago. As a result, some of the largest Episcopal congregations in the United States have been forced to vacate their buildings and meet elsewhere.

So now, convention delegates were told, the denomination is the proud owner of scores of empty buildings nationwide – and liable for their upkeep in a depressed real estate market where empty church buildings are less than prime property. It’s the classic “dog in a manger.” The denomination has managed to keep the buildings – for which it has little use. However, they made their point – refusing to allow the congregations which built the facilities to have any benefit after generations of sacrifice, donations and volunteerism.

“One former Episcopal priest wrote me, ‘The irony is that after all their property suits to get control of empty buildings, they now are losing their main property.’

“But this cost cutting measure may not be enough to salvage the long term solvency of the Episcopal Church. The church is hemorrhaging money like crazy and no one seems to know how to turn off the spigot.”

“The accelerating fragmentation of the strife-torn Episcopal Church USA,” writes Christian author Charlotte Allen. “ in which large parishes and entire dioceses are opting out of the church, isn’t simply about gay bishops, the blessing of same-sex unions or the election of a woman as presiding bishop. It is about the meltdown of liberal Christianity.

“Liberal Christianity has been hailed by its boosters for 40 years as the future of the Christian church. Instead, as all but a few die-hards now admit, the mainline churches that have blurred doctrine and softened moral precepts are declining and, in the case of the Episcopal Church, disintegrating.”

“On July 8, 2012, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori preached her brand of post-Christian religion while masquerading as a Christian bishop,” reported convention attendee Dr. Sarah Frances Ives.

“She mocked most of the crucial doctrines of the Christian faith, including the God of creation, the Incarnation, and the Trinity. She accomplishes this through her demeaning use of rhetoric. She taunts the Lord by the use of the name ‘Big Man’ and then points her finger at everyone listening and tells them that they have ‘missed the boat.’

^{Katharine Jefferts Schori, national presiding bishop}

“Jefferts Schori then proclaims that she has the answer for this. We all need the ‘act of crossing boundaries’ to become God after which our hands become a ‘sacrament of mission.’

“In this sermon, Jefferts Schori continued her mission of destroying the Christian faith through her rhetorical device of dismissive ridicule.

“Jefferts Schori leaves a wide wake of destruction behind with this sermon: the eternal triune God has been torn down, human beings are to boldly claim our place as God, and the sacraments of the Eucharist and Baptism have been turned into things our hands make. In other words, Jefferts Schori accepts that now humanity, animals and God are one undifferentiated blob. This is essentially a form of solipsism, the belief that self is all that is known to exist. Anyone can see that this is both pure heresy and utter nonsense.

“Episcopalians need to loudly affirm that we are created in the image of God and redeemed by the sacrifice of the Son of God, but no, we are not God ourselves and we are not erasing the boundary between God and humanity. That Jefferts Schori is encouraging humans to cross the frontier into becoming God should be immediately repudiated by all believing Christians.”

“Yesterday,” reports Angela O’Brien from the convention, “the House of Bishops of the Episcopalian Church approved a new provisional blessing for gay unions, while the full General Convention voted in favor of general acceptance for transgender clergy.

 “Some Episcopalian bishops spoke out against the resolution on same-sex blessings. Bishop Bauerschmidt, of the Episcopal Diocese of Tennessee, urged the bishops to defeat the resolution.

David Thurlow

“The Reverend David Thurlow advocated rejecting the resolution. ‘For two thousand years the Church has had clear teaching regarding Christian marriage and Biblical norms of sexual behavior,’ he said, pointing out that ‘through previous statements and resolutions the Church has pledged itself not to make any change to this traditional teaching.’

Likewise, Bishop Edward Little of Northern Indiana stood against the resolution.

“The Christian world is going to understand us as having changed the nature of the sacrament of holy matrimony,” Bishop Little said. “The Christian world will look at that liturgy world and see vows, and exchange of rings, a pronouncement and a blessing and they will understand that to mean the Episcopal Church has endorsed same-sex marriage and changed a basic Christian doctrine. I do not believe that we are free to do that.”

But few observers were surprised by the transgender and same-sex resolutions.

A few years ago, the annual national Episcopal convention overwhelmingly refused even to consider a resolution affirming that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Upon returning home from that meeting, Bishop Peter H. Beckwith, leader of the Springfield, Illinois, diocese, wrote in a pastoral letter that the Episcopal church was “in meltdown.”

Beckwith has joined bishops in the dioceses of Central Florida, Dallas, Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, California, and South Carolina in asking their church’s top official, the Archbishop of Canterbury in England, for permission to pull out.

Beckwith says the failure of the resolution introduced by conservatives to declare the church’s “unchanging commitment to Jesus Christ as the son of God, the only name by which any person may be saved” was extremely disturbing.

“When a Christian church cannot bring itself to endorse a bedrock Christian theological statement repeatedly found in the New Testament, it is not a serious Christian church,” wrote Allen.

At this year’s convention, David Virtue reported: “In all the talk about same sex this and transgender that, there is absolutely no talk about sin. A psychologist friend of mine opined that talk of ‘sin’ here would be considered psychologically damaging and offensive to a lot of people, especially gays, so it is off the radar screen. ‘No sin, please; we’re Episcopalians.’

“The national Episcopal AIDS coalition is handing out free male and female condoms to all passersby. I pocketed a few just in case some folks don’t believe me.

“To keep funding for youth ministries alive, a 17-year-old girl stood up in the House of Deputies to say that the Episcopal Church could stay alive if it got into recycling. Poor kid hasn’t got a clue.”

Christ Church, Plano, Texas — a large congregation leaving

“It must be galling to the Episcopal liberals that many of the parishes and dioceses that are pulling out are growing instead of shrinking,” noted Jay Tower. “Christ Church Episcopal in Plano, Texas, for example, is one of the largest Episcopal churches in the country. Its 2,200 worshipers on any given Sunday are about equal to the number of active Episcopalians in many of the liberal bishops’ entire dioceses, whose churches average attendance is 80.

“One repeated theme is that the conservatives who are pulling out have no confidence in the denomination’s presiding bishop, the arch-liberal Katharine Jefferts Schori. She allows same-sex union ceremonies in her Nevada diocese and recently used the phrase ‘mother Jesus’ in a sermon.”

Why are Episcopalians leaving one of the oldest denominations in America? Perhaps that can be answered by New Hampshire’s V. Gene Robinson, the openly homosexual Episcopal bishop. When he addressed the fifth annual Planned Parenthood “prayer breakfast”

April 15, 2006 in Washington, D.C., he declared that “religious people” are the enemy.

^{Bishop Gene Robinson}

“We have allowed the Bible to be taken hostage, and it is being wielded by folks who would use it to hit us over the head,” he said. “The sin of Sodom had nothing to do with homosexual sex but was a failure to care for the poor, the widows and the orphans. Scripture is not as plainspoken as some would have us believe.”

When the conservative Anglican diocese that serves the Fresno, California, area voted to leave the U.S. Episcopal denomination, the national denomination did as it has done in Connecticut, Virginia, Florida and Texas, it fought the diocese in court – seeking to seize all property, which includes millions of dollars worth of sanctuaries, parsonages, parish halls and college campuses.

Observer Giles Fraser says that the liberal national leadership doesn’t have a clue. Citing a vote by the diocese of Pittsburgh, led by Bishop Bob Duncan, Fraser explained: “They are sick to death of liberals telling them that ‘gay’ is OK.”

“Anglicanism is in deep trouble,” writes Fraser, “and so, too, is the Church of England. The fact that 46 members of the church’s general synod, its parliament, have written expressing their support for secessionism, bodes very ill.

“Thus far the Archbishop of Canterbury has maintained the traditional Anglican image via media with impeccable impartiality, trying to hold things together with a generous policy of being kinder to his enemies than his friends.

“But the truth is, the only people who now believe that Anglicanism can survive the current crisis in one piece are those holed up in Lambeth Palace” – the Archbishop’s luxurious headquarters in England.

“Fissures have moved through the Episcopal Church, the American arm of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which has 77 million members, and through the Communion itself, since the church ordained V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire in 2003,” writes Neela Bannerjee in the New York Times.

Before being named bishop, Robinson deserted his wife and children to take up with a homosexual lover – something that conservative Episcopalians see as adulterous infidelity severely compounded by sexual sin and perversion – certainly enough to disqualify Robinson from any kind of leadership.

They consider the Episcopal Church’s ordination of Robinson as the “most galling proof of its rejection of biblical authority,” writes Bannerjee.

“In the last four years, the Anglican Communion, the world’s third largest Christian body, has edged closer to fracture over the issue. In the United States, several dozen individual congregations out of nearly 7,700 have split with the Episcopal Church.”

The Fresno vote was the first time an entire diocese chose to secede.

The Reverend Ephraim Radner, a leading Episcopal conservative and professor of historical theology at Wycliffe College in Toronto, predicted a huge legal battle – since the national headquarters has vowed to hold onto any buildings of congregations leaving the denomination.

“The costs involved will bleed the Diocese of San Joaquin and the Episcopal Church, and it will lead only to bad press,” said Radner. “You have to wonder why people are wasting money doing this and yet claiming to be Christians.”

Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Home-Page-News-and-Views/Why-is-the-Episcopal-church-near-collapse.aspx?p=4#co4UJHHY6JXFvRhs.99