San Diego bishop to priests: Embrace ‘LGBT families’, give Communion to remarried

At least three parish bulletins have included message from Bishop Robert McElroy
Bishop McElroy (photo: U-T San Diego)

Bishop McElroy (photo: U-T San Diego)

The following comes from a November 28 LifeSiteNews article by Claire Chretien:

San Diego Bishop Robert McElroy is calling on his city’s priests to embrace “LGBT families,” and to allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion in certain cases.

Following a much-hyped diocesan synod on the family last month, Bishop McElroy encouraged priests to publish a diocesan notice in their bulletins saying the Church will “assist those who are divorced and remarried and cannot receive an annulment to utilize the internal forum of conscience in order to discern if God is calling them to return to the Eucharist.”

“The Synod proposed a spirituality of family life which is deeply inclusive,” and embraces “LBGT families,” the statement went on to say. “During the coming months Bishop McElroy will be working with a committee of synod delegates who will focus on the implementation of these goals.”

The statement, which multiple sources confirmed the bishop sent to priests of the diocese, has appeared in at least three San Diego parish bulletins and is one of the most liberal interpretations by a U.S. bishop of the pope’s controversial exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

The “internal forum” is the process by which a “remarried” couple living in a state the Church considers adultery may “discern,” usually with the help of a priest, whether they may receive Holy Communion. This is at odds with the Church’s perennial teaching on sexual morality and the Sacraments, which stipulates that only the divorced and remarried who live abstinently as “brother and sister” may be admitted to the Sacraments.

The notion that couples who are in sexual relationships with individuals other than their valid spouse–adultery–may decide they are eligible to receive the Sacraments anyway has long been condemned by the Church, including by Pope St. John Paul II in his apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio. In the wake of Amoris Laetitia, it has again been condemned by numerous Church experts, including a renowned philosopher and close friend of Pope St. John Paul II as “completely inappropriate” and a potential “pastoral catastrophe.”

‘LGBT families’
The use of the term “LGBT families” is unusual for a Catholic bishop, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, “A man and a woman united in marriage, together with their children, form a family” (CCC 2202) and family “is the natural society in which husband and wife are called to give themselves in love and in the gift of life” (CCC 2207).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church also teaches that sexual acts between members of the same sex are “intrinsically disordered,” “contrary to the natural law,” and “under no circumstances can they be approved” (CCC 2357).

McElroy has previously called the Catechism’s language “very destructive.”

The synod also recommended the creation of a diocesan office that will specialize in outreach to the “LGBT” population, that he hire a senior level marriage and family staffer whose sole job will be to focus “on all stages of separation and divorce,” and that the diocese provide “formation” on the “internal forum” that is referenced in Amoris Laetitia.

In interviews with local media, McElroy stressed, “Our notion of family is an inclusive notion” and individual “conscience” is the “real core of Catholic teaching.”




To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.


  1. Here we go. 🙁

  2. helen wheels says:

    Good Grief !!!

  3. The internal forum solution has been used by the Church for decades but it was a hush-hush don’t tell situation. Thank God that the Church has decided to be honest about it.

    • So up until now, the church has lied ? I suggest you find other topics to be thankful for. If the hush hush approach is what you don’t agree with then come out and tell the world who and what you are and stop this anonymous name. Remember “who are we to judge”.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      Hardly so.

      Card. Pell: “…Emphasizing the ‘primacy of conscience’ could have disastrous effects, if conscience did not always submit to revealed teaching and the moral law.”

      “Pell quoted Bl. John Henry Newman’s writings on conscience, in which Newman rejected a ‘miserable counterfeit’ of conscience which defines it as ‘the right of self-will’. He noted that Newman… “condemned a conscience which rejected God and rejected natural law.” (Cath Herald, 11/29/16, excerpted)

      In the New Church, neither God nor God’s law can be objectively known: I can now make it up “according to my conscience.” Functional agnosticism.

  4. Father Perozich! Batter Up!

  5. Catechism of the Catholic Church – The Church’s ultimate trial

    675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.574 The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth 575 will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.

    • Church approved messages of Our Lady of Akita, Japan

      “As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.”


      • continued: “The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres (other priests); churches and altars will be sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.”

        “The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them.”

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          “The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them.” (words of Our Lady of Akita, noted by Catherine)

          Words to meditate on, on this last day of the month of the Faithful Departed Souls. Thank you, Catherine.

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        So, since reference is made almost every day to Akita, I thought I’d figure out what she said and whether she is indeed “Church approved”, as claimed. The evidence appears to be contradictory, and representing it as “Church approved” is at least misleading.

        It is true that the local Bishop issued a pastoral letter approving veneration, and tried very hard to get Vatican approval. But he never got any such approval from the Vatican, and subsequent Archbishops of Tokyo discounted the Akita claims entirely.

        • Church Approved Messages Received the Approval of Rome

          Bishop Ito went to Rome a third time in June of 1988 to seek the opinion of the Holy See. “I was worried because of the seriousness of the Message,” he said. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, reassured Bishop Ito that he had acted properly, and gave definitive judgement on the Akita events and Messages as reliable and worthy of belief.


          • For teaching purposes: The paid, infiltrator troll, posting as, *Your Fellow Catholic* is clearly threatened. Hence, the attempt to silence. These Church approved messages point to what is now taking place. This troll also mocked the Miraculous Medal as a belief in “magic metal”. This troll will take every opportunity to belittle, undermine, degrade, mock and even insult blessed sacramentals/objects or devotions and beliefs that honor her. Defeated Hillary, also wanted to break down and remove certain religious beliefs, structures and systems. – “In The End My Immaculate Heart Will Triumph!”

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Not threatened, just looking for truth and clarity. The quote you offered at 2:44 PM is a verbal report by a reporter, given as hearsay. There is no written report, not even a first hand report of the results of the meeting between Ito and Ratzinger. Does that sound like “Church approval”?

            If there was Church approval, why would the Metropolitan Archbishop governing Akita make THIS statement long after the meeting between Ito and Ratzinger: “Archbishop of Tokyo Peter Shirayanagi, then president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Japan, “said bluntly, ‘The events of Akita are no longer to be taken seriously’,” in a 1990 30 Days interview.”

        • ” reference is made almost every day to Akita ” = In other words, this paid operative does NOT want Catholics or anyone to read about or know about Our Lady of Akita, Japan’s, Church approved (worthy of belief) warning messages, to mankind.

          Be assured, faithful Catholics, that you have absolutely hit the core of distinct fear, when George Soros type, paid operatives attempt to silence the Mother of God.

          We’ve had enough of exhortations to be silent! Cry out with a hundred thousand tongues. I see that the world is rotten because of silence.
          — St. Catherine of Siena

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Catherine, why do you keep repeating the lie, over and over again, that I am paid to be here? You have been told otherwise, yet you continue to spread the lie. You do understand that bearing false witness against your neighbor is a violation of the Commandments, and is a mortal sin, right?

          • Ann Malley says:

            YFC, payment doesn’t always come in the form of financial remuneration.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Ann Malley – I am not receiveing ANY kind of payment. Please don’t feed the lie.

            You all just can’t stand the fact that I bring some good, logical reaction to much of the emotional mud slinging that goes on here on CCD.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “…You all just can’t stand the fact that I bring some good, logical reaction to much of the emotional mud slinging that goes on here on CCD.”

            The above is nothing but your own supposition, YFC. One could say, lie. Again, payment can come and does in many forms. Personal satisfaction can be a form of payment.

            As for what I can or cannot stand, you, at least judging by the stab in the dark you just made, have demonstrated that you are not attuned to what motivates me. That is no matter. What you constitute as “logical” isn’t exactly on mark either. As for emotional mud slinging, your own posts are often ripe with what you ascribe to others.

        • Both Pope Benedict and Pope Francis have referenced Akita
          in regards to prayer in their public messages:

          Pope Frances references the pilgrims of Marian shrine of Akita, Lourdes, etc in his
          Saturday, 12 October 2013

        • (cont)
          Pope Benedict 16th referred to Akita and Fatima:

          Fr Riggi said to the Pope, “…speaking of Fatima, you once said there is a link between Fatima and Akita, Japan’s weeping Virgin…”

”In any case, in keeping with the current norms, given the absence of a repudiation of Bp. Ito’s decision by his successors, or by higher authority, the events of Akita continue to have ecclesiastical approval.]
          Revised: November 2011″

          Wkipedia is not a dependable source. Anyone can edit it.

          • Catherine says:

            May Our Lady’s sweet heavenly grace, continue to shine upon you! Thank you, Anna32

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Thank you Anna for contntuing to provide information on this topic. As I said in my initial post, Akita remains in somewhat ambiguous position, and I just think we need to understand that. A fair reading of all the evidence is needed, including the fact that even the EWTN link you provided says that one WOULD expect a more explicit approval document if it were given, and that the assumption of ecclesiastical approval rests ENTIRELY upon the fact that nobody asked Bishop Ito to recind his original document. It should be noted that Ito was not entirely a cold observer on this issue either…HE was the one who had the statue constructed, which is later said to weep, if I understand the history correctly.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Information is also gathered by reading the signs of the times, YFC, and looking to the reality of the fruits all around us. The observable reality of bishop against bishop and cardinal against cardinal is there for all to see.

            Much like faith is a gift of God, when one is in Heaven, faith is no longer required because the realization of that which was promised is all around. So too, the prophecy of fractious division is no longer necessary when the divisions are even now allowing the sheep to fall into the clefts they create.

          • By a close reading of the EWTN summary dated 2011 (link above)
            Akita is an accepted Private Revelation authorized by the local Ordinary for his diocese.

            Although the CDF has in place a process of investigation/intervention
            by both national conferences and the Holy See of such phenomenon
            If Warranted “as has occured with regards to Medjugorje”,
            no such intervention has been announced regarding Akita since its authorization in 1984

            “in any case, in keeping with the current norms,
            given the absence of a repudiation of Bp. Ito’s decision by his successors,
            or by higher authority, the events of Akita continue to have ecclesiastical approval.”

          • (con’t)

            As in all authorized and unchallenged, It is our choice to accept or not accept

            Obviously Pope Frances and Pope Benedict recognize it
            since PF referenced Akita along with Lourdes, Guadalupe in 2013 as Marian Shrine
            and PBXVI associated it with Fatima in 2009 (links above)

  6. As Politicians should be called out about receiving communion at the same time promoting the killing of infants, so should these Wolves for guiding lost sheep.

  7. I do not know about Bishop Elroy, but I was taught that a person must work to have a well informed conscience according to Catholic teaching and not to do so was culpable ignorance. I was taught that marriage is between one man and one woman for life. I was taught that sodomy was a disease ridden dangerous habit that was absolutely forbidden by both the Bible, all approved Catholic Catechisms and common sense about the Natural Law — one does not use the excretory function for the reproductive one. I was also taught that one was to obey ones bishop in all things except sin. My Catholic Bibles and Catholic prayer books, all approved, tell me also to avoid close association with those who would lead me into sin. So I, by the grace of God and…

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      “one does not use the excretory function for the reproductive one.”

      Interesting observation, Anne T. I’d be curious to hear how you think children are conceived.

      • So play dumb if you must, but I am sure other people understood what I meant without getting into all the messy, vulgar details. End of discussion on that one.

    • Contined: with God’s help, I will follow MY conscience.

  8. Anathema sit

  9. St. Christopher says:

    Unfortunately, the Vatican is releasing its attack dogs, like Abp. Pinto, to threaten the brave cardinals who signed the dubia to the Pope. Where are the rest? Can a bishop just do as he wishes, even if he is obviously wrong?

    How can we contact B. McElroy and the USCCB to advise them that we object and that we will no longer pay for their fat life style and morally and intellectually corrupt behavior. Stop sending them money. Give to true Catholic Traditional orders only.

    • Did Archbishop Pinto offer any reason why, uninvited, he stuck his nose into this situation? And what can he offer? His expertise is in canon law, not doctrine. The four Cardinals he not so subtly brands as disloyal are requesting clarification of DOCTRINAL questions.

      • Larry Northon says:

        Pinto is a priest who holds the title “monsignor.” He is not of bishop rank. That said, I find it impossible to even suspect that he made those statements without orders from Pope Francis, especially since no other high-ranking Holy See functionaries have stepped forward to publicly contradict and rebuke him.

  10. The Watchman says:

    God is very inclusive. The only inclusive family created by Almighty God is between a man and woman or husband and wife. What this fallen world is preaching is not of God. I say to you America convert and repent before your time is up and judgement will befall your nation. Pray America Pray!

  11. I guess my question, and that of a lot of us, is where this is all taking us. I can foresee a day when the Catholic church will follow the Episcopal church into moral relativism on all matters sexual, if current trends continue. That would render a restoration of moral discipline a most troublesome endeavor, and signal defeat for all those who attempted the same in the past, as for instance, JPII and poor BXVI,

  12. The internal forum refers to matters of conscience. The most perfect and clear example of judgments in the internal forum would be the Sacrament of Penance. When a person confesses sins, the confessional is the “competent forum” in which the priest is the legitimate judge. The priest judges if the sins are to be remitted or retained (Cf.: John 20:23), what the guilt of the penitent is and, therefore, what the appropriate penance is for the sinner. No other forum or judge can usurp the judgment given in the confessional and, of course, the confessional remains absolutely inviolate under any circumstances and cannot be a matter of public record (Code of Canon Law [CIC], canon 983 § 1 & 2).

    The parish priest may have spoken to the couple…

  13. I hate to say that I told you so, but now I must. The time and money spent on the San Diego Diocesan Synod was an utter waste of resources. With all due respect to the office of bishop, San Diego Bishop McElroy is a misguided liberal. Homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered! Catholics who were validly married and now divorced and currently living with another civil spouse without an annulment, are committing adultery which is a serious/mortal sin and the internal forum cannot be used, no matter what Pope Francis or Cardinal Cupich or Bishop McElroy or the flawed Amoris Laetitia might say.

  14. “The Synod proposed a spirituality of family life which is deeply inclusive,” but it does not include repentance.

  15. In the internal forum solution, Familiaris Consortio guides us clergy to help couples in irregular unions to live as brother and sister. I will continue to do that. For those with same sex attraction, an important component is stepping away from the alphabet groupings of applied identities to justify feelings and actions, and an embrace of accepting one’s authentic sexuality as male or female and all that is created with that. I do not see people as anything but man and woman when they come to the church, even if this is not their current way of thinking.

  16. In 1999 Pope John Paul II stated, “The family is a community of love and life, which is created when a man and a woman give themselves to one another without reserve in marriage, open to the gift of children.” Marriage is sacramental marriage for our Catholic understanding. Family means male husband female wife united in the sacrament, and then children from that union. Other relationships are quasi families, having qualities like a family, and should be nurtured with the goods of the church, but not used to push sexual activity outside of the sacramental union.

    • So Father Richard, here is where I have a problem with Church teachings on this subject: A woman (for this example) is in a marriage with two kids. The husband starts drinking, becomes alcoholic, starts beating the kids and his wife. She files for divorce, as well she should, don’t you think? A couple of years later she meets another man and falls in love and gets married. By church law she cannot go to communion after the marriage. Why not? She had to get a divorce to protect her children and herself. Surely, she should not be punished for the sins of her former husband. This is where discernment comes in.

      • Try reading Mark 10 and get back to the good priest. Perhaps the civil divorce (after speaking with a priest) was necessary for physical protection. That doesn’t end the putative marital bond.

      • Even in our synod document it speaks of communion for those who cannot get an annulment. She would need to proceed to this step with her pastor before continuing to receive Communion while still married to her former spouse. Most of these bad marriages can be resolved if the persons involved will engage the church, rather than just acting on their own. I never have had a petition for annulment denied, because I help the person dig out and present the facts as to why the marriage failed.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Two questions Fr Perozich:

          At 7:06 AM you seem to be saying that people should be discouraged from sexual activity outside of sacramental marriage. Are you saying that sexual activity among civilly married couples is sinful? Among non-catholics?

          At 10:31 AM you seem to say that you attempt to convince victims of abuse to reconcile with their abusers. Is that what you are saying? How is that different than placing a priest back into parish ministry who has been abusing parishoners?

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        Exactly right, Bob One.Even Jesus himself said that divorce was justifiable in the case of adultery by the spouse – certainly a far less dire situation than escape from physical and mental abuse.

        Speaking of abuse: ONE of the reasons why those who deny this kind of solution probably also deny the abuse by priests of children, or just chalk it up to “homosexual” priests.

        The Church has shown so little compassion for abuse victims of all kinds, it makes one wonder why anyone goes to church at all.

        • YFC….We’re not just ‘chalking it up to homosexual Priests’ we’re exposing the real and only ONE cause of the homosexual sex abuse scandal. And if you think the Church has shown so little compassion for abuse victims perhaps you might want to come out of your shell and see the enormous, both monetarily and emotionally/spiritual, efforts that have been implemented to assist those who were abused.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Ronnie, I don’t think the abuse victims have been compensated nearly enough in most cases. Some have lead entire lives feeling guility themselves, even though they did nothing, some have even committed suicide out of grief.

            And no, the one and only cause of the scandal wasn’t homosexual priests. There were plenty of straight priests, and plenty of straight priests and bishops who turned a blind eye to what was going on and transferred priests from parish to parish.

            Your statements just prove that the Church STILL hasn’t learned lessons, and has ZERO moral authority when it comes to telling people how to heal their lives of abuse, wherever it happens.

          • YFC – I hate to have to keep on rehashing this truth which people still are in denial over, but over 81% of the abuse involved male Priests abusing male victims and less than 5% were considered true pedophilia. So take a guess what the rest of the abuse was.
            Of course, some “liberal” bishops did transfer these homosexual abusers, but like in the case of Archbishop Weakland, who was a admitted “homosexual” he needed to cover for his gay Priests who had the same disorder as him.

        • Larry Northon says:

          Jesus did not say divorce was or was NOT justifiable in any case, let alone adultery. The passage to which you refer contains the Greek word “porneia” which means “fornication.” That is sex between two unmarried persons. So the passage comes out to this effect: “if a man leaves his wife and marries another, except for fornication…(etc), he commits adultery.” The true sense is: “unless he is leaving an invalid marriage or cohabitation, in which case he CAN marry validly…”

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            There is no sense whatsoever, and no word in that passage, that can be taken to mean “valid” or “invalid”. The concepts didn’t even exist at the time.

        • St. Christopher says:

          Wow, “YFC” you just never quit. No, the Bible does not precisely say this (and certainly does not intend it). Matthew 5:32 says, “But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery . . .” (See also Matt 19:9). Fornication is from the Greek word, “porneia.” In this context, many theologians consider this to mean sex during the betrothal period. While there is a “marriage” during this period (think of Joseph and Mary) there is no consummation. Jesus intends a man and woman to stay married, once consummated.

        • “Even Jesus himself said that divorce was justifiable in the case of adultery by the spouse ” Er, no. You must be reading a poorly-translated Protestant Bible.

          Here is a short article by the estimable Catholic Answers on the often-mistranslated passage:

        • Your Fellow Catholic says: “Even Jesus himself said that divorce was justifiable in the case of adultery by the spouse –”

          Our Lord never said such a thing. The Greek word used in Sacred Scripture is “porneía,” which translates to “fornication.”

          Fornication and adultery are not the same thing. Fornication usually refers to a relationship between two unmarried persons, male and female.

          Our Lord was referencing invalid marriages there, which are not true marriages; rather, they involve fornication. Therefore, they are a separate case. Fornicators, not being truly married, can separate and then marry others.

      • Bob One: I’m a total stranger, but your hypothetical case described my situation exactly — even down to the two kids. I did remarry civilly two years after the civil divorce. I did not present myself for Holy Communion. I actually was not sure at the time what to do — but I attended Mass weekly and prayed. I prayed a lot… Those prayers – those Masses – led me within a year to find a spiritual advisor and I learned about the annulment process. It was a very difficult and very, very GOOD experience. During that process there was confession and penance and living with my civil husband as sister and brother. It was very difficult and very, very GOOD for our relationship and for our children. The annulment was granted, the fees…

      • I had two aunts, who did just that around the 1950’s — separated from and/or divorced their husbands because of abuse. They got a jobs, raised their children and never remarried. They probably received a small amount of alimony, but I do not know. One of them literally learned to tap dance when she was in her early eighties — taught by her own daughter, who was married to the same man her whole life. The one aunt died around the turn of this century because she ate some contaminated food. Evidently, she was still in fine health otherwise.

      • People who have come from broken homes see that second marriages are rarely any better than first ones and often worse. If the problems are not solved in the first marriage, most often the person brings them into the next marriage. The myth that the grass is greener on the other side most often is just that — a myth. People forget that the grass on the other side needs to be planted, watered, fertilized and cut, too, or it will wither and die also.

    • Very well said, Father Richard. I admire and respect you!

      • St. Christopher says:

        Agreed, Fr. Perozich, except that if an annulment is not granted there can be no communion, never, ever. This does not mean that an abused woman cannot civilly divorce and thereafter receive communion, she surely may do so. However, Jesus did not intend to people to divorce. If the Church cannot grant an annulment, then that woman may not remarry and receive the sacraments. Such issues were bravely put to Pope Francis by the brave four cardinals in their “dubia.” Of course, Francis will stay silent, except, perhaps, to visit some punishment on them, such as “demoting” their status within the Church. Stay strong, be brave.

  17. Do you think it might be time for Bishop McElroy to go back to an orthodox seminary for re education about the teachings of the Church he represents? He surely is off the tracks on this teaching. Perhaps a year or so in one of the seminaries in the mid west might help his thinking and reasoning. Please pray for Bishop McElroy….he needs prayers desperately for leading so many astray.

    • Diego, I’m with you in that Bishop McElroy certainly does need our prayers. As it is now he is leading many souls astray in allowing people to believe that divorced and remarried persons may receive Communion and that such a thing as “LGBT Families” even exist. The only true family is with a male father and female mother plus children or openness to children.

  18. John Patrick says:

    I am afraid that although he is a bishop, he is not a Catholic. His remarks will send many to hell.

  19. I have to say that I was naive about Bishop McElroy. Turns out he is far worse than I feared. He clearly trimmed the sails just enough under Archbishop Levada to become an auxiliary. Now that he is Ordinary in San Diego, it’s Katie bar the door.

  20. Oh, and one more thing: The Diocese of San Diego can now officially shut down the Marriage Tribunal and give all the current staff other jobs to do. Perhaps Fr McNulty can become the new LGBT Czar. Why would anyone in their right mind apply for an annulment and answer that very invasive questionnaire and ask friends and family members to answer questionnaires, when now all one need do is to have a little talk with your priest and bingo – Communion for me with no hassle. WOW!!!

  21. david drewelow says:

    the catechism’s language is”‘very destructive”. the sounds like something uncle screwtape from c s lewis’ screwtape letters would say if a young devil were asking him about the enemy. and his update of the screwtape letters is just waiting to be written in this moment of the church when we see the strongholds of good being lambasted as ‘hurtful’, ‘causing division’, and the fruit of narrow minds.

  22. The Memory says:

    Judas was and Apostle….could the Bishop be a far removed relative?

    Agree with Communion for divorced, if the other party was responsible for the divorce by their actions and also applied for the divorce. Why punish the innocent the second time after the failed marriage?

  23. As the Pope has already pointed out, most Catholic “marriages” are invalid anyway due to poor catechesis. This is the logical outcome of all that.

    This has already been going on for decades, as Anonymous points out. The time to have complained about civilly divorced and remarried couples receiving Holy Communion would have been around 1985.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      You don’t really believe that (“most Catholic ‘marriages’ are invalid, etc”), do you, Dave N?

      Would we therefore be admitting that marriage preparation was almost infinitely better prior to Vatican II, because the great majority of those Catholic marriages lasted, and were hence valid? And who has been running the catechetical programs for the past 40+ years that have suddenly resulted in instant marriage “invalidity”?

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        Or, where are the Progressive Catholic Brethren (PCB) with their “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” defense, namely, that isn’t it a fallacy (similar, they say, to blaming Vatican II for the spiritual winter we are now in) to blame the breakup and supposed “invalidity” of Catholic marriages, tracing it back to bad catechesis?

        After all, according to them, you cant make any judgment about prior possible causes based on subsequent outcomes?

        As the PCB often intone about Vatican II, “correlation is not causation”, right? So, the reason that Catholic marriages break up now, and are supposedly “invalid”, couldn’t be merely because of “bad catechesis”, right? Or then we might consider what Council and its “New…

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          …“New Theology” has wreckovated the catechetical programs, anyway, for over 50 plus years?

          Certain lines of reasoning may lead to dangerous conclusions.

  24. Romulus Augustus says:

    I thought it was bad when Bishop Robert Brom was in charge, in those days we in the TLM were regulated to Holy Cross Cemetery in San Diego next to coffins!

  25. John Patrick says:

    Never thought that I would hear a bishop proclaiming perversity and falsehoods and heresy.

  26. It appears that this is simple ecclesiology: McElroy wants, and wants badly, archepiscopal status and the red hat: he has seen the very liberal and slick traditional-Mass-suppressing Cards. Kevin Farrell, Cupich, and Joseph Tobin (now of Newark: Tobin actually was dismissed by P. Benedict in 2012 from the Cong. for Religious and sent back to a see in the US where it was hoped he would be minimized) found that the most effective pathway to power and to P. Francis’ bosom was to be a sychophant liberal-church puppet.

    Any of us who have close priest-friends (yes in the Novus Ordo; they suffer a lot) know that there are two kinds of priests: those who are in it to serve Christ first-last-always: and the others, ambitious and slick, who…

    • …who are always focused on the next higher chair and more power. Just look at what happened to Fr. Perozich for example, who stood up for the lives of the unborn. HE must be suppressed.

      So little has changed in 2000 years.

  27. Linda Maria says:

    The true sheep of Christ, will hear His Voice, and follow it! Even if it is a big challenge! Christ always gives us the grace, to do God’s Will, in the most challenging situations! Catholics all should be taught, that Marriage is HOLY, one of our Sacraments! It is NOT like marriages of the “fallen” secular world, outside the Church, that does not know Christ! If we follow Christ humbly and obediently, all will be well! The Church already has an annulment process. Our current Church prelates are in error, refusing to abide by the current annulment process, and making up their own, wayward ideas, contrary to Church teaching, on the Sacrament of Marriage, and eligibility for Holy Communion! Best to simply ignore them, and follow…

    • Linda Maria says:

      I will continue, with my post, above. As I was saying, it is best to ignore wayward prelates, who preach nonsense— and follow Church teachings. Then, one will always be on the right pathway.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.