Search This Blog

Monday, January 28, 2019

The Homosexual "Pipeline" is Real: Gay Seminarians are Funnelled into the U.S. by Wicked Bishops

Bishop Arthur Serratelli of Paterson, NJ appears to be one of the bishops involved in channelling actively gay seminarians into the United States. The cover-up and protection of gay clerics continues. Check out these two priest lovers from Paterson. Note that they are RECENTLY ordained. They were brought to the U.S. where they can enjoy the good life and join the lavender boys club.


Fr. Dulibber G. Gonzalez and Fr. Marcin Bradtke have reportedly been friends since before their respective ordinations. Father Gonzalez was ordained in May of 2018, and Fr. Bradtke was ordained in May of 2016. (From Church Militant)


We keep being told that the problem is behind us. What a joke! Homosexuals continue to be actively recruited and given access to all the financial goodies of U.S. parishes as well as the parishes' kids. (Does anyone really believe that these men who are told to stick to "age-appropriate" sodomy will listen?) Bishops and their staffs know what they're doing and enable it. 

How does a bishop respond when caught red-handed advancing the homo agenda? Threaten the lawsuit. Hey, they have lots of money ripped off from the faithful to pay high-priced lawyers to go after critics. 

Church Militant is being threatened with a lawsuit for publishing an article about this shocking reality. They stand by their story. You can read the story about the two priest lovers here and learn more about the massive crisis by watching the video below. There is, indeed, a gay subculture in the Church and it isn't going away soon. 

PARENTS: PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN! IF YOU ARE IN THE PATERSON DIOCESE, YOU CANNOT TRUST YOUR BISHOP AND YOU'D BETTER VET YOUR PRIESTS, BECAUSE THE CHANCERY IS NOT!

8 comments:

Chriss Rainey said...

I cringe every Sunday when within the Prayers of the Faithful I hear a plea for "the healing of the victims of abuse." It is always worded as if this subject is over and done and all we have to do is lick our wounds and move on. Clear the rubble from the street, treat the wounded and go on from here.

The problem is the abuse of minors is only a symptom. The problem is gay men and if we are going to pray, we should be praying for an end to disordered clergy. Then, we would not HAVE abused kids.



S said...

Unrepentant sodomites not in a state of grace can not be licitly ordained. The sacraments they offer are not valid. ALL OF THEM ARE FAKE BISHOPS AND PRIESTS. Further: as far as proper intent; if asked "are you in a state of grace" prior to ordination and they answer 'yes' and are not repentant nor have a purpose of ammendment, their intent after a fraud ordination is of no consequence - its invalid.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

S, I sympathize with your feelings, but I'm not sure exactly what would make an ordination invalid soI looked it up and got this from Catholic Answers. It's certainly a serious sin and a sacrilege to receive a sacrament in the state of mortal sin, but it doesn't invalidate the sacrament. This would be a good question for serious study and input from a canon lawyer.

FROM CATHOLIC ANSWERS

There is very little that would invalidate a priest's ordination. Pope Pius XII, in Sacramentum Ordinis, set forth the requirements for a valid ordination. These requirements were very simple:

The laying on of hands
The words of ordination set forth by the Church
The proper intention by the bishop
A recipient who is not receiving the sacrament against his will
These requirements are interpreted in the broadest possible sense. It would be chaos in the Church if any little thing could invalidate an ordination. Every priest's sacraments could be called into question, and countless confessions, anointings, and Masses would be questioned.

Being in a state of mortal sin does not invalidate the reception of a sacrament. Marriage and confirmation can both be validly received in a state of mortal sin. It is a great offense to the sacrament, but does not invalidate the sacrament. A priest who is ordained in a state of mortal sin should confess it, but he is still a priest.

Someone who rejects a teaching of the Church is also validly ordained. Such a person should not be ordained, but once ordained he is validly a priest. After all, the Eastern Orthodox and several ancient Christian communities explicitly reject certain Catholic teachings, yet the Church has always accepted their ordinations as valid.

Fr. VF said...

Donatism. It's a heresy.

elpine flower said...

Proper Intention on the part of the recipient of the Sacrament of Ordination was always a criteria.
For all Sacraments except the Holy Eucharist, the intention of the recipient can also block the validity of that Sacrament. In the 1978 rite, the intention of the candidate is publicly proclaimed in a question and answer form from bishop to candidate. See if you can read where the candidate declares that he is receiving the sacrificing priesthood:

"Bishop: My son, before you proceed to the order of presbyterate, declare before the people your intention to undertake this priestly office. Are you resolved, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to discharge without fail the office of the priesthood in the presbyteral order as a conscientious fellow worker with the bishops in caring for the Lord'sflock?

"Candidate: I am.

"Bishop: Are you resolved to celebrate the mysteries of Christ faithfully and religiously as the Church has handed them down to us for the glory of God and the sanctification of Christ's people?

"Candidate: I am.

"Bishop: Are you resolved to exercise the ministry of the word worthily and wisely, preaching the Gospel and explaining the catholic faith?

"Candidate: I am.

"Bishop: Are you resolved to consecrate your life to God for the salvation of his people, and to unite yourself more closely every day to Christ the High Priest, who offered Himself for us to the Father as a perfect sacrifice? "Candidate: I am. THE FORM ALSO IS CHANGED

To this point we have reviewed the expressed intention for which a man is ordained. The matter of the Sacrament of Holy Orders is the imposition of hands by the bishop on the ordinand. This is done in silence and is one of the most inspiring parts of the ceremony. The traditional rite and that of 1978 are the same on at this point. But the form of the Sacrament is different.

In 1948, Pope Pius XII defined once and for all which words of the traditional ceremony are to be considered the essential form. Changing these in any way would invalidate the Sacrament. It is important to note that the pope never changed the word s. He defined the words that were already in the ceremonial for many centuries. The form of the Sacrament in the traditional ceremony is:

"Grant, we implore Thee, almighty Father, to this Thy servant the dignity of the Priesthood, renew within him the spirit of holiness, that he may keep the rank in Thy service which he has received from Thee, and by his conduct afford a pattern of holy living.

"The form in the 1978 rite is: Hear us, Lord our God, and pour out upon this servant of yours the blessing of the Holy Spirit and the grace of the power of the priesthood. In your sight we offer this man for ordination: support him with your unfailing love. We ask this through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

"The nature of the priesthood is that which is explained in the publicly expressed intention of the bishop. To which form of the priesthood is the candidate ordained in either ceremony?

elpine flower said...

Proper Intention is required for valid reception of any Sacrament.
In these active homosexual cases as cited in the article, I asked a priest Canon lawyer for the specifics.
He answered that ,"It appears the Vatican must redefine Proper Intention."
The words of Ordination have already been changed.
The Sacrament of Matrimony is annulled for lack of Proper Intention.
This is becoming a hotly debated topic on many blogs.
It is the Vatican that must expand on the impediments to Holy Orders.
Good luck with that.



Valid Reception

While the sacraments act ex opere operato (by the action itself), the graces they confer are validly received ex opere operantis — that is, according to the rightful and proper intention and disposition of the recipient to worthily receive the graces that the sacraments confer. When all the conditions required by divine and ecclesiastical law are met a sacrament is received validly. In the Latin-rite Church, a determination of the valid reception of a sacrament would include several considerations.

First, previous and valid reception of baptism constitutes an essential condition for the valid reception of any other sacrament. By baptism, the new life of grace is conferred and human beings become members of the Body of Christ, the Church. Baptism is the doorway by which the faithful enter the Church and are united to Christ who nourishes them by way of the sacraments.

Second, in adults, the valid reception of the sacraments presumes that the recipient has the intention of receiving it. The sacraments impose obligations and confer grace. And yet, neither is possible without the free consent of the recipient. The only exception to this teaching pertains to the Eucharist because, no matter what the recipient’s intention or disposition, the body and blood of Christ is really and always present.
https://www.osv.com/OSVNewsweekly/ByIssue/Article/TabId/735/ArtMID/13636/ArticleID/6231/Matter-and-Form.aspx

elpine flower said...

Please permit me to cite one more link here on the question of the "Validity of Holy Orders"

Recently I spoke with several other RC priests on the topic. Both stated Proper Intention on the part of the recipient is necessary validity of any Sacrament.
As I commented on in another spot here I did speak to a retired priest Canon lawyer some years back on this very topic. I mentioned specifically the knowledge of practicing sodomites being recruited by ssa Seminary Rectors, Order Superiors and Vocation Directors.
He took a deep breath before he answered and thought for awhile.
That was when he replied that it would appear the Vatican should be more specific and redefine the necessity of Proper Intention for reception of a Sacrament.
Here is a link to someone asking the same question. Read all the way to the bottom and note the priest answering the question seems to be caught up in the same conundrum at the end.
https://forums.catholic.com/t/sacrament-of-holy-orders-validity/142910

Bottom line, IMHO it boils down to Sanctifying Grace. It is either being transmitted or with held , cooperated with or not. Jesus instituted the Sacraments to convey this Grace so we may be strenghthened to resist temptation of sin.
How do we see this today ?

elpine flower said...

With all due respect Fr VF, the heresy of the Donatists was to question the validity of a priest to confect a sacrament while in the state of mortal sin.
That is not the the question being asked.
The question is the necessity of Proper Intention on the pat of recipient to receive a Sacrament validly.