Timeout! … a look at a sample post from the comments to the WSJ article

Comments from WSJ article. If you want some excellent Church teachings, go and read ALL of Blessed Bucky’s comments … AMAZING!

Below are my Top Ten observations regarding this latest silly and pathetic attack upon Bishop Morlino.

1) Bishop Morlino works by intimidation?! How about a case where a group of people solicits the aid of the ruling secular force in an effort to silence the voice of truth within their own faith? Now, are we speaking of CTA and the WSJ, or the Sanhedrin and Pontius Pilate? Looks like the same old story to me, and the typical process for forging saints.

2) 40 (WOW! Really? 40?!) pro-abortion Call To Action heretics issuing an open letter to their bishop in the secular press is only worthy of a story in Madison’s WSJ. Q: Why do they do this? A: Simply because Bishop Morlino happens to execute his DUTIES as a bishop of the Catholic Church as one who actually BELIEVES the Faith. If you have a problem with his teaching, you do not have a problem with him, but the Catholic Church, and therefore, its founder, Jesus Christ.

3) How does the so-called “priests morale problem” compare to Morlino inspiring 30 men to study for the priesthood in this diocese, when he began with about 2? The morale is certainly HIGH somewhere, and it is apparently very HIGH with these YOUNG seminarians. Why all the sad faces among this group of priests? Who is really the problem here?

4) Also, contrast the very HIGH morale of these mostly YOUNG seminarians with the tiny conclave of gray-haired CTA heretics and ask yourself where each movement will be in 10 years.

5) OXYMORON: “Catholics who disagree with Church doctrine.”

6) Let’s be square: The only reason anyone is upset about Bishop Morlino requiring HIS priests to play the 2006 CD to HIS people from HIS pulpits is because they disagree with THE CHURCH’S teaching on these subjects as faithfully taught by the good bishop. If it covered the Diocesan Services Appeal instead of affirming marriage being between one man and one woman (duh), I doubt any of these priests, or the WSJ would be the slightest bit concerned. To reject the teaching of Christ’s Church is to, again, reject Jesus Christ Himself.

7) Richard McBrian is a heretic whose writings have been formally condemned by the Church. Why on earth would he be considered a credible source on anything to do with the Church? Why doesn’t the WSJ mention his writings having been condemned by the Church to give a proper context to his silly comments? And by the way Fr. McBrian, a bishop is, by definition, a “conservative” because he is called to “conserve” and pass on the same faith that was handed down from the Apostles. I’m sorry you’re not in favor of that.

8) What did Vatican II teach about the role of the faithful toward their bishop? “The faithful … should be closely attached to the bishop as the Church is to Jesus Christ, and as Jesus Christ is to the Father” (LG 27). I still haven’t found any mention in the council documents of the “faithful” attacking their bishop in the secular press … especially when they have not accused him of even one sin.

9) Amen to Jimmy Akins!

10) Finally, in order to put this all into a proper context, its important to remember that this group of CTA heretics just attacked, in the secular press, a person their own professed faith identifies as the “vicar of Christ” in their diocese.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: