tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post1249358407888312063..comments2023-12-18T09:55:42.480-08:00Comments on What Sister Never Knew and Father Never Told You: The Katholic Krazies: Will The Synod Make Them Walk?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-51731248822860555592014-10-20T18:20:19.780-07:002014-10-20T18:20:19.780-07:00Cozzens's books are excellent, but they tell a...Cozzens's books are excellent, but they tell a story that the hierarchy is unwilling to hear. The sound you hear is the Vatican crumbling. khughes1963https://www.blogger.com/profile/16118365554189078448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-97084123315324942014-10-20T18:18:58.537-07:002014-10-20T18:18:58.537-07:00Spot on about the Krazies, and they are the ones w...Spot on about the Krazies, and they are the ones who have seemed to have the upper hand during the last few papacies. It's interesting to know that Guarnizo appears to be another rockstar cleric who has a talent for getting people to part with their money like Marcial Maciel did. His real story sounds like it would be a doozy. It's when these neo-trad priests start going all reactionary on the modern world that my BS meter goes off. Voris is a real head case. I watched the YouTube video where he told his audience that his model for American governance was a monarchy governed by a king who claimed to govern by divine right. Excuse me, but that model ended up failing in a number of locations, including France in 1789 and England in 1648. khughes1963https://www.blogger.com/profile/16118365554189078448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-62928599490948024482014-10-15T09:08:03.253-07:002014-10-15T09:08:03.253-07:00So glad to have found your blog - I have read back...So glad to have found your blog - I have read back through some of the older entries and found a lot of interest here.<br /><br />On the instant topic - I think much of the blame for the admittedly krazed reaction of some factions within the Church must fall on Catholic progressives--and I would count myself as a "Catholic progressive" but for the fact that I hardly qualify as a practicing Catholic these days. As you have noted, the more liberal Catholics don't organize much, we just disobey or go away, effectively forfeiting our voice. But its not just the silent progressive (majority? plurality? large minority?) within the laity - it is also on the remaining moderate and progressive clerics. The last two papacies have carefully cultivated a crop of bishops that are largely sycophantic yes men, especially among the more progressive. These "leaders" have remained conspicuously silent while the Loris and Burkes of the world (and their lay buddies like Donohue) have been allowed to be the face of the Church. So there has been no voice within the Church for some time willing to say anything even mildly progressive. The best we had was when Lori and Burke were demanding that democrats be denied communion, and a few bishops were willing to say that was not the practice in their dioceses. None that I know of were willing to say more. Now that there is at least some (little) room for discussion in the Church, the krazies are stunned to learn that there are Church leaders that disagree with them and their Crusader pals. The silence of the progressives for all those years led the krazies to reasonably assume that the kind and understanding priest down the street was an aberration, and that "real" Catholics were all hard-hearted Burkeans. Maybe if we had insisted on being counted they would be less reactionary...Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-31483241128643720782014-10-15T05:12:31.172-07:002014-10-15T05:12:31.172-07:00Actually it is not just intuition. I too have had...Actually it is not just intuition. I too have had access to the fuller story and while I may not know as much as you might, I know enough to realize that this man is dangerous to the max. Reading the above comment about Father Cozzen's 2000 book on the American priesthood, Guarnizo manifests some of the worst pathologies Cozzens describes. Consolaminihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09278560268489520757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-90464120498087509042014-10-15T05:10:39.617-07:002014-10-15T05:10:39.617-07:00I have read Cozzen's book on The Changing Face...I have read Cozzen's book on The Changing Face of the Priesthood and found it to be one of the most insightful and helpful --and unfortunately all too true--analysis of the situation facing the Catholic Church in the United States. Cozzens hit the mark squarely but as so many in the hierarchy are thre precisely because fit this dependency model Cozzens describes, there has been little hope for change, Signs are that Pope Francis is appointing more psychologically mature men. Let us hope. Consolaminihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09278560268489520757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-91290603635866892022014-10-14T23:14:50.206-07:002014-10-14T23:14:50.206-07:00Your evaluation of Father Marcel Guarnizo is spot ...Your evaluation of Father Marcel Guarnizo is spot on. He is far more concerned with self-promotion and outside activities than performing priestly duties. Like now, while at St John Neumann Parish in Gaithersburg Father Guarnizo was a self-promoter with little concern for performing the daily tasks required of a parish priest. He lacked the skills necessary to be a successful parish priest. <br /><br />Janet of Gaithersburg continues to claim he was thrown under the bus by the Archdiocese in response to his denying communion to a lesbian. In actuality his dismissal from the Parish and Archdiocese involved more than the communion incident. Additional reasons are only known by a few however I have knowledge of the true facts and can state that your blog posts concerning Father Guarnizo, the communion incident and its aftermath demonstrate uncanny intuition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-47857874797339426862014-10-14T23:08:33.325-07:002014-10-14T23:08:33.325-07:00Embedded in this latest entry as well as the above...Embedded in this latest entry as well as the above comments lies what I believe the most crucial insight of all, namely the psychological impairment and arrested development of these krazies. If you read, for example, Fr. Don Cozzen's The Changing Face of the Priesthood you will find a trenchant analysis from a Freudian and Jungian perspective of the psychosexual basis for the pathologies deeply entrenched in institutional Catholicism. Simply put, the Catholic Church in its human organization is an Oedipal institution and those who are most successful in it betray an infantilism that includes among other things the kind of narcissism and paranoia on display in the referenced blogs. These people are psychologically driven to shore up their positions with such vehemence and commitment precisely because they are under such psychological threat when the institution suddenly and unexpectedly begins to show some sign of maturation. The Francis-Burke contrast is a virtual typology of openness to growth versus massive (and unconsciously defensive) resistance. Their need for Disneyland Catholicism with its costumes, flight from reality, authoritarianism, rigidity and yes, deep reservoirs of anger are all symptomatic of the very fragile psychological structures they are defending. And by the way, their obsessive neuroses cannot help but take the form if an intense misogyny and homophobia as there one finds them most vulnerable and most heavily defended. The Synod is bringing it all to a surface, an unwelcome therapeutic intervention they cannot abide except to attack it. They may well go into schism, but it will be a schism of very sick individuals. Anyone who has seen their communities from the inside and has studied the individuals who belong to them and lead them knows how infested they are with stunted children. The Pope is a healthy, mature, and deeply human Christian -- the kind the Gospel produces when it is heard, understood and lived. The krazies -- and they are crazy -- belong instead to the church of Oedipus with all its murderous and incestuous venom. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-78756440663113981702014-10-14T19:35:27.866-07:002014-10-14T19:35:27.866-07:00The Liberal Catholic Church in its origins was not...The Liberal Catholic Church in its origins was not really a revolt against Rome. Indeed both +Wedgwood and + Leadbeater were former Anglicans. Even dear old ++Arnold Harris Mathew (sp?) couldn't deny that he was an Anglican and his body is resting next to the door of a lovely Anglican country church. <br /><br />The PNCC was more of a revolt against the Irish bishops than against Rome. Alas, the same bishops were responsible for so many Uniates returning home to Orthodoxy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-38943163312333367282014-10-14T16:38:28.658-07:002014-10-14T16:38:28.658-07:00I must have expressed myself badly. I don't b...I must have expressed myself badly. I don't believe a significant number of neo-trads would leave the Church, unhappy as they may be. But reading the various blogs, I do think there would be some who, believing that Francis' Church has left them, would gather into congregations that perceived themselves as keeping the "true faith." And, as I did write, I think there is a significant difference in the mentality of "liberals" and staunch neo-traditionalists, in fact conservatives in general. I have found that conservatives are far more passionate about their ideology, far more financially committed to supporting it, and far more inclined to organize groups that share their ideology. As I said, I don't think liberals have the attention span for schism. As for Cardinal Burke, as he would lose his Cardinal's position should he leave, I doubt he would go. And if he did he would still be a Bishop but not even an Archbishop as he no longer heads an Archdiocesan See. He would, by courtesy, be addressed as an Archbishop and retain whatever ceremonial prerogatives belong to that office but Bishop Fellay would undoubtedly not move over and make room for him in the chancery office. But who knows? Consolaminihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09278560268489520757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1900800634479346046.post-67351254939662414012014-10-14T16:20:46.983-07:002014-10-14T16:20:46.983-07:00i think you're being somewhat unfair regarding...i think you're being somewhat unfair regarding the motivation of 'traditional' leaning catholics remaining within the church; after all i as a liberal leaning catholic didn't leave the church under benedict even though i was loudly and frequently discontent. i just bided my time and hoped that a more progressive pope would come along... and I'm glad i did stay although i was very unhappy being a catholic at the time. probably most trad leaning catholics are probably doing much the same although others inevitably would have left at some point anyway. one difference between trads and liberal catholics is that Vatican ii isn't going to go away and I'm not sure many can get over that emotional hurdle, evurrrr<br /><br />i also disagree with your opinion that cardinal burke doesn't have any motivation for leaving the church; after all if he did defect to SSPX he would out-rank Fellay - not even an archbishop, only a 'humble' ordinary - and become defacto senior cleric / leader of the SSPX. it would be a PR coup for the SSPX and the big Burke would get to dress up as the real Pope (or as near to it as he dares) complete with Crown and Sedalia etc and pontificate to all to his hearts content without fear of contradiction or ever being questioned. he could live in a idealised perfect fantasy world projecting his thinly hidden narcissistic wounds - a toxic mix of sexual suppression and self-hate, which must be a very tempting possibility for him particularly as he's a careerist who has just past the apex of his career. he appears to be setting himself up as another Ottavani figure. Paul VI probably made a mistake in not curtailing Ottavani earlier because he wanted to be fair and give the catholic right a voice - but will Francis be so patient? i think Francis, as a wiley Jesuit, is very able to play hardball and dirty if it's needed!johnnoreply@blogger.com