Posted on 11/23/2004 4:56:01 PM PST by thor76
Amchurch Bishops Come up with Another Phony Catechism From: Fr. Moderator
Donald Wuerl, Newchurch Bishop of Pittsburgh Theological Bojanles Writes Amchurch "Catechism" Newvatican Previously Found Him So Ignorant of Canon Law That He Was Sent back to Remediation School
If you thought that the New Order would stop after its Vatican II Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992 (well, that was the year of its first version at least), were you wrong!
Although the Novus Ordinarians quote that travesty as if it were Holy Writ, the Vatican II catechism is so full of mistakes and "nuancing" of true Catholic doctrine that it should be thrown into the fireplace, where it will have some use. And why wouldn't it be defective? The bishops and cardinals on the writing committee admitted that they were incompetent to read the seminal documents of the Faith in their original languages. How can any book pretend to be a catechism when the Newchurch officials can't even read the text of St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory the Great, St. Anselm, St. Albertus Magnus, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, St. Alphonus, and so many others?
Theologians have pointed to numerous errors in the Vatican II catechism, some committed from ignorance, some obviously deliberate to be "politically correct." The common teaching of the Fathers on limbo is entirely omitted. The section on capital punishment underwent several revisions until it could satisfy the liberalist types and contradict the constant teaching of the Catholic and Apostolic Church. The section on marriage contracts previous teaching. And on and on it goes. (If you, in ignorance at the time, bought a copy, it is not too late to ditch it and get the Roman Catechism written by St. Charles Borromeo after the Council of Trent, a brilliant and eminently readable work that expounds Scripture, Tradition, doctrine, and practice for all of the Church's essential teachings.)
After the first "version" of the catechism was floated, Newvatican gauged its popular reception and then issued a second "version" with several significant changes in the doctrine. Apparently, Newchurch doctrine can be changed by popular demand! This situation is reminiscent of what happened with the "New Mass," which, when first issued in 1969, contained an explicitly heretical definition of the Mass. When this egregious error was pointed out, a red-faced Paul VI recalled the original text and had it patched up a little. Nevertheless, it still remains heretical.
Now it seems that the Newchurch bishops of the United States have fabricated a "national adult catechism in the hope of reaching young adults who have left" Newchurch. Don't hold your breath, you Newchurch bishops. Another phony catechism isn't going to bring them back. Only the authentic Roman Catholic Mass, Sacraments, doctrine, and morality will do that, and you are light-years distant from that!
And guess who was chairman of the Amchurch editorial board. Why, it was the same Donald Wuerl, of Pittsburgh, who was found so ignorant of canon law that Newvatican issued a stern reprimand against him and directed that he return to school!
Nor is this Amcatechism a serious work. Unlike the Roman Catechism, the Baltimore Catechism, or even the Vatican II catechism, it doesn't lay out and explain the teachings of the Church in a serious exposition. No, each of its 36 chapters opens with a story, purportedly of model Novus Ordinarians, including:
Dorothy Day, leader of a communistic worker movement Joseph Bernardin, Modernist archbishop of Chicago, a vocal proponent of a "gay-friendly" Church, whom Donald Wuerl publicly described as his "role model" -- go figure! Cesar Chavez, another socialistic agitator Thomas Merton, the Buddhist-Trappist, who died in 1968 of electrocution in a bathtub while participating at an "oecumenical conference" with Buddhists in the Orient These choices were too much even for ten of the Ambishops, who voted nay! on the catechism and got Merton pulled out of the final text.
The Newchurch bishops recognized that American Novus Ordinarians are now so ignorant of their cult these days that they cannot hand real doctrine. So a dumbed-down, "Americanized" version had to be concocted. And, of course, the Amcatechism had to be politically correct. Against the dictates of even the Newvatican, the Amerbishops insisted upon using "gender-inclusive language." Is the New Order she-god far away?
No, she wasn't. Her cause for canonization is before the Congregation for Saints.
Who has eight kids? Like I said, the only Morrison I know of apparently holds Masses on the SF waterfront every Sunday. That's the guy to ask. He's now been accused, here, of having been ordained a Prot, in a Prot church, and having eight kids, presumeably while masquerading as a priest. I wonder if he'll be accused of being Burkett's accomplice in Rathergate, next?
If you're going to criticize the man - don't stoop to calumny. You better be able to back yourself up.
I was talking about priests that claim ordination in the Old Catholic Church which isn't catholic at all. But I'm also always complaining about the infiltrators and "imposter" bishops in the Catholic Church in this country and see no reason to not be wary of any men who claim to be ordained catholic priests but seem to have no history or puzzling credentials. I think Reagan was right when he said:"Trust but verify".
Reagan was right. I thought you were talking about this guy in SF, the one with the website. If not, then I take it you can verify that you were not?
I don't know who is in SF with a website. I was talking to someone who said someone who claimed to be a Roman Catholic priest was ordained in the Old Catholic Church. The only "priest" I am somewhat familiar with,who claimed to have been ordained in the Old Catholic Church and also claimed to be a Roman Catholic priest,wasn't. He had eight kids and was on the Art Bell show a couple of times,a big old fraud. If it sounds like the same person,beware. I have no more interest in the subject.
The new version of the Catechism isn't nearly as bad as the Amchurch deconstruction will probably be.
Check this for a "Catechism"...
http://www.the-tidings.com/2004/1119/ecumenicalnew1.htm
excellent. Thank you.God Bless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.