Defending the Flock
After an especially large contingent of our dear Society heard Mass on Palm Sunday at St. Michael's in Scranton, we had the good fortune to witness our friend and the pastor of St. Michael's, Fr. Carl Gismondi, in the act of defending his congregation from the impious. You see, a motley band of heretics were arrayed on the sidewalk, bedecked in custom t-shirts, handing out leaflets and proclaiming doctrines most foul. Not one to let the devil in among his flock, Fr. Gismondi preached the true Faith to these poor estranged souls, and attempted to recall them to reason, particularly stressing the Gospel of John in what we overheard of his highly ecumenical dialogue.Permitted by our dear President to examine one of their wretched leaflets, we were duly surprised at the plethora of blasphemies contained therein, bizarre even among that unfortunate modern creature, the Protestant.
These cultish followers of former construction worker Harold Camping, who, having failed to accurately predict the Day of Judgement in 1994 later clarified that on September 6th of that year the Age of Churches had ended, recklessly maintain these absurd claims which abuse both Holy Scripture and sound reason, and seek to infect all men under the guise of Family Radio. In preparation for the coming Apocalypse, this prophet of the wicked and his cohort insist that God has cursed all His various apostate churches, abandoning His new covenant, and will not deign to save any who persist in attending a church. Of course, to those fully awake to the unique efficacy of the one true Church of Christ, headed as she is by that Rock, Peter, and singularly possessed of the Truth, there is no surprise that Satan led these false prophets to her doorstep.
Interestingly, Robert Sungenis of Catholic Apologetics International once ran with this crowd, albeit in their saner days, and then convinced of their errors, co-wrote "Shockwave 2000: The Harold Camping 1994 Debacle" which was published by New Leaf Press. Besides the site mentioned above, their theories are also spewed forth here, but thankfully are spurned by most other heretics. By order of the President, we dealt appropriately with the offending materials.
go to main page
by Iacobus @ 4/09/2006 05:23:00 PM
29 comments
St. Louis-Marie de Montfort, ora pro nobis
St. Joseph, ora pro nobis
St. Ambrose of Milan, ora pro nobis
St. Dominic, ora pro nobis
St. Francis (and St. Clare), orate pro nobis
St. Catherine of Siena, ora pro nobis
St. Alphonsus Ligouri, ora pro nobis
St. John Chrysostom, ora pro nobis
29 Comments:
At the risk of further appearing to be at times foolish:
Does anyone else see a face in the lower left corner of the burning heretical text?
Are the eyes thin and looking up and to the right?
Well, as I used to teach my students in '303. Witches and heretics', one pyre is worth a thousand sermons.
Yes indeed, I have just noticed the face as well, it looks like a roasted Donald Duck.
Cumanus, about your first comment: classy. : )
Yes, you know something's fishy when, upon exiting the church doors after Mass, you are immediately offered a pamphlet with the words, "Hey, would you like to get a BIBLE MESSAGE today?"
The Doctor asked why the Society for a Good Time didn't put themselves at Fr. Gismondi's disposal, offering to forcibly remove the offenders. But, as I told him, it seemed that the good priest had things well under control.
Okay, so does anyone see the face in the upper left-hand corner? I think the nose is fairly visible. (Hey, as long as we're walking down that path . . .)
The best part of this encounter - at least of the small part that I heard - came as Fr. Gismondi was insisting that one of the deluded Biblical literalists outside of St. Michael's deal John 6. "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you." As the cultist reached out to hand me a pamphlet (I ignored him), he said over his shoulder back to Fr. Gismondi:
"But that's impossible!"
And Father, in turn, clearly amused: "That's what they said!"
. . . dixerunt durus est hic sermo quis potest eum audire . . .
Don't ever say I don't do my part to attract the Neo-Catholics to your blog, exposing them to Sacred Tradition.
Them folks love to read about images on french toast or in a bowl of spagetti.
Sounds like a poor example of ecumenism...
I would've talked to them at the very least without starting a "Holy War". I say this based upon my previous dealings with Mormons and Jehova's Witnesses, in particular.
Now for the converts I have a question:
Do you believe that a Catholic condemning you before your conversion would facilitate you entering the Church?
How many of you giddy folks on this matter would seriously say yes?
Also, I would suggest that Archbishop Fulton Sheen (a Traditionalist's icon) dealt with topics appealing to all Christians in America; a point that some Christians condemned him for. Would you do the same if you had the position the famous Archbishop had? Or would you use that platform to condemn the truths of the other 60-70% of Americans in this country?
The better tact would be to invite Harold Camping to Assisi and and all together partake in a Hindu sacrifice.
You fellas are so unecumenical.
Of course given the context of the scene it sounds like it was from the onset a "Holy War" that started from the other end.
In any case...
I noticed my statement was somewhat stacked when I said:
"...would you use that platform to condemn the truths of the other 60-70% of Americans in this country".
Of course it is stacked because I referred to the "truths" of the other religions/denominations. Maybe I should've said "errors."
Actually, no. I think Ambrosius would agree from my previous example at Cornell that I would be far from the ecumenical person to permit what Joe Six Pack entails. That is not ecumenism as taught by the Church at Vatican II, anyways. Please quit spinning.
As a matter of fact while at Cornell I disagreed 100% in the psuedo-sacramental earth ritual thing that some Catholics were doing on campus. It was some thing I can't quite remember now. If I won't tolerate things like that within a Catholic Community; I surely wouldn't encourage the ecumenism you seem to suggest, Joe Six Pack.
So Johnboy,
Can you provide me a percentage breakdown of all the heretical cults as to what degree they hold to Catholic truth?
And then, please tell me at what percentage do they not become deadly dangerous and threats to the eternal salvation of men?
Here's my guess:
Orthodox are at 94%
Anglicans 60%
Methodists 45%
Wiccans 15% (They do acknowledge a spirit greater than themselves)
A true Satanist I suppose would believe 100%, just be at odds with it all.
SPPX 120% (They still hang on to the 20% that has been lost since V II)
Which of these groups can we "dialogue" with in brotherly love?
I'd say we can work with all of them except the SSPX ulta-Trads. They're the most dangerous of them all.
Your portrayal of all non-Catholics is moderately disturbing, Joe Six Pack.
Most people on this earth are not Satanists or diseases to the Catholic faith. That sort of portrayal to me demonstrates an insecurity to others (however, that point is an opinion and no more).
And the percentage of one's belief holding onto Catholic Truth is part and parcel a gift from God Himself. So don't get too proud in your faith...
In my opinion a "disease to the Catholic faith" would be a wolve in sheep's clothing. A classic modernist.
Any religious group outside the Holy Catholic Church is satanic to one degree or another.
(I suppose this opening position wouldn't go over well at an ecumenical conference.)
I'm not so sure about your listing of percentages, JSP, even if you are just proposing it hypothetically to set up Johnboy. Satanists practice Black Masses that are parodies of (Tridentine) Masses, and, if I recall correctly, they only steal Hosts from Catholic churches. So the out-and-out Satanist is closer to believing in transubstantiation than some High Church Anglicans. At least they understand what the two teams are in the great battle between Our Lady and the Serpent, which prots don't seem to understand. Granted, Satanists chosen the wrong side, and I don't mean to play devil-worship's advocate, but Satanism does resolve a number of the contradictions of heretical and pagan religions into a pure (well, "pur-er"; evil is inherently negative and self-contradictory) statement of evil. At least it's easier to identify them than the more covert satanism of prot churches, which accept artificial contraception, abortion, factionalism, the denial of the Eucharist, of the BVM's role, the Petrine ministry, etc., etc.
In any case, when it comes to orthodoxy, "a miss is as good as a mile" is a helpful guide. (I'm talking about formal heresy here.)
JSP, to be clear, I am not so much objecting to your scale as pointing out that, surprisingly, forthright Satanists seem to attach greater significance to certain truths of Catholicism (from a perverse standpoint, of course) than do many other false religions. For instance, most mainstream prots seem to think that Catholics get into Heaven even though, according to their stated theories, we are idolaters who adore bread. This is very lukewarm, whereas truly demonic people by their wicked vehemence (if by nothign else) against the truths of our Faith testify to the *value* of those truths.
TP,
I agree with you.
I tried to represent that in my percentages.
I gave Satanism 100% - meaning they believe everything Catholics believe.
I think I see Hillary Clinton's face in the burning text. Am I correct?
OH, JSP, I didn't get that at all. My mistake -- I thought 100% meant 100% wrong, or 0. We are in fact in agreement. I need to read more clearly . . . er, *carefully.*
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
øn a slightly different topic, have you guys ever figured out the series of signs regarding Judas, leaving after communion, and stealing? I have been to St. Michael's in Scranton several times, and never quite gotten the entire story...
huh?
I know the story behind those Judas signs. They were placed there by the colorful previous rector of that parish to discourage people from leaving Mass immediately after communion -- the so-called Judas procession, since Judas left immediately after the first Holy Communion. The added bit about stealing, though, I don't quite get -- except perhaps as a reminder to people that Judas was a bad guy?
If you are very curious, I could inquire of the priest who originally had the signs made.
I seem to remember someone once mentioning it had something to do with the original Judas sign being stolen, or something. But then again, in fairness, nearly every sign in that church is very strange. My personal favourite was the awful looking statue of the BMV with a note pinned to the bottom: "Please don't take."
I've had some strange experiences there in general, though. A few years ago a couple of friends of mine and I got roped into singing a mass there at 5 in the morning in honor of some feast or another. I don't remember too many details, but its too bad we didn't get assaulted by heretics... Or did we?
COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE!
Post a Comment
<< Home