Remember how my letter to Bishop Lennon caused a little scuffle with reader and friend Sully over the nature of the man in the Cathedra giving orders that align children and the faithful with dissent, buffoonery and danger vs. the people underneath him who get caught in a discernment nightmare causing them to execute orders they know are whacked?
The cat and dog fights in the Chancery between Bishop Lennon and Cardinal call-me-Sean were about the bastion of moral dissent being appointed to guide the flock.
Does this make it any clearer what side Bishop Lennon was on?:
You may know that Archbishop Pila has been succeeded by Richard Lennon, late of the Boston Diocese. It sounds as though there is a crackdown on everything that looks progressive. The letter below is a request for badly needed help.
As I've been suggesting, ad nauseum, the people below the man giving the orders may be the people we are clashing with, but I assure you, the man behind the curtain... the man giving the orders, watching from the poop deck like a sneak and a coward while we're all bickering with the poor suckers faced with executing the asinine orders...is Sean.
It's not their fault, really. They may be confused temporarily. They may be afraid. They may try getting help from the Vatican which responds with bupkis (more than ever now because Levada has the authority). They may then go through a process of contemplation on whether they should issue a press release to warn the people what is going on, etc, etc.
All this takes time....and it's very hard discernment for a priest and most especially, Bishops. It's also very hard discernment for lay people appointed to the curia.
Meanwhile, they're getting orders which continue to divides us, as some of us will never (come what may) go along to get along.
We'll stand up, we'll put up a blog to "tell", we'll make up pamphlets and become pamphleteers, we'll go to the Boston Globe, etc.
We'll withstand the assaults and insults, the slander, the mischaracterization (most of it coming on the Bishops orders and suggestion), while the trickle down of insane directives the people underneath the Cardinal execute, causes us to fight with good people.
Those individuals really don't want to be doing what they are doing, but they have a misguided formation about what orders they are required to "obey", and what orders they should approach the Bishop's throne, and say:
"I'm not doing this, it's unsafe for children (or women) and quite frankly, nuts."
In my opinion, nobody should have ever been giving legitimacy to Sean's future church by quieting down to see how Talking about Touching, Bryan Hehir, Jack Connors, Ed Saunders, Terry Donilon, Janet Eisner, et al., was all going to pan out for us.
I believe it's absurd to ask mothers to not be so abrasive to Sean, implying he isn't such a bad fellow, whilst we all know Sean's future church has every CCD class and "catholic" school discussing with children what touches are safe via people fighting against us on the sanctity of how to use our sexuality. We are dealing with the sexual safety of children.
Some of the people Sean has appointed embrace the ideology of verbally instructing children (as little as kindergarten) to go ahead and touch their classmates to see what sexual arousal feels like (because it feels good) but not to tell their Catholic parents who are wound to tight on morals to really understand what they are doing. We've been demonstrating for several years, how in the secular schools this process was used to water down the natural defenses of those children, how some of those (family life is challenged via unhappiness, etc.)become obsessed, addicted to the sensations of arousing their genitalia because, lets face it, it feels fabulous.
If it's one thing we've proved, even Baal serves God, as Helen Drinan just demonstrated as she exposed the exercise of:
- what information gets to the Cardinal
- what information he gives out to people underneath him who will make decisions and accept his recommendations
- what degree somebody has to go to in order to get other information to the people making decisions
- who will refuse look at the information on the say so of the Cardinal.
Come on kiddos, get a grip on what's going down up at the Digs and act accordingly.
I believe it's equally insane for an orthodox group of men running a Catholic Men's Conference to sell Sean as a party to our objectives, beside Fr. Corapi, as if they share the same philosophy. They (I would hope but am not certain of this) would not put Bishop Hubbard's photograph on their initiative, making people attending believe that they can rely upon what he is saying and doing.
These men should have no trouble understanding how Richard McBrien's photograph and participation in that conference would lead unsuspecting people to believe that the next time McBrien is speaking over at Boston College, he's in the loop with EWTN, so therefore, the things he says are part and parcel of the authentic faith. The same thing applies to the Bishop occupying the Boston Cathedra.