Why does Fr. Martin persist in embarrassing, sleight-of-substance tactics?

The well-known Jesuit priest and author insists that Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy is a “dissenter”. That would be funny if it weren’t so stupid.

(us.fotolia.com/Nejron Photo)

When I posted my first article on Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy’s letter to Pope Francis, along with the story behind the letter, I expected it would get attention. I didn’t expect, however, that it would go viral, with a constant stream of comments, tweets, and Facebook posts, many of them from sites and sources not usually associated with Catholic World Report. As Fr. Weinandy told me earlier today, he has received hundreds of positive e-mails, from many different countries and many of them from laity who welcomed his letter as giving voice to their own concerns.

But, of course, the response has not been positive in all corners. Fr. James Martin, S.J., who has openly admitted that he is not a theologian and has blithely argued that the Catechism’s teaching on homosexuality should be changed, decided to trot out the “d” word:

Fr. Martin has obvious skills in promotion and marketing (and I speak as someone who spent several years in marketing). In reading his America article on the matter, I wondered if he was also considering a career as a comedian. For instance, he writes: “Father Weinandy made public a stinging letter to the Holy Father in which he dissented from Pope Francis’ teachings.” Oh? And what teachings, exactly, would those be? As Fr. Weinandy wrote in his letter to His Holiness:

First there is the disputed Chapter 8 of “Amoris Laetitia.”  I need not share my own concerns about its content.  Others, not only theologians, but also cardinals and bishops, have already done that.  The main source of concern is the manner of your teaching.  In “Amoris Laetitia,” your guidance at times seems intentionally ambiguous, thus inviting both a traditional interpretation of Catholic teaching on marriage and divorce as well as one that might imply a change in that teaching. (emphasis added)

Now, in order to dissent—using that word in a general and non-technical, non-canonical way—one needs to know what he is dissenting from. Fr. Weinandy rightly notes that the ambiguity which has plagued this pontificate from the start, notable in parts of Amoris Laetitia but hardly confined to it; such ambiguity makes actual dissent impossible. After all, if Fr. Weinandy were to say that AL teaches that the divorced-and-civilly-remarried can now receive Holy Communion under certain situations, he would be agreeing with the bishops of Malta, Germany, and a few other countries; if he held that AL teaches that Holy Communion cannot, in fact, be received by the same except under guidelines already given by Pope John Paul II, he would be agreeing with any number of other bishops (Archbishops Chaput and Sample, among many others) as well as with perennial Church teaching.

Put another way, in the matter of AL, it’s impossible to dissent because it’s not clear what is being taught or not taught!

Which, of course, is why Fr. Weinandy remarks on “the manner” of Pope Francis’ teaching. Now, can one dissent from the pope’s manner of teaching? I think even the most theologically naive among us might be able to figure that one out. But Fr. Martin, as is his loose and slippery style, isn’t altogether interested in clarity or details. Another example demonstrates this fact: regarding Fr. Weinandy’s criticism—when working for the USCCB as head of the Committee on Doctrine—of the theological method of Terrence Tilley as it applies to Christology, Fr. Martin states:

About Professor Tilley, he had written, ‘Those who argue in a manner similar to Tilley with regard to what is to be the content of faith also often espouse contraception, abortion, fornication.” In other words, because Professor Tilley happens to argue in a particular way, he also supports abortion—a breathtaking leap of logic.

But here is what Fr. Weinandy actually wrote:

However, his [Tilley’s] own criteria [which involves assessing doctrinal models and formulations on the basis of what is taken to be their “fruits”] undercut his whole theological proposal. Those who argue in a manner similar to Tilley with regard to what is to be the content of faith also often espouse contraception, abortion, fornication, adultery, divorce and remarriage, masturbation, homosexual activity, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, etc. Tilley himself states in a footnote: “Laity seem to have been disaffected by the bishops’ preaching about sexual morality that is increasingly incredible.” While Tilley is not specific, one can presume that he would include at least some of the above list. However, the above enumeration is hardly the fruits of a holy life founded upon the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Note, contrary to what Fr. Martin asserts—that Fr. Weinandy claims Tilley actually supports abortion—Fr. Weinandy makes no such claim. He challenges the legitimacy of Tilley’s method by noting how others who argue in a similar way—that is, who employ a similar theological method to ascertain sound theological models—also espouse such things as contraception, abortion, and so forth. The closest Fr. Weinandy comes to doing what Fr. Martin claims is Fr. Weinandy’s quote from Tilley in which he refers to what he regards as laity’s seeming disaffection from the bishops’ teaching about sexual morality, which Tilley characterizes as “increasingly incredible” and Weinandy says that “one can presume that he would include at least some of the above list.”

Thus, again, Fr. Martin concludes from this statement that “because Professor Tilley happens to argue in a particular way, he also supports abortion—a breathtaking leap of logic.” There is indeed a breathtaking leap of logic here—but it is on Fr. Martin’s part. But perhaps I am being unkind to logic, which probably has no interest in being associated with such obvious feats of mediocre, clumsy sophistry.

One more from Fr. Martin:

Father Weinandy’s letter reveals once again the double standard often employed by many of Pope Francis’ critics. Under Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI, no dissent was tolerated. Now some of the same people who were charged with enforcing rules against dissent are themselves dissenting.

If by “dissent” Fr. Martin means openly contesting, questioning, or denying Church teaching about, say, the ordination of women, sexual morality, contraception, the nature of the Eucharist, and so forth, then let’s cue the laugh track. In fact, the pontificate of John Paul II witnessed countless theologians and professors dissenting—and rarely if ever getting called on the carpet. Fr. Martin’s remark is not funny, but it is very misleading, even deceptive. Could it be that magic, not comedy, is Fr. Martin’s focus?

But, again, the big question here is: what is “dissent”? One can rightly question and criticize the way or timing of Fr. Weinandy—and I say that as someone who thinks his letter is entirely accurate and on point on every point. But one cannot, with any sort of intellectual integrity, make the case that Fr. Weinandy has dissented from Church doctrine or dogma. (Those interested in a brief if rather technical piece on dissent should read “Authority and Dissent in the Catholic Church” by the late Dr. William E. May.) On the contrary, as so many have already noted, Fr. Weinandy’s concern is that the authentic, clear, and consistent teaching of the Church is being obscured, undermined, or dismissed by the current pontiff, who certainly does have a low and even antagonistic view of theology and doctrine.

As I remarked in an editorial back in May, pondering some comments by Pope Francis:

… how does doctrine become an ideology? The problem, in part, is that Francis’ use of the term ideology is something like a shotgun blast: it sounds powerful and gets attention, but the exact target can be hard to locate. But it is clear, in keeping with the first point, that Francis sees ideology as being closed to the Holy Spirit. However, can true doctrine be ideological? It’s an interesting question. On one hand, it’s true that claiming a doctrinal statement captures the entirety of the mystery of Faith is incorrect, even dangerous; it is true that saying a particular school of theology perfectly and completely expresses the Faith has an ideological character; it is unsound and unwise. But adherence to true doctrine, it seems to me, cannot be ideological simply by holding fast to true doctrine. (There is, after all, a reason the Creed is recited every Sunday, to give just one example.) On the contrary, to defend and hold to doctrine is not only not ideological, it is part and parcel of being a Christian. So, for instance, if someone claimed that holding to the Church’s teaching that God is One (in nature) and Triune (in Persons) needs to be open to other views, would it be ideological to hold fast to the Church’s basic doctrine? Of course not.

A dissenter does not seek to uphold Church teaching, does not protect doctrine from misrepresentation, does not stand up for the perennial teachings of the Church, does not suggest the Church hold fast in the face of fanciful fads and popular passions. No, a dissenter likely tends to talk constantly of “dialogue” without any clear or firm purpose for such dialogue, probably hurries to assure his disciples that the Church will soon “update” and “change”, possibly argues that the Catechism needs to be rewritten to mean something opposite of what it once said, and perhaps even encourages actions that are directly contrary to the Church’s teachings and practices.

Fr. Weinandy protests on behalf of Church teaching. Fr. Martin apparently protests in frustration with Church teaching; he would do well to discern the log in his own eye before blindly seeking the non-existent splinter in someone else’s eye.

About Carl E. Olson 1055 Articles

Carl E. Olson is editor of Catholic World Report and Ignatius Insight. He is the author of Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?, Will Catholics Be “Left Behind”, co-editor/contributor to Called To Be the Children of God, co-author of The Da Vinci Hoax (Ignatius), and author of the “Catholicism” and “Priest Prophet King” Study Guides for Word on Fire. He is also a contributor to “Our Sunday Visitor” newspaper, “The Catholic Answer” magazine, “The Catholic Herald”, “National Catholic Register”, “Chronicles”, and other publications.

64 Comments

  1. Ever since I read Fr Martin’s back and forth with Ross Douthat
    In the NYT I have seen him as sincere and sincerely modernist in his essential theology and pastoral morality. His teaching sounds more like that once found on TVs old “Gossip Girl” or “90210” than the CCC.

    • Father Martin’s dissent from the Church’s immemorial commitment to the moral law bears Father Weinandy out: this papacy, by its very refusal to reaffirm that commitment is bringing to light the darkness that has found its way into the Catholic clergy at all levels. Father Martin can deny this. The USCCB can deny it. Carl Olson is simply saying what all the faithful know in their hearts. We have a deep problem on our hands and we must acknowledge the problem before we set about correcting it.

      • I agree! Fr. Weinandy’s letter to the pope was right on. The Pope IS alienating his flock with confusing statements and socialistic ideas.

    • Carl Olson may be intelligent but he seems to bash Father Martin without integrity. What about simply challenging Father Martin to be more specific about the objectives of dialogue Martin desires and letting him take the next step? I have read articles by Martin and have been more favorably impressed by Martin than by Olson.

      • “Carl Olson may be intelligent but he seems to bash Father Martin without integrity.”

        How so? Have I misquoted him? Misrepresented his positions? Slandered him?

        No, no, and no.

        Try again.

  2. “Rev.” Martin is a perfect spokesman for “the current pontiff.”

    He does not hold and teach the Catholic faith – he holds a tortured, counterfeit, anti-Christian hodge-podge of beliefs “with Catholic sprinkles on top.” He is practiced in the low arts of deception, evasiveness, manipulation, disintegration and dishonesty. He is very clever – by the low standards admired in the media.

    He does not have the mind of Christ.

      • While I can’t judge the “heart” of Pope Francis, I, and others certainly can see that the pope has absolutely no reason not to answer the Dubia. And why is that? It’s obvious: he thinks the ambiguity in Amoris Laetitia will promote something he wants which cannot be justified from Holy Scripture, Sacred Tradition, or the Magisterium. And what else other than receipt of Holy Communion by those in “irregular” relationships?

  3. Fr. martin is nothing but a leftist trotskyite who passive aggressively seeks to get his followers to harass others and do his dirty work for him.

  4. James Martin is nothing but a fraud. He quite simply needs to confirm or deny what many already suspect, that he is in fact a homosexual. That intrinsic disorder and obsession is what drives his dissent. He is a foot soldier in satan’s army.

    • So what if Fr. James Martin is a homosexual. Does that in any way lessen his dedication to his church? There are all types of men in the priesthood. Gay, asexual, those who have relationships with women and all manner of men. If they are teaching the truth and helping others their personal lives are none of our business. You will probably burst you girdles when you see married Latin Rite Priests, women priests, and deacons. Won’t be long now and we will have a true priesthood of all believers.

    • “Obsession” is a key word.
      It bespeaks a spiritual disorder far deeper than we would care to imagine and accounts in large part for his blindness, and the habitation of darkness in which he and those who will not correct him abide.

    • “He quite simply needs to confirm or deny what many already suspect, that he is in fact a homosexual.”

      Do you realize that you have just used the same tactic as the venemous, vicious toad Michelangelo Signorile and his equally vicious and venemous group ACT-UP (AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power), who coined the term “outing” to force so-called “closeted” persons afflicted with same-sex attraction to proclaim their sexual preference publicly – particularly those in positions of public prominence?

      Just as Mr. Signorile and ACT-UP’s tactics of “outing” are wrong, so is Father Martin for, in effect, saying “Everybody out of the closet!” to those Catholic priests and religious who struggle every day with the intrinsic disorder of same-sex attraction.

      And, likewise, you, too, are wrong for demanding that Father Martin “fish or cut bait.” That’s between him and God – if or until he insists on making it our business by proclaiming his sexual preference publicly. But that’s not your call or mine – or anybody else’s except Father Martin. I hope and pray that he does not do so – and, much more importantly, that he repents of the many wrongs and evils which he has inflicted and reforms his life fully before God calls him to his final judgment. And we will all do well to pray for his repentance and reform each day, too.

  5. The label dissenter appended by Fr Martin SJ and friends should be owned with distinction because it is the new Reactionary, réactionnaire, conservateur of Vendee Catholics and White Russians opposed to Bolshevism. Like Robespierre’s All citoyens have inviolable rights although not all Frenchmen are citoyens. They are dissenters. Fr Martin’s conviction is that dissenters refuse to embrace mercy sans justice and homosexual behavior as laudable. There is a divide. The trouble is the Fr Martins presently hold the reins within the visible structure of the Church. The dissenters hold to Christ as members of the Mystical Body.

    • So what if Fr. James Martin is a homosexual. Does that in any way lessen his dedication to his church? There are all types of men in the priesthood. Gay, asexual, those who have relationships with women and all manner of men. If they are teaching the truth and helping others their personal lives are none of our business. You will probably burst you girdles when you see married Latin Rite Priests, women priests, and deacons. Won’t be long now and we will have a true priesthood of all believers.

      • From the Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations (2005): “Men with deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or who are sexually active cannot be ordained”

  6. Well proposed…may Our Lady on this First Saturday with the Holy Poor Souls obtained special graces and miracles for us and the world…..

  7. Father Martin’s dissent from the Church’s immemorial commitment to the moral law bears Father Weinandy out: this papacy, by its very refusal to reaffirm that commitment is bringing to light the darkness that has found its way into the Catholic clergy at all levels. Father Martin can deny this. The USCCB can deny it. Carl Olson is simply saying what all the faithful know in their hearts. We have a deep problem on our hands and we must acknowledge the problem before we set about correcting it.

      • THE BISHOPS SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF SAY ABOUT EVERYTHING EXCEPT WHAT IS NEEDED TO FOLLOW OUR SAVIOR. IT IS TIME FOR BISHOPS TO BE QUIET…LIKE THEY ARE TO THE LAITY WHO ASK QUESTIONS AND DO NOT GET EVEN A POLITE ANSWER.

  8. “But one cannot, with any sort of intellectual integrity, make the case that Fr. Weinandy has dissented from Church doctrine or dogma.”

    And he hasn’t.

    And that is what sets him apart from Elizabeth Johnson, Peter Phan, Roger Haight et al.

  9. Very good article. I wish I could say something good about Fr. Martin, but even referring to him as “father” makes me cringe. He is in the solid camp of the enemy, a sidekick to the father of lies and a disgrace and embarrassment to the office of Priest. May the Lord have mercy upon his soul and the souls of the rest of the fallen Jesuits.

    • have you ever read any of Father Martin’s books? They are wonderful, scholarly,
      humorous and just wonderful. The old church is long overdue an overhaul. No longer are the “princes” of the church to be above all but they are supposed to be real pastors working hand in hand with all other priests. No more fat old cardinals and bishops.

      • “No more fat old cardinals and bishops.”

        My, my, such hatred for the fat and old. Doesn’t that make you ageist and a fat-shamer, two mortal sins in your church of Modernism?

        I am both fat and old. I gather that somehow makes me evil.

        “The church is long overdue for an overhaul,” huh? A)It’s Church, not church, and B)since you’re Protestant, why are you even bothering to post here?

      • The “old” Church was founded by Jesus Christ. As for the “fat old” comment… One would surmise that Pope Francis would be categorized as such. Even a Jesuit could discern better than to say this. Priests working hand in hand… now there’s an image we don’t need to think about.

  10. This also applies to the new USCCB “doctrine chief,” Mgsr. John Strynkowski, who has also labelled Weinandy a dissenter. These folks also don’t seem to realize that this infers Francis is proposing new teaching, for what else would require a new/current act of assent, as though Weinandy would have withdrawn his previous assent from the perennial teaching?

    • Msgr. John J. Strynkowski (a priest of the Diocese of Brooklyn, by the way) is not “the new USCCB “doctrine chief”.” He was Father Thomas Weinandy’s predecessor in that post, not his successor.

      The current Executive Director of the USCCB Secretariat of Doctrine and Canonical Affairs is Father Michael J.K. Fuller, of the Diocese of Rockford. He was appointed to that post in May of 2016. He was ordained a priest for the Diocese of Rockford in May of 1997.

      On the one hand, Father Fuller was a seminary professor at Mundelein Seminary (Archdiocese of Chicago) for 14 years (from 2002 to 2016), so he was probably part of Cardinal George’s “scouring of the shire” in the Archdiocesan seminaries (i.e., cleaning out the theological, spiritual, and moral cesspool that University of St. Mary of the Lake/Mundelein Seminary (and St. Joseph College Seminary (formerly Niles College), too) had been for far too long). Father Fuller was also the spiritual director of (and an instructor for) the Diaconate Formation Program of the Diocese of Rockford for 14 years (2002-2016).

      On the other hand:

      Father Fuller’s seminary education was at Mundelein Seminary during the “anything goes – except Catholic orthodoxy” tenure of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin as Archbishop of Chicago. Before he came to teach at Mundelein, he taught at Creighton University in Omaha for 4 years (2004-2008). In addition to his work with the Diaconate Formation Program in the Diocese of Rockford, he also served as an instructor in the Diaconate Formation Program in the Archdiocese of Chicago, which means that he certainly worked with and for the infamous heterodox priest Father Michael Ahlstrom during the latter’s inexplicable tenure as head of the Archdiocesan diaconate program.

      AND, equally ominously, in 2012 Father Fuller became the editor of the notorious heterodox journal Chicago Studies, and served as editor at least until his appointment to the aforementioned USCCB post. (He may still be the editor of Chicago Studies; I don’t know, though.)

      https://www.rockforddiocese.org/pdfs/pressreleases/2016-05-24-PRESS%20RELEASE-Fuller%20Appointment.pdf

      http://www.usccb.org/news/2016/16-061.cfm

  11. Even in the highest places Satan reigns and directs the course of events. Satan will succeed in infiltrating into the highest positions in the Church. … A time of very severe trial is also coming for the Church. Cardinals will oppose Cardinals and Bishops will oppose Bishops. Satan will enter into their very midst.

    Third Secret of Fatima.

    Father Martin does not serve God.

  12. Recommended reading:

    ‘The Pope and the Jesuits’ by James Hitchcock, published by the National Committee of Catholic Laymen, 1984

    Be not afraid.

  13. Great column, Carl.

    You will win no friends among the powerful at the USCCB or America magazine’s Jesuits, but your reward will be great in heaven!

  14. Fr. Martin;

    (With all due respect to Ann Landers) – You may have a point, but if you keep your hat on maybe no one will notice.

  15. Foremost, don’t Forget that God is in charge and present In the boat, sleeping, while the Storm is all over us. Don’t be afraid and be at peace in your heart despite the present attack against the Church by the forces of Darkness.

  16. Jesus warned about false prophets who come as wolves in sheep’s clothing! and Paul warned us of “false apostles”
    St John warned us..Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

    I pray “father” James Martin will repent of his errors before it’s too late.
    He is a fraud and God have mercy on him for leading many souls astray with falsehood and half-truths!
    I’m not sure how his false books can get a Nihil Obstat?
    God have mercy on the church.

    • also for got to mention another point…does anyone notice how “Father” James Martin and Pope Francis are both Jesuits? Pope Francis will protect his own Jesuit brother and give him a seat at a top ranking position at the Vatican.

      “Birds of the same feather flock together”.

      • Since when is being a Jesuit a sin. They are amongst the hardest working orders in the church. 500 years a growing faster than any other community. Thanks to the fact that they take the time to study and learn the real truths before being ordained. God bless all Jesuits from the leader of the church to the most humble country priest. AMDG!

        • Being a Jesuit is not a sin. (By the way: If you’re asking a question, then please end the sentence with a question mark, not with a period.)

          But perverting and falsifying the eternal and unchanging truths of the Catholic Church, as Father Martin and all too many other members of the Society of Jesus (e.g., the “gang” at America Magazine) IS a sin – and a grievous one at that.

          “They are amongst the hardest working orders in the church. 500 years a growing faster than any other community. Thanks to the fact that they take the time to study and learn the real truths before being ordained.”

          Aside from the fact that the above quote contains only one sentence and two sentence fragments, which “real truths” are you talking about? The REAL “real truths” of the Catholic Church, found in Sacred Scripture, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and the long, long line of Magisterial teachings of Holy Mother Church, going back in an unbroken line to the first Pope, St. Peter? Or the false teachings of the de-facto “American National Catholic Church” which exists in too many places in this country (and you could change the first word to the nationality of your choice and still be accurate)?

          “God bless all Jesuits from the leader of the church to the most humble country priest.”

          Does that include those of whom God spoke through the prophet Isaiah:

          “Woe upon you, that lightly harness yourselves to ill-doing, and draw down upon you, as with a strong rope, its guilt! What is this, you say, that the Holy One of Israel threatens? Quick, no waiting; let us know the worst, and with all speed! Woe upon you, the men who call evil good, and good evil; whose darkness is light, whose light darkness; who take bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe upon you, that think yourselves wise, and boast of your own foresight! Woe upon you, heroes of the tankard, brave hearts round the mixing-bowl, that take bribes to acquit the guilty, and rob the innocent of his rights!” (Isaiah 5: 18-23)

          Does your quote also include those of whom Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, God-made-man, Priest, Prophet, and King, spoke:

          “And if anyone hurts the conscience of one of these little ones, that believe in me, he had better have been drowned in the depths of the sea, with a mill-stone hung about his neck. Woe to the world, for the hurt done to consciences! It must needs be that such hurt should come, but woe to the man through whom it comes!” (Matthew 18: 6-7)

          Does your comment include those of whom the holy apostle St. Paul wrote to St. Timothy:

          “Be sure of this, that in the world’s last age there are perilous times coming. Men will be in love with self, in love with money, boastful, proud, abusive; without reverence for their parents, without gratitude, without scruple, without love, without peace; slanderers, incontinent, strangers to pity and to kindness; treacherous, reckless, full of vain conceit, thinking rather of their pleasures than of God. They will preserve all the outward form of religion, although they have long been strangers to its meaning. From these, too, turn away. They count among their number the men that will make their way into house after house, captivating weak women whose consciences are burdened by sin; women swayed by shifting passions, who are for ever inquiring, yet never attain to recognition of the truth. Moses found rivals in Jannes and Mambres; just so the men I speak of set themselves up in rivalry against the truth, men whose minds are corrupt, whose faith is counterfeit; yet they will come to little, they will soon be detected, like those others, in their rash folly.”

          And don’t say that there are no such men in the Society of Jesus, because that is a LIE. Not all of them are such, but all too many certainly are.

          “AMDG!”

          Do you even know what that acronym stands for? It is an acronym of the Latin phrase “Ad majorem Dei gloriam” – which means “To the greater glory of God?” I ask you: Just HOW is the greater glory served, furthered, or achieved by perverting and falsifying the truths and doctrines and dogmas of the one and only Church established by God on earth – namely, the Catholic Church – as Father Martin and all too many other Jesuits in the U.S. and worldwide do? (To deny that is also a LIE.)

          And there is another acronym which always should follow “AMDG” – namely, “HBMV”, which stands for “(Et) honorem Beati Mariae Virgini.” The correct English translation of that phrase is “(and) honor to the Blessed Virgin Mary.” Tell me: How is the Blessed Virgin Mary honored by seeing her only-begotten Son (God made man, remember) and His Church crucified all over again through the perversion and falsification of the Faith by Father Martin and his friends, supporters, fellow-travelers, and “useful idiots” – including all too many other Jesuits in the U.S. and elsewhere? They do dishonor to Holy Mother Church (which Jesus entrusted to the care of the apostles, in the person of his Blessed and Most Holy Mother, while he was being crucified for the sins of the world – including the ongoing sins of Father Martin) who pervert and falsify its eternal and unchanging truths.

          • Two addenda:

            “They are amongst the hardest working orders in the church. 500 years a growing faster than any other community.”

            Again, Ms. McGowan, which “church” are you talking about in your sentence? The real Catholic Church, founded by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Or the de-facto heterodox (of the “left”) American National Catholic Church, which exists in all too many Catholic parishes across the country (and whose growth has been aided and abetted by all too many Jesuits across the U.S. – particularly so in their educational institutions, but also through America Magazine) and which seems to be provoking a de-jure schism with the Catholic Church just as real as the de-jure schism provoked by Marcel Lefebvre and his sedevacantist flock a little over 29 years ago?

            Your sentence fragment in the above quote is a LIE. It is the religious orders which have held to the truths of the Catholic Church and its teachings on religious life, found in “Perfectae caritatis” – well worth your reading (as is “Ordinatio sacerdotalis,” by the way – though that is occasioned by one of your other comments on this article) – which are the fastest growing religious orders in the Catholic Church (the real one) in the United States in particular and in the world in general.

            And I inadvertently omitted the citation for the last of the Scripture quotations in my comment above: 2 Timothy 3: 1-9.

          • Thank you Mr. Dominic Lombardo!
            It seems Patty Mcgowan’s head is clouded with confusion and cannot see the light. Let’s pray for her!

            Patty you need to understand there are “false prophets” read Matthew chapter 7, in the church that will deceive the elect. Many anti-christs in the world, read 1 john chapter 5.
            And that’s what Mr. James Martin is and the like! Mr. James Martin uses the same demonic verbiage tactics like the LGBTQ/left wing crowd. It’s sad.
            He is a fake priest because in his books he never talks about the homosexual should be living a chaste life.
            Please read the Bible more and watch EWTN and stop listening to CNN and the homosexual liberal anti-christian agenda.

  17. Shows how low the rump cino liberal.scarcely roman or Catholicssuch asmartin of amer. Mgz. and ab martin.pf Ireland have become Both Martin’s Vacate the faith and morals sexual and otherwise of the church. That Martinis still s priest let alone promoted.by the Vatican is a sorry sight to behold. NEVER again will I give money.to usccb or.liberal bishops like south.cal oR Cupich.of Chicago.. Sad to see faithful.clergy like Wienady demoted while homosexual apostates agenda promoting alleged clergy like cupich and Martin run.loose at the mouth and are promoted..

    • Don’t worry! remember what Jesus said!

      Luke 17:1-2 Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. 2 It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble”.

      Fr Martin (and Pope Francis, usccb bishops,et.al..) is causing alot of christians to stumble! Take heed of the warning!
      Pray for their conversion!

  18. “Why does Fr. Martin persist in embarrassing, sleight-of-substance tactics?”

    Ummm…because he’s a Jesuit? Has there ever been a better living, walking, talking definition of the pejorative term “Jesuitical”?

  19. Can there be a comparison of one who upholds the perennial Magisterium of the Catholic Church and one who engages in demonic dissent from the teaching of the spouse of Jesus Christ – His Church?
    The contrast is all too apparent.
    As is the contrast between those who could bring the rouge Jesuit to correction but do not, and those who would see the advocate of licentiousness receive a temporal correction before an eternal one is rendered.
    This week’s pericopes from the Book of Maccabees in the Office of Readings provide the perfect lens to what is transpiring before our very eyes.
    The Gentiles have raised the abomination in the temple, the faithful conceal the mark of their covenant relationship with Almighty God, the Word of God is discarded as metaphorical, and they frolic in the gymnasium.
    Save us from these clerics, O Lord.

  20. Excellent article.

    I know I shouldn’t laugh but Patty McGowan’s comments are truly humorous and a fitting “defense” of Fr. Martin. BTW, not all cardinals and bishops are fat.

  21. Great article! Many of us are waiting to see what will finally trip up Fr. Martin.

    BTW, it’s “cue” the laugh track, not “queue.” You’re not having the laughs stand in line, you’re having them begin their performance.

    • Hahaha!
      Don’t you mean thank the “god of this world” ? Read 2 Cor. 4:4

      Jesus warned about false prophets who come as wolves in sheep’s clothing! and Paul warned us of “false apostles”
      St John warned us..Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

      Throughtout catholic history there has been heretics, apostates, “fake priests” and “fake christians”.

      Don’t be decieved by Satan!
      Read the Bible more and pray for Mary’s intercession!

  22. The article is well written and clearly understandable. We are the products of our times, environments, families, etc. Martin is a Jesuit, and I presume not of the “classically” trained era. Hence, his formation was likely along the lines of personal choice and freedom over and above traditions, magisterial teaching, etc. I really don’t have time to read any more his writing. It’s rather banal and repeats the same, liberally based mantra over and over again.

3 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Why does Fr. Martin persist in embarrassing, sleight-of-substance tactics? - Catholic Crossing
  2. MONDAY CATHOLICA EDITION – Big Pulpit
  3. Why does Fr. James Martin persist in embarrassing, sleight-of-substance tactics? | PagadianDiocese.org

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*