A Response to Bill Donohue About that Wretch, Theodore McCarrick

Catholic League president Bill Donohue recently wrote a response to the revelations about Cardinal McCarrick. The well-known defender of the Church (via the Catholic League) wrote, in part:

A little over a year after assuming the reins of the Catholic League, I started exchanging letters with Newark Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. He was genuinely supportive of our efforts. On October 17, 1994, he wrote to me saying, “I have been speaking to the bishops of New Jersey at our Provincial meeting and encouraging them to support the work of the Catholic League in their own dioceses.”

Now he is bearing a heavy cross. The takeaway for me is clear. ...

Mr Donohue goes on to write what I suppose would be considered a muted and sympathetic essay in Christian charity, and ends by asking us to pray for Cardinal McCarrick.

Very nice, but utterly deficient.

Why? Because: Enough of this obscenity is enough, and we're long past "enough".

First of all, Mr Donohue has no way of knowing whether a congenital liar like McCarrick (who lied for decades about what he was "into", and who lied to all and sundry, up to and including a man the current pope has canonized: John Paul II) could remotely be "genuinely supportive of our efforts". Lying and falsely representing themselves is the essential problem with homosexual clerics: one has no way of knowing how honest they are about anything. Their lives are a lie, and they lie to cover that reality up.

The Homosexual Rape of the Church

Sin makes you stupid, or as Aquinas put it, "Sin darkens the intellect." In McCarrick's case – and in the case of all homosexuals in the clergy – sin makes liars of them as well, or they would have never been allowed into the clergy in the first place. They falsely represented themselves to get in, or had older homosexuals let them in, for "favors".

Liars, and thieves, too, they are: thieves spiritual, thieves physical (rape, molestation) and thieves of ecclesiastical reputation. They've destroyed the reputation of the Catholic Church. It will take 500 years of extremely serious efforts by all the clergy to even remotely begin to restore the Church's reputation. And homosexuality has devastated Church morale. It is incredible (in a literal sense) how devastated Church morale is by these perverts, worming their way into the vitals of the Church, like maggots or parasites. (They've gutted the "Vatican II" Church, certainly, and hastened its collapse.) Were the Church not divinely inspired and sustained, truly, it would die. Read the disgust and anguish of Michael Brendan Dougherty here, for an example:

An excerpt:

There is an undeniable psychological tension between my religious belief that I cannot have hope for salvation outside the visible, institutional Church and my honest conviction that of all the institutions and societies that intersect with my life, the Church is by far the most corrupt, the most morally lax, the most disillusioning, and the most dangerous for my children. In that tension, personal prayer will dry up like dew at noon.

That's how bad this situation is. But let us put it in historical perspective:

• The Protestant Reformation has been with us 500 years. It has gone a long way – via the "Vatican II Church" and the alterations of the Mass and all our other devotions – in turning the modern Catholic Church into a Protestant denomination (despite occasional claims otherwise).
• Islam has been with us 1400 years. It, too, is the "gift that keeps on giving". 
• And now we have a homosexual mafia burrowed into the heart of the Church, a true parasite apparently resisting every effort to remove it.

Make no mistake about any of them. All three of these crucifixions directly attack the central Christian revelation of the Incarnation.

• Islam is Christianity's "kill shot", denying the Incarnation root and branch, insisting that God is one person, not three, let alone not allowing one of them incarnating Himself to save us from sin.
• Protestantism accepts the Incarnation, certainly, but takes the reason for it away. All one has to do is call on the Lord and one is saved, having accepted God as one's Savior. (Romans 10:13; the most Protestant verse in the Bible).
• But Protestantism teaches this salvation requires no change of one's nature. We are, as Luther said, Simul Justus et Peccator, simultaneously justified before God but also still a sinner, or as he metaphorically put it, we are each a manure pile covered with snow, the snow being God's grace and the manure pile our permanent human (fallen) nature. (This is, of course, grotesque; see C.S. Lewis' questioning of this teaching in his 10th Letter to Malcolm, in Letters to Malcolm, Chiefly on Prayer, for one example of a push back against the notion.)
• This foundational Protestant idea denies the New Testament doctrine that Christians are now a new creation in Christ, that our nature is changed; indeed, that we are "born again" by the Holy Spirit through baptism and reception of the Most Holy Eucharist, which changes our nature through what the Greeks call theosis, and the West, Divinization. For example:

·   St. Athanasius: "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." (De inc. 54, 3: PG 25, 192B) and [CCC 460]

·   St. Thomas Aquinas: "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods." (Opusc. 57, 1-4) [CCC 460]

·   This teaching is stated in many ways throughout the New Testament. Examples:

·   John 1:12 “But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” (Obviously, a new creation)

·   2 Cor 5:17, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” (Again, a new creation) 2 Peter 1:4 might well put it best; see also Romans, 6:4, 7:6, 12:2; Galatians 3:27; Ephesians 4:22-24; Colossians 3:8-12.

• It is because of this change in our nature that Catholicism has always been adamantly set against sin. Sin can have no place in a Christian's life, as St. Paul teaches throughout his writings. (Example: 1 Cor 6:9-11) But because the modern (and Modernist) Church is essentially Protestant – Luther famously wrote that he could sin many times a day and it not affect his assurance of salvation – it now teaches that we cannot live up to the moral law, and must accept moral failure and yet have no fear of our salvation, because the Church essentially now accepts Simul Justus et Peccator.
  

What Homosexuality Demands

Now, what homosexuality does is to create a third cross for Christianity to bear: whereas Islam denies the Incarnation essentially, and Protestantism denies the Incarnation as necessary for our theosis, and denies theosis essentially, so "GayChurch" now embraces "incarnation" in a wholly prurient, carnal, and libidinous sense: we are sex objects to violate. Isn't THAT what the homosexual clergy do? They violate: they violate their vows and the Ten Commandments as much as they violate altar boys and seminarians. And of these three crucifixions: denying the reality of the Incarnation, misunderstanding the salvic nature of the Incarnation, or literally buggering the Incarnation, which is obviously worse? (N.B. Traditional Arabic Islamic culture is one of the most homosexual on Earth, despite Koranic teaching; and Protestantism never had any relationship to homosexuality except to condemn it, until the latter 20th century when "mainline" Protestant Churches embraced it. More traditional types of Protestantism continue to reject it, of course. The Catholic Church is torn between these positions; Traditional Catholicism continues to uphold the ancient teaching, with Progressive Catholics going the mainline Protestant route.) 

So, therefore, with all this in mind and reminding everyone I am not God, and do not make final judgements on anyone's soul's eternal fate, I answer Mr Donohue thusly, (and certainly do not think it is "over the top"): Pray for Cardinal McCarrick? I myself pray for Cardinal McCarrick, alright. Indeed, in an utmost earnest fervor, I pray that he go to Hell quickly – if that is his destiny. I am not God and I cannot send him there, but he ought to go. Few deserve it more. Why? He has spent decades upon decades lying, bearing false witness, coveting the bodies of young men in his charge, imposing himself on them, perhaps murdering their salvation, and blaspheming and directly insulting God Himself, all Three Persons, but especially the Second and Third. (Allegations that these evils were few in number or long ago are irrelevant: it happened, and it no doubt happened many more times than reported; and McCarrick lied about it for decades.) Theodore McCarrick is a soul vampire, an undead who recreates his hideousness in the young men he's violated.

Dante put homosexuals in the Seventh Circle of Hell, below even murderers and suicides. Considering what McCarrick and those like him have done over long lives, it is, simply, quite apropos.

He can go join "Franny" Spellmen in the bottom of the seventh circle of Hell. At least he won't lack for company.

N.B. Not I do not say McCarrick is unforgivable. Were he to "come out" and admit all, instead of hiding behind the Church's lawyers, as he is doing right now – were he to "name names" and finally, for once in a long life of soul-damning deceit, be honest – maybe he can avoid the serious possibility of Hell that he now faces. But don't hold your breath. "Sin darkens the intellect", indeed. And the last thing the GayChurch wants is true conversion.

An Préachán