Monday, April 9, 2018

The Unholy Face


 He was born in Croatia, as Josip Grbavac, in the year 1967. Since circa 1995, he has been known to the world as Braco (pronounced  BRAT-tso) or "little brother." Also nicknamed "The Gazer," Braco has garnered a large following. Why? He does not claim to possess spiritual powers, or to be a "healer," yet thousands claim that by staring at his face (or sometimes even a picture of his face), they have experienced cures, sensations of energy, and inner peace. He has not spoken to anyone for an interview since 2002, however his website says the following:

Those meeting Braco´s peaceful Gaze(sic--capitalized as if belonging to God) for the first time commonly note this inviting feeling of familiarity, even friendship and trust. Others report this connection growing with time, becoming a uniquely personal foundation as their lives are enriched by the gift Braco shares. Braco’s work on behalf of people everywhere, to better lives and offer renewed hope, has been taking place since 1995, helping people in many countries: including Croatia, Slovenia, Germany, the United States, Mexico, Japan, Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, Holland, Czech Republic, Finland, Portugal, Denmark, Israel, Australia, Russia, Dominican Republic. And this list is growing with new countries offering invitations for Braco to visit. (See http://www.braco.me/en/about/introduction-braco/).

Braco does not espouse any religion, but simply spouts sweet platitudes such as, "Life is always worth living" reminiscent of the 1950s show with Abp. Fulton Sheen, Life is Worth Living, so they're not even very original platitudes. So why a post on this man? He is a danger, and very insidious. Unlike pagan gurus who openly espouse false teachings, what could be wrong with Braco? He doesn't claim to have healing power. The fact is that Braco is indeed claiming, albeit indirectly, that staring at his face promotes peace, happiness, and cures. What I hope to expose in this post, is that going to Braco is an evil inversion of devotion to the Most Holy Face of Jesus Christ. Just as "Divine Mercy" detracts from devotion to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, this deceitful man detracts and perverts devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus. He is peddling a form of anti-Christian New Ageism, and many people are falling for it.

"The Gift" Has Sinister Beginnings

 Braco claims to have received his "gift" from one Ivica Prokić (d. 1995). According to Braco's website, Prokic As a young boy of age seven, had a potent experience while playing by a river with other children. He passed out and later described "feeling a piece of the sun enter him", and this would become a determining moment of his outstanding abilities being awakened.

In childhood, Ivica already felt different from his friends, but it took him years to realize the nature of his special kind of abilities and talents. As a young man, he began experiencing unusual visions that grew more numerous and stronger with time. Eventually, he would recognize that some of the unique things he saw in these visions were becoming a reality, and then he finally came to understand many of the symbols he saw as well.

Moving to Zagreb, Ivica would undergo two more defining encounters. He underwent a near-death experience, which heightened his visionary abilities, and in 1989, he visited a bio-energetic clinic where his talents were recognized as prophetic in nature and exceptional for healing. Now Ivica found the certainty he needed to begin sharing his work to lovingly help people in their lives. His abilities had further developed to enable him to see the past, present and future of those who requested his aid.

Working techniques evolved, and Ivica would come to have short conversations with his visitors, offering advice for their lives, and for the lives of loved ones brought in photographs by visitors. Ivica also began writing short books and gave one to each person. These books offered to help people better understand themselves and life, and many people felt a special loving aid assisting them as they read, and afterwards.

This "gift" was given to Braco, as if he were a "little brother" of his; Braco met Ivica in October 1993. Their bond and recognition of each other was instant, and the friendship and trust that ensued was the foundation of Braco’s future.

Completing thirteen books, Ivica would write about Braco in several, naming him as his successor and carrying on the life mission he began. Years before Ivica met Braco, he also prophetically spoke of his coming to join him and work at his side.

Their meeting, filled with such joy and happiness, made Braco immediately decide to leave his career and former life-style to be at Ivica’s side. After Ivica’s death in April 1995, visitors did not stop coming to Srebrnjak 1 (the Center in Zagreb, Croatia), but instead came to Braco to tell him he was the one to carry on Ivica’s loving work. Braco accepted this responsibility and found in himself the talents to share the gift with people, that began helping visitors and their loved ones immediately, and continues today.

What do people pay to do when seeing Braco? Again from his website:

After visitors are welcomed and brief introductory information about Braco and his gift is shared, sometimes including a film clip, Braco will come on stage. He will stand in front of the group. During the five to seven minute duration of him sharing his Gaze(sic), he remains peacefully calm and motionless. His Gaze(sic) embraces the whole group, and he may not look at every single person individually. There are no therapeutic actions and he neither speaks to his visitors, nor touches them. He does not make any diagnoses, or provide any treatment. Braco’s Gaze(sic) alone is the way of sharing the gift with others.


  • After Braco leaves the stage, time will be offered for a few people to share their own experience who wish to do so. A session usually lasts 30-35 minutes.
  • Only adults (18 years or older) may gaze with Braco.
  • Women who are pregnant past their third month may not attend.
  • People with illnesses are advised to follow the recommendation of their doctor before and after their gazing experience.

Some people bring a photo of their children and other loved ones who are not able to gaze with Braco to create a loving connection for the non-gazing individual. (see Braco.me). 


What's Wrong With It?

1. Possible Foul Play. 

Braco's mentor, Ivica Prokic, died on the coast of South Africa by a freak wave. The exact circumstances of his death at the young age of 44 are unknown to this day. Interestingly, Prokic allegedly took off his gold jewelry and handed his money to Braco before his freak accident. 

2. Prokic claimed to have received "energy," had an NDE, and became a fortune teller.

His encounter (if he is not a charlatan), was not of God. Divination (fortune telling) in all its forms is condemned by God, "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord; because of these same detestable practices the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you." (Deuteronomy 18:10-12). 

3. Meditating on Braco's face causes people to "feel energy." 

"That energy started moving inside me. I could actually see it," says Ashley Shapiro, who believes Braco’s gaze cured her respiratory disease. "I said, ‘Oh my good Lord in Heaven, I’m going to heal.'" (See https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/If-Looks-Could-Heal-Healer-Makes-South-Florida-Stop-140480503.html). 

The experience of a surge of energy or power is also related to the cultivation of altered states of consciousness.(See  Karlis Osis, et al., "Dimensions of the Meditative Experience," The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, vol. 14, no. 1, 1982, p. 121). Thus, "[Meditation is] a profoundly transformative process, for when practiced intensely, meditation disciplines almost invariably lead into the transpersonal [occult] realm of experience…. A progressive sequence of altered states of consciousness can occur, which may ultimately result in the permanent, radical [occult] shift in consciousness known as enlightenment or liberation." (See Roger N. Walsh, Frances Vaughan, eds., Beyond Ego: Transpersonal Dimensions in Psychology (Los Angeles, CA: J. P. Tarcher, 1980), pp. 136-137). The pagan meditation he encourages can open the door to possession via the occult. 

4. Braco uses a pagan sun symbol (and sells jewelry with the image for people to wear).

"Sun worship has also been found in Babylonian texts and in a number of Asian religious cults. Today, many Pagans honor the sun at Midsummer..." "The sun has long been a symbol of power and magic. The Greeks honored the sun god with "prudence and piety," according to James Frazer's . Because of the sun's sheer power, they made offerings of honey rather than wine -- they knew that it was important to keep a deity of such power from becoming intoxicated!

The Egyptians identified several of their gods with a solar disc above the head, indicating that the deity was a god of the light." (See https://www.thoughtco.com/pagan-and-wiccan-symbols-4123036)

5. It engenders Indifferentism and a cult of personality. 

The focus becomes this man's face, and it gives you peace and healing for some unknown reason. Nothing is attributed to God; every religion is treated as being just as good as every other belief system (Indifferentism). The so-called "theoretical physics" that support Braco's claims come from one Professor Alex Schneider, Board member of the Swiss Society for Parapsychology. This is not a "scientific endorsement." Moreover, the professor's explanation on Braco's site is little more than mumbo-jumbo meant to sound profound:

Basically, Braco’s influence is not to be understood as energies coming from his person. His charisma is such that his "higher" human qualities, together with the help of the catalysis of the individual participants (the above-mentioned group dynamics), puts him in a position to change the people standing before him in their deeper human layers in such a way that they are able to absorb harmonizing information, as well as to awaken these themselves. These then become effective in the outer being of the participants, such as self-healing. Braco always stresses that he is not a healer, meaning, he does not focus on influencing a physical disability of an individual.  Measurements done by Volkamer show that Braco’s subtle energies are about the same as those of any other spiritual healer. The unique feature of Braco, therefore, does not consist of the release of any healing energies, but is taking place on another level. (With nonsense like this written under the guise of being meaningful, Schneider might want to consider a career in politics).

How to Explain the "Healings"

1. The "Placebo Effect." In a psychology experiment, a placebo is an inert treatment or substance that has no known effects. "Even though placebos contain no real treatment, researchers have found they can have a variety of both physical and psychological effects. Participants in placebo groups have displayed changes in heart rate, blood pressure, anxiety levels, pain perception, fatigue, and even brain activity. These effects point to the brain's role in health and well-being." (See https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-placebo-effect-2795466). The huge build-up given Braco before you get into a staring contest with him, can make people believe something will happen and trigger the placebo effect. It's a type of group hysteria, where people experience the same "symptoms."

2. Natural Processes. Many people are taking conventional treatment while going to stare. The treatments start to work, and they attribute it to staring. It reminds me of someone who told me an old joke about a city kid who goes to a farm. The farmer tells him, "When the rooster crows, the sun is rising." The city kid said, "Wow! That's some pretty powerful rooster!"

3. Liars and lunatics. Some people want 15 minutes of fame, some might get paid by Braco, or some might be embarrassed to say they experienced nothing when everyone else allegedly did. People who are mentally unbalanced will often attend these type of events, and they imagine all kinds of things due to their illness.

4. Demonic activity. Braco got his "power" from someone who practiced divination; an occult practice. He uses pagan images and wants people to go into an altered state while meditating on him as some wacky "deity." It's not too hard to see demons at work.

The alleged healings can be the result of any (or any combination of) the above. One thing is certain: they are not true healings from God.  

Insulting the Holy Face of Our Lord

Devotion to the Holy Face of Christ was revealed by Jesus to Sr Marie of St Peter (1816-1848) a Carmelite nun of Tours in France. The primary purpose of the devotion is to make reparation for sins against the first three commandments: Denial of God (atheism / communism), blasphemy, and the profanation of Sundays and Holy Days.

The devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus, based on the life and writings of Sr. Marie of St. Peter, was eventually approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885 who established the devotion as an Arch-confraternity for the whole world. There are promises attached to the devotion, and a "Golden Arrow" prayer. Just as sins are like poison arrows in Christ's Sacred Heart, so those who recite the prayer and keep the devotion shoot a "golden arrow of love" into His Heart, bringing delight.

Devotion to the Holy Face is also a reminder of our true last end, the Beatific Vision of God face to face. According to theologian Pohle, "The supernatural beatitude of Heaven fundamentally consists in the intuitive vision of the Divine Essence (visio Dei intuitiva), as opposed to the purely abstractive and analogical knowledge which man has of God here below." (See Dogmatic Theology, B. Herder Book Co., [1955] 12:30). Now, we are to focus on the face of a mere man, devoid of true religious signification, seeped in occultic origin and influence, who wants you to pay for staring at him in the hopes of achieving peace and wellness. I'm surprised he can keep a straight face when taking people's money while saying he doesn't claim to be a healer! So why do you stare at people, and have them stare at you?

Conclusion
So, is Braco insane, possessed or a charlatan? Any one (or any combination) is possible. I doubt that he is deranged, unless "crazy like a fox" counts. He certainly does the devil's work, whether or not a case of actual possession, and he may certainly take advantage of people desperate for healing and peace of mind. Stay clear of this man, who could open you up to malevolent influences. Seek your peace in the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ. While looking at an image of His Holy Face, recite the "Golden Arrow" prayer, ""May the most holy, most sacred, most adorable, most incomprehensible and unutterable Name of God be always praised, blessed, loved, adored and glorified in Heaven, on earth, and under the earth, by all the creatures of God, and by the Sacred Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Amen."

Finally, let us develop a devotion for the Holy Face of Jesus Christ, as recommended by Pope Leo XIII in 1887 to the members of the Archconfraternity whom honor It:

I. To wear on their persons a picture of the Holy Face, to kiss it devoutly the 1st thing in the morning on awaking and at night before going to sleep, to consecrate their actions during the day to the divine Face, to resolve to perform them in its presence and before its eyes.

II. At the commencement of their prayers, or of any exercise of piety, has an easy means of placing themselves in the presence of God, and of combating distractions, to think of the Holy Face whose eyes are open and fixed upon us, to adore it with faith, to look at it with love.

III. In presence of the Blessed Sacrament, to recall to our remembrance the fact that the Face of the Savior is present there in the sacred Host: that it sees us, listens to us, blesses us, speaks to us interiorly.

IV. To endeavor in their conduct to imitate the virtues of patience, of gentleness, of serenity, of modesty, which shine in the Holy Face. Listen to the divine Master who said learn of me, and seeing me, that I am meek in face and humble of heart: knowing that, in fact the gentleness and humility of the heart of Jesus are, as in a very clear mirror, admirably reflected on the Face of the Man God.

V. In trials, sicknesses, accidents, temptations, to prostrate themselves before the picture of the Holy Face whether in their private Oratory, or above all, in the church of the Confraternity where it is specially exposed.

VI. To have in their houses a picture of the Holy Face which they shall honor as the protector of the family and the Guardian of the domestic hearth; to recite before it the prayers which are habitually said in common by the household.

VII. When they shall hear any blasphemies pronounced, or shall see and act of impious sacrilege which they cannot prevent, to recollect themselves and to pronounce with their hearts, if they cannot with their lips, the words: Behold, O God, our protector, and look upon the Face of thy Christ, or: May the Name of the Lord be blessed! Sit Nomen Domini benedictum!

VIII. To propagate the worship of the Holy Face in their locality, amongst their friends and acquaintances, and to make use of it in order to combat, in every possible manner, the terrible effects of indifference and irreligion.


90 comments:

  1. This type of charlatan is most successful because of the Novus Ordo Sect, as the rise of Protestantism and New Age Movements is due to the general apostasy of the nations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. The Great Apostasy has indeed brought about much (if not almost ALL) the evil in today’s world.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  2. Since the topic here discussed (among other things) was about the Holy Face, I will take the opportunity of some advertising for spreading this cause.

    If anyone wants to receive free a Holy Face medallion and Holy Face pamphlets (and other devotionals), you can contact me and I will send them to you for free.

    My email:
    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-g25eUM4IN-M/WF7gGkg5NiI/AAAAAAAAAAs/Fp5gNcFeKboonnM1Z6HT7jESV2xaNTpDQCK4B/s1600/email.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the information and offer of devotionals to the Most Holy Face Of Christ!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  3. What is thee exact meaning of
    "Interprets Omens?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It means to foretell future events based on some event. For example, crows were circling around your house therefore someone will get seriously ill or die. It is superstitious nonsense and God deplores it as the future is truly known to none but Him.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  4. The photo of Braco gives me the creeps. People who pay to look at him must have more money than sense. This is the first that I have heard of The Holy Face Devotion. I am very interested in it. I have been trying to find out if Sr. Mary of St. Peter was ever canonized. Does anyone know?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      Sr. Mary of St Peter has not been canonized by the True Church; who knows if the Great Apostasy not happened. Nor has the Vatican II sect attempted a false canonization. They reserve those for antipopes like Roncalli and Wojtyla.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. ...and Bishop Montini.
      (false Pope Paul VI)

      Delete
    3. They're talking about canonizing Pius XII.
      (Not kidding!)
      Personally,I think if Pius XII had been staunchly CATHOLIC from 1939-1958 the Novus Ordo wouldn't want anything to do with him.
      This Man in your blog entry is frightening and the back story is even more bizarre/unsettling.
      Some guy guves up his money and jewelry just before dying?
      Sounds like a nefarious hostile takeover.

      Delete
    4. @anonymous7:18

      The Vatican II sect will often place the Holy next to the unholy to show the alleged hermeneutic of continuity. Hence the beatification of Pope Pius IX with the “canonization” Of Roncalli. It’s not that Pope Pius IX was liked by Modernists (far from it!) but that it shows Catholics with Modernists and makes them seem equally acceptable in the “Church.” They will the same with Pope Pius XII as with Pope Pius IX.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    5. Anonymous @ 7:18 pm

      "Personally,I think if Pius XII had been staunchly CATHOLIC from 1939-1958 the Novus Ordo wouldn't want anything to do with him."

      Pope Pius XII WAS "staunchly Catholic" until the end. Any suggestion otherwise reeks of the accusers NOT being "staunchly Catholic."

      Over the last two weeks, the BOORS at Pistrina Liturgica have allowed all manner of criticism of Pope Pius XII to be displayed on their infernal blog. At least one anti-Pius XII agitator went as far as to boldly state that Pope Pius XII lost the Papacy in 1940-41!

      I don't imagine that Introibo will tolerate that type of perversity on his blog. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Introibo.)

      Moreover, I find it of little use to allow "anonymous" posters to discuss the so-called demerits of a certainly valid Pope who gave us the Dogma of the Assumption etc.

      Allowing people to focus, or zero-in, on certain, seemingly controversial events surrounding Pope Pius XII, without having privileged insider knowledge of the circumstances Pope Pius XII was faced with at the time, is opening up the conversation to the inevitable next step, which is outright denial of the validity of the Popes back as far as Pope St. Pius X. From experience, I find that is the usual progression.

      Delete
    6. @anon 9:50
      You are correct that Pope Pius XII was always Catholic and pope. To suggest otherwise is not only false but can lead to being a Vacancy Pusher, as I call them. Ibranyi has Pope Honorius II as the last true pope in 1130 AD!!

      I can understand people having a preference for something, like the midnight fast. I think if you can stick to it without detriment to your health, it is laudable to do it. However, that’s ALL it is—a mere preference.

      Pope Pius XII was pope. That means whatever he decreed was always fully and completely Catholic.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    7. Even the FSSP & ICKSP offered the pre-1955 Holy Week this year.

      Most of them aren't valid priests yet even indults know the 1950's ushered in the Novus Ordo.

      Pius XII made terrible destructive decisions and was parcel to modifications that are the result of him blessing the Liturgical Change Commission in 1948.

      Our chapel avoids every "change" from 1951-1958.

      God bless.
      Andrew


      Andrew

      Delete
    8. Andrew,
      I have attended both the Holy Week pre-1955, and the Holy Week as revised by Pope Pius XII.

      It is inaccurate to say that Pope Pius XII "ushered in" the Novus Bogus. If you want to argue that the law ceased to bind because it gave people wrong ideas as time passed, that's one thing. To say they're intrinsically wrong is to claim that a real pope gave evil to the Church. But that is impossible unless Pope Pius XII fell into heresy as a private theologian prior to that and lost his office. That's when people become a Vacancy Pusher. The pope who gave us the dogma of the Assumption and called the canonization of Pope St. Pius X "The greatest act of my pontificate" was a heretic?

      You can still go pre-1955 WITHOUT casting doubts upon Pope Pius XII which are unfounded.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    9. Anonymous @ 2:16 pm

      Pope Pius XII was the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and as such made liturgical changes which were promulgated and appeared in the Acta (IOW, everything was done legally and correctly). Catholics are bound to follow ALL His (Pius XII's) changes. The 1917 Code affirms that the MOST RECENT liturgical changes are to be used. It's "linear"; it's "black and white"; there are NO "shades of grey," as much as certain individuals would like there to be.

      Clergy whom have taken it upon themselves to REJECT Pope Pius XII's LEGITIMATE changes ALL acknowledge that there is NOTHING intrinsically wrong with ANY of the changes He made. (How could a legitimate pope do otherwise?) Therefore, other, fallacious, reasoning is given for their militating against a valid pope's decrees.

      Contrary to what you may think, it's NOT a "badge of honor" to be disobeying the wishes of whom ALL sede traditionalists indisputably believe was the last valid pontiff before the darkness fell. The foregoing reasons are why I'd surmise that the CMRI adhere to the latest changes of Pope Pius XII.

      Delete
    10. Introibo @ 7:41 pm

      I understand that in your above post you're NOT saying that the law ceased to bind is correct --- just that it's an "argument."

      But if you want to argue that the law ceased to bind because it MAY HAVE GIVEN/MAY GIVE people wrong ideas as time passed, that flimsy argument is vitiated by pointing out that the argument would in effect be saying that the Church gave bread which subsequently turned to stones. That is impossible. We both know that the changes cannot be an inducement to impiety.

      Delete
    11. I don’t claim they’re an inducement to impiety. I claim that people can get the idea that any type of change is ok. There is nothing intrinsically wrong. That a law can cease to bind is well recognized by the approved theologians and canonists (e.g.,Noldin, Regatillo,etc.)

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    12. Introibo,

      I wasn't saying you claim the changes are an inducement to impiety. If anything, I'm saying the opposite. I was just reiterating our belief that there's nothing intrinsically wrong with the changes. (Let me make it clear: My posts are not an attack on you.)

      And, we both know that a valid pope making legitimate changes has zero correlation with a pseudo pope making illegitimate ones.

      Sure, I agree - people can get all sorts of wrong ideas, mainly because they're ignorant. Is that the Church's problem? Even irrational Catholics (R&Rs) don't "get the idea that any type of change is ok." I don't think that that argument holds enough water for one to be rejecting the liturgical rules of a valid pope. The ironical thing, is that if one isn't knowledgeable the changes cannot possibly be a danger (in the common example of a soul migrating away from Bergo to end up eventually, say, at the CMRI) and if one is knowledgeable the same applies.

      We're talking about whether the use of the Pius XII changes causes or has the potential to cause actual harm. Can someone, anyone, cite an example of where they've done so?

      Fr. Cekada: "They [the Pius XII changes] became harmful (nociva) because of a change of circumstances, and hence automatically ceased to bind."

      And I'm saying: Thank you for your opinion, Father, however I disagree with your premise, and therefore your conclusion. Unless, of course, you're telling me, Father, that the liturgical practices which Pope Pius XII gave to the Church as bread could subsequently turn to stones. I don't think that in time and eternity under any circumstances, especially these known circumstances, that they can.

      I'm very confident, Introibo, that you're supportive of the idea that one should be necessarily selective insofar adherence to Fr. Cekada's many and varied opinions of numerous matters of concern to Catholics whom cling to tradition.

      Delete
    13. I agree with you. Fr. Cekada’s opinions are just that—opinions. I disagree with his take on Una Cum and Terri Schiavo to name but two.

      I also agree that the Pope Pius XII changes are completely Catholic. What I’m not willing to do is say that the SSPV is schismatic because they don’t accept them (“became noxious “ under the circumstances). There is a principle about laws ceasing to bind, and I have zero Magisterial authority to decide if it is correct to apply in these times of the Great Apostasy.

      Unlike Fr Cekada, who insults and condemns me for my opinion on Una Cum, I will not condemn the viable opinion of another on a point open to dispute in these novel times.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    14. Introibo,

      Thank you for your reply.

      I agree with you. By no means am I suggesting that the SSPV (or anybody else) is schismatic. That'd be a tad harsh, wouldn't it? And it really isn't viable for me, because I'd have to give up being a fan of Fr. Jenkins. :) Lol (Seriously, I like a lot of things Fr. Jenkins has to say.) However, I just so happen (for good reasons) to think they're wrong on this issue and on the Thuc consecrations, to also name but two. But, of course, the rejection of Pope Pius XII's disciplines isn't exclusive to the SSPV.

      I highly doubt that Catholic casuistry gives examples where promulgated rites and liturgies would cease to bind due to becoming noxious (If so, Fr. Cekada would've let us know. I think he's the one being "novel.") I revolt at the very idea. I'd like to see real cases showing what class of ecclesiastical laws are given as examples, and the circumstances where actual laws ceased to have force due to "nociva" and were therefore abandoned.

      Delete
  5. They also canonized Faustina along with her abomination of a diary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very sad and very true.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. The infamous diary most likely wasn't written by her & there is a high probability Sr.Faustina would be abhorred by the modern Divine Mercy Sunday replacing Low Sunday.

      I knew a valid priest (traditional valid priest
      not Novus Ordo) who's parents & grandparents originated from the same Polish village as
      Sr.Fauatina.(God rest his Soul)
      This village spoke with a rare unique Polish dialect that wasn't known outside their small area.
      Who in the World could translate that rare unique dialect into over 50 languages?

      Also,it was common knowledge in this village that Sr.Faustina & most of her fellow Nuns could barely read & write above a 6th grade level.
      Sr.Faustina's era was back when Nuns in East Europa prayed,worked,prayed,and attended Holy Mass.
      They weren't college educated social justice warriors yet &
      being barely literate was common.

      The people in this village were Catholic and not incognito modernists hiding out until 1965.
      Believe me,this priest I'm mentioning was CATHOLIC to the core.(staunch after midnight Holy Communion fast,pre-1950 Missal,etc...he was taught very well but his family)

      Lastly,the original Divine Mercy image was a bleeding Jesus Christ crowned with thorns.

      Be careful with what the Novus Ordo tells you to believe.

      Delete
    3. You make some very valid points, but Divine Mercy was condemned by the Holy Office, and Faustina’s “canonization” by Wojtyla is no proof of sainthood.

      Delete
    4. I agree with your comment about Sainthood and in no way is my comment implying she's a Saint.
      All I'm saying is she was Catholic & not a modernist new age Wojtyla type.
      I thought Pius XII era allowed the Divine Mercy prayer and the John XXIII era stopped it's usage?

      Delete
    5. I’ve never heard such about the prayer. If you have a citation please send it along. I’d be very interested!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    6. Introibo - I read where Pope Pius XII Blessed the Divine Mercy Image in 1956. Do you know anything regarding this? Thanks.

      Delete
    7. Joann,
      I have no not heard of that. Do you have a link or citation you could send? I’ll be happy to check it out and dig deeper.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    8. This article states Pius XII blessed the ORIGINAL Divine Mercy image.
      Original image was our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ crowned with thorns & bleeding,not the modern rays of light Divine Mercy image.
      I am not defending nor defaming the Divine Mercy.
      http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/faith-and-life/in-defense-of-the-divine-mercy-devotion/

      Delete
    9. Introibo - You can find where Pope Pius XII blessed the Divine Mercy Image in 1956 at the following:
      Wikipedia/Faustina Kowalska

      Delete
    10. To Joann and anonymous@2:09,

      Thank you both for bringing this to my attention. I learn a lot from my readers!

      Here's my take having read the Lepanto Institute article and the citation within the Wikipedia article on Sr. Faustina.

      1. It does seem credible that Pope Pius XII blessed a picture of the Divine Mercy in 1956. I have not seen what that image looks like. According to anonymous commenter, the original image was decidedly different. I have no way at present to confirm or deny that (a) the blessing definitely took place or (b)what that image looked like.

      2. The Lepanto Institute is a "conservative" Vatican II sect organization. As such, some arguments they make are valid only if one accepts the legitimacy of Vatican II and the Concilliar "popes," which I obviously do not.
      For example, what Roncalli did, what Cardinal Ottaviani did post-1964, and the rehabilitation of the devotion almost exactly 40 years ago on April 15, 1978 by Wotyla--are all meaningless as without Magisterial authority.

      3. Pope Pius XII put the diaries of Sr. Faustina on the Index of Prohibited Books. Hence, they WERE AUTHORITATIVELY CENSURED.

      4. The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office in 1959, was under Roncalli, but as all members were appointed with jurisdiction by Pope Pius XII, and none had yet professed heresy.

      5. The Holy Office prohibited "images and writings that promote devotion to Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by Sister Faustina." This would tend to give credence to the assertion that there could be one or more earlier forms that do not fall under the prohibition.

      6. The Holy Office further declared, "There is no evidence of the supernatural origin of these revelations.” It added "at this time"--However, the excuse of later findings and correct translations under Wojtyla, only works against, and not for, the Divine Mercy devotion.

      7. Under Popes Pius XI and XII, devotions were suppressed as "useless imitations" or corruptions of other devotions. Such suppressed devotions include The Sacred Head of Christ, and The Merciful Love of Jesus. Divine Mercy would seem to fall in that category.

      8. The claim that other seers had recorded things similar to Sr. Faustina is without merit. For example, Christ allegedly told her, "Now, I know that it is not for the graces or gifts that you love Me, but because My Will is dearer to you than life. That is why I am uniting Myself with you so intimately as with no other creature."(Divine Mercy in My Soul, The Diary of Sr. Faustina, Stockbridge, MA: Marian Press, 1987, p. 288)

      More intimately than the Blessed Virgin Mother of God? That's offensive to pious ears! No real saint had ever recorded such nonsense, or they wouldn't have become a saint.

      9. Is it possible that there was a true devotion corrupted by the Modernists? Possible, but highly unlikely given all that I wrote above.

      10. In 1954, Pope was 78 years old and suffering from stomach cancer. Is it possible that (a) the image he blessed wasn't the current Divine Mercy? Yes.

      Is it possible he blessed the Divine Mercy, due to forgetfulness, pain killers, etc.? Yes. Even if not, a simple blessing is neither papal endorsement or decree. He could have simply been blessing an image of Christ without further significance. Had Pope Pius XI blessed a Statue of Christ's Head, he would not be signaling approval of the devotion and all it stands for, nor is it per se heretical.

      That's my take, and I thank Joann, anonymous and all my readers for keeping me informed and making this blog more interesting!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    11. Introibo - I came across the original Divine Mercy painting from 1934 in two different sources. In comparing them, they seem to be the same work. Also, there was a total of three different paintings done by various artists through the years.
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Mercy_image
      thedivinemercy.org/library/article.php?NID=2826

      Delete
    12. Very interesting! Let’s see if anonymous can show us what is claimed to be the original version with Christ crowned with thorns and bleeding. In either case my analysis remains unaffected at this point.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  6. He would fit right in at a NO retreat center. Right next to the Reiki booth.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wonder what this guy puts down as his occupation when he applies for a credit card or files his taxes. "I charge people to look at my face because it heals them." Seems like a dead end career but he doesn't seem to be hurting for dough.

    I'd charge people to look at my face too but my mug is so ugly that after I got done paying all the people who needed therapy for PTSD that I think it would take me a while to break even.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t know what YOUR profession is, but you should seriously consider being a stand-up comic!!

      Thanks for the laughs!!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  8. Introibo, what do you think of Dr Tom Drolesky (www.christorchaos.com) and Griff Ruby? Griff published a book called Sede Vacante, do you know of the book and what do you think of it? Thanks,
    Inquirer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like Dr. Droleskey. As a matter of fact, we met years ago when he ran for Lt. Governor here in NY on the Right to Life Party Line in 1986. He's a good and honest man, devoted to the One True Church. I'm glad he found his way home, and I like his blog.

      I'm reading Griff Ruby's work now. I started a couple of months ago. I like most of what I've read, but I will reserve final judgement until I'm done. Between, work, family, my other obligations, and this blog, my free time is scarce. I have had contact with Mr. Ruby via an anonymous email address. I told him I would read his work and tell him my opinion when I finish.

      Dr. Droleskey knows my actual identity, but not my identity as Introibo. As we have not communicated in over 20 years he may have even forgotten me.

      Mr. Ruby knows me as Introibo, but not my real identity.

      I have high opinions of both gentlemen.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo,
      I have read on Griff Ruby’s website where he says that anyone who attends the Novus Ordo is committing “mortal sin”. How can he bind people? What are your thoughts?

      Delete
    3. He’s not “binding people” he’s stating a fact that all forms of false worship are (objectively) mortal sins against the First Commandment. Subjectively, a person may not be so culpable, but we can only judge the objective act.

      Every woman who has an abortion murders her child. Whether or not any particular woman is subjectively guilty of murder is known to God.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  9. People are so desperately looking for answers in everywhere that they fall into ludicrous traps like that. Seriously, every time I check your blog this week this guy photo make me laugh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It’s funny, yet tragic. People are looking for peace and healing by staring at this guy. It proves:
      1. People are being led astray from true spirituality after V2

      And

      2. There’s a sucker born every minute

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Our Western Hemisphere has moved too far away from the Catholic Faith & social morals.
      It's difficult to imagne our Godless secular World returning to pre-WW1 standards.
      The 1920's is when the great falling away began socially.
      Militarily the great falling away began,in my opinion,with the French Revolution & American War of Northern Aggression.(1861-1865)

      God bless.
      Andrew

      Delete
    3. The NO fake church has abolished all the traditional devotions so the faithful seek out these experiences in all manner of bizzare encounters.

      Delete
    4. To Tom and Anon@2:31

      I agree with you both!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. Introibo, is that your face? I'm on to you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol!!
      If it was I’d have to charge you!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  11. Do you take American Express and Diners Card?

    ReplyDelete
  12. You never know you may pick up some business if people sue him because his unprepossessing face made them sick?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Introibo, I didn't realize Steve Speray is at war with Father Cekada over the 55' missal. https://stevensperay.wordpress.com/2018/03/26/rr-sedevacantists-reject-holy-week-liturgy-of-pope-pius-xii/#comments. What do you make of the issue? I always thought Steve Speray and Fr.Cekada were on the same team until I discovered this controversy. In his comments, notice Steve Speray doesn't even call Father Cekada "Father" but just "Cekada" as if he were not a priest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m in general agreement with Mr. Speray. While I don’t think those who use pre-1955 are schismatic, many of the arguments they use imply that there was something intrinsically wrong with the Rites approved by Pope Pius XII. This is wrong.

      Steve does believe that Fr Cekada is a valid priest, but I think he’s had it with Fr. C’s arrogance. Fr. C trashed me on his blog over the Una Cum issue, in spite of the fact I defended him on several occasions against Pistrina Liturgica. If you don’t believe his every opinion as “dogma” you're somehow “benighted.”

      Steve Speray is a humble and holy family man. Fr. Cekada has yet to reign in his pride. He’s not been man enough to admit his error regarding the murder of Terri Schiavo by dehydration and starvation and publicly apologize for the scandal he caused Traditionalists. Fr C has done MUCH good, but I understand why many people turn away from him. Sad. He’s in my prayers.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo, I have heard traditionalists such as Tom Drolesky criticize Father C on the situation of Terri Schiabo but I never really looked into what it is all about. Could you sum up the problem and exactly what Fr. C had to do with it? Thank you.

      Delete
    3. That would require an entire post. What I can say was that Fr C attempted to justify the murder by dehydration of Terri Schiavo by her adulterous husband. Fr DePauw, a REAL pre-V2 canonist And Fr Stepanich a REAL pre-V2 theologian CONDEMNED her murder. Even after a top neurologist told Fr C his facts regarding her medical condition were wrong, he persisted in his error causing grave scandal.

      Dr. Droleskey wrote an excellent summary, and a reply to his queries on the case from Fr Stepanich. I suggest you read that to get a good idea of the problem. It can be accessed at:
      http://www.christorchaos.com/FatherMartinStepanichonTerriSchiavo.htm

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. I just read the article in the link. It is apparent that the problem lies in this one paragraph which I will quote:

      "As for a feeding tube being an "extraordinary means" of keeping a helpless patient alive, there is not doubt that it is "extraordinary" in the sense that such a tube is not the ordinary means of nourishing anyone, since God equipped us humans with mouths for partaking of food and drink and some of the medications needed. And, when feeding tubes were first introduced they were plainly something "extraordinary." However, in the course of time, they became quite commonly used, so that they could not really be looked upon as "extraordinary" any longer. They became ordinary means of keeping helpless patients alive, and they have saved the lives of countless many."

      So Father Cekada judged that this would be an extraordinary means of keeping her alive. Fr. Martin, yourself, and Tom Drolesky judged it another way. Who is right? Did Father C defend his teaching with anything from the magisterium? If so, could you counter it? Has the pre-V2 Church spoken on feeding tubes as an extraordinary means of life support? I'm also curious about what the Novus Ordo sect had to say about the whole case? It seems to me that both sides are based on opinions and nothing more. If true, by what authority do you stand in condemnation of Father C for not sharing your opinion? Thanks.

      Delete
    5. Fr C’s account is based on outdated understanding of medical technology and the workings of the human brain. How could it be otherwise when using books from the 1950s? So the principles he uses have no applications in the present state in general or the specific case of Terri Schiavo in particular.

      Dr Droleskey is not a theologian. He is a former professor with a doctorate in political science. I’m not a theologian. I have a Masters Degree in science and a doctorate in law. Fr. Cekada is not a theologian. He has a diploma from Econe which doesn’t qualify him for anything other than providing the Sacraments.

      Fr Stepanich WAS A THEOLOGIAN. FR DEPAUW WAS A CANONIST. They understand far more about applications of theological and canonical principles. However, I do not rest on a (non-fallacious) appeal to authority.

      Below is the link to a letter sent to Fr C by Dr Gebel, a qualified doctor and medical expert who had access to Schiavo’s medical records. The feeding tube is moot because as Dr Gebel testifies SHE WAS CAPABLE OF EATING AND DRINKING BY MOUTH.

      Hence, she was MURDERED!!! Fr. C has yet to retract the scandal he has perpetrated in giving moral sanction to her murder even after the letter of Dr Gebel was given to him.
      See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1393366/posts

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  14. Introibo,

    I agree with 11:07 am inasmuch as this is a case of conflicting opinions. There is no authority to definitively decide anything.

    But putting all this aside, what was Fr. Cekada's interest in the matter? The Gebels? Did they know Terri Schiavo or the Schiavo family personally? How did Gebel Jr. have access to Terri Schiavo's medical records?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is no case of conflicting opinions. It is clear on the record that Mrs Schiavo was capable of eating and drinking but was prevented from getting that capacity by her murderous, adulterous husband. Do we need an authority to tell us dehydrating and starving a woman to death (who is not in a PVS and can take food and water by mouth) is murder?
      Anyone with an ounce of humanity and common sense can figure that one out.

      What did Cekada sanction her MURDER? You’ll have to ask him. Comparing Cekada to Fr DePauw And Fr Stepanich is like comparing a high school biology teacher to surgeons.

      Fr Jenkins was at the forefront defending Mrs Schiavo’s right to live. Dr. Gebel was a friend of his, I believe, and was given access to the records in an attempt to help Terri Schiavo’s parents save her life.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  15. Introibo,

    Thanks for that info, but it still doesn't explain why Fr. Cekada (not merely "Cekada" - he's a validly ordained priest/alter Christus, and I don't think Jesus would approve of people referring to him as merely "Cekada") inserted himself into the controversy. Do you know why he became involved?

    Btw, *obviously* I was referring to the feeding tube as being an extraordinary means of sustaining life as the conflict. Why you'd assume I would think denying a person food and drink who was capable of eating and drinking liquids and solids in a normal manner is moral is beyond me.?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I understand that Fr Cekada is a priest, but I will never go back to the days when people thought “priests can do no wrong.” That 1950s wrongful mentality gave us the Great Apostasy and children being raped. When a priest sanctions murder, I don’t think depriving him of the respected title is something to which Jesus would object.

      Why did he get involved? You’ll have to ask him. He had no business putting his unqualified nose into the dispute. He was DEAD wrong.

      I wasn’t assuming anything. Fr Cekada sees nothing wrong with murdering Mrs Schiavo. There are people who comment here who defend Adolf Hitler himself! I’m no suggesting you are one such person—but the way your comment was worded, and given the types of commenters I sometimes get, I couldn’t be sure to what you were referring. My apologies if you were offended.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. This is very interesting. Do you have anything written by Father Cekada explaining his position? I'd rather not judge him like you judge and condemn him but rather listen to the priest's own explanation and judge for myself. You are accusing Father Cekada of a serious crime and I think his side now needs to be heard and I should hope you will provide it on your blog. Do you have anything or should I search elsewhere? By the way, there appears to be more than one of us anonymous commentators who have joined this interesting thread, just so you are aware that you are interacting with at least two if not more people. Thank you.

      Delete
    3. @anonymous 1:30

      At the risk of sounding uncharitable, I don't like people accusing me of being "judgmental" in the pejorative sense of the word.

      I have looked at all the evidence from all sides at the time and had the expert opinion of my spiritual father, Fr. DePauw, an approved pre-V2 Canonist.

      I am under no obligation to you to publish anything. I make no money from this blog, it is a work of charity I feel called to do during the Great Apostasy. If anything, I lose time making additional money as a lawyer, not to mention precious time with my wife and family.

      Unless you (a) have privileged information on the case, (b) are a medical doctor and PVS expert of the same level as Dr Gebel, or (c) are an approved pre-V2 theologian or canonist (like Frs. DePauw and Stepanich), there's nothing you could possibly have to add to this discussion.

      If you want further information please contact Fr. Cekada at St Gertrude the Great in Ohio for his side, and Fr. Jenkins (SSPV) at Immaculate Conception Church in Ohio for his side.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Don't tell me I have nothing to add to this discussion you pompous airbag. No wonder you like Drolesky, you are two cut from the same cloth - as in two pompous NY busybody windbags.

      Now, since you think you are qualified to pontificate on the subject and you are no more qualified than I am, answer this question: according to Fr. DePauw, "expert" canonist, what Church laws did Fr. Cekada break?

      Delete
    5. I’m flattered to be compared to an intelligent Catholic gentleman like Dr Droleskey! Thank you.
      What did Fr C do wrong? Not get current medical opinion on Mrs Schiavo’s state. That’s so simple even you should be able to comprehend it! (Maybe)

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    6. Droleskey is an arrogant busybody. Actually so are you. You both meddle where you don't belong but getting back to my point...In answer to my question as to what Father Cekada did wrong you said "not get current medical opinion on Mrs. Schiavo's state."

      1. Says who?
      2. I'm more interested in the Church's opinion than yours. So far you have produced nothing from the magisterium. I'm still waiting.
      3. What is the current medical opinion that you claim Father Cekada did not get? Was it that she could "be forced to swallow food and water"? Is that it? Is that why you think he is a supporter of murder? Please clarify exactly what you mean.
      4. What Catholic authority condemns Fr. Cekada? Cite it here and now.
      5. Show me where the Catholic Church's moral theology is based on modern medicine?

      Delete
    7. 1. Basic logic. You can’t apply principles to things you don’t understand.

      2. According to Theologian Davis, “Man must preserve it [life] by the use of ordinary means; he is not bound to employ extraordinarily expensive methods, nor methods that would inflict on him almost intolerable pain or shame.” (See “Moral and Pastoral Theology” [1934], 2:113). That is the GENERAL PRINCIPLE. Do you really think what inflicted intolerable pain or was extraordinarily expensive in 1934 was the same in 1958 or 2004? The principle remains the same but it’s application GREATLY DIFFERS. See my # 1 above.

      3. He didn’t get that she was NOT in a PVS; she WAS capable of FEELING THE PAIN OF DEHYDRATION; that she COULD take food and water by mouth.

      4. See # 2 above. He applied a general principle to a specific case without knowing the crucial medical information necessary for a proper solution.

      5. It’s not. HOW IT’S PROPERLY APPLIED must be based on modern medicine.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  16. Introibo,

    No problems. I wasn't offended.

    I appreciate where you're coming from insofar Father, but it's a matter of respect for Fr. Cekada's Sacerdotal Character. It's also the mark of a Gentleman to refer to people by their correct title. Moreover, why do you tip your hat to a lady with a bad reputation when you pass her in the street? Not because of what *she is*, but because of what *you are*.

    I must confess (it may be obvious) that I don't know much about the "ins and outs" of the Schiavo case. That's why I'm asking you.

    I was under the impression that the dispute was over whether a feeding tube was an extraordinary means of keeping a person alive. You mean to tell me that Terri Schiavo was eating and drinking normally, and then her husband legally got an order to stop giving her food and drink and Fr. Cekada knew this and said it was morally permissible?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It began, more or less, as a disagreement over feeding tubes among other principles. However, the incontrovertible testimony of Dr Gebel, whose letter I linked above, clearly stated that Mrs Schiavo could be made to swallow food and drink water. Her husband didn’t allow for it to happen. After getting this letter, Fr C only dug his heels in and made medical claims seeking to undermine the medical opinion of Dr Gebel—as if he’s qualified to do that! It’s a pathetic joke.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo, when was Dr. Gebel's letter written? The article you posted is dated 4/29/05 but Terri died 3/31/05. I ask because you made it sound as though Fr. C had access to this letter before her death.

      Delete
    3. It's been awhile, but to the best of my knowledge and belief, it was given to him before she died. Nevertheless, the point is moot, because he should have publicly retracted his prior position in the light of the medical facts presented and apologized to Mrs. Schiavo's family for involving himself in a matter of life and death without making morally certain he had all the facts. He wrote back to Dr. Gebel attempting to defend his indefensible position, proven wrong on the medical FACTS.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  17. Introibo,

    It doesn't matter to me whether she needed feeding tubes or not. She was alive. No one had the right to take her life. That's my opinion. Btw, who's to say that God wouldn't have let her recover to a fairly significant degree? I believe in miracles. Do you?

    But - reading between the lines - I see what's happened here. Fr. Cekada was probably arguing that the hospital or care facility were using feeding tubes because feeding her by hand was not possible in terms of the level of attention they could offer, so in effect she was being fed by tube which he deemed an "extraordinary" means of keeping one alive, and he doesn't think one is bound to keep people alive by extraordinary means.(Btw, I've never read anything Father wrote on the Schiavo case.) I think he was wrong, but his opinion wasn't instrumental in the decision making process, was it?

    What disgusts me today, is that certain people on a certain "pulpit" and from a women's society founded by an angry lady named Trina (It's called the "Pissed Trina Society") are using the Schiavo case in their highly personal vendetta/campaign against Fr. Cekada and all sede clergy.

    It's pretty apparent that to them it's all about using that poor woman to discredit Fr. Cekada. Why aren't people up in arms over these sickos using Mrs. Schiavo to further their iniquitous agenda?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, she was alive, that's what matters, and of course I believe in miracles--you might send a polite comment for example.

      Was Fr. C instrumental in the case? That's besides the point: it's scandalous and makes good Traditionalists look bad (or even worse in some places).

      I know nothing about angry women and iniquitous agendas. Maybe you should write a blog about it: "Pissed Trina Liturgica."

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. If your beef is that she could "be made" to swallow food and sip water and not whether feeding tubes were an extraordinary means of life support than it remains to be seen how Father Cekada was wrong. The case as I recall was about removing the feeding tubes which resulted in her death. If Father Cekada judged that the removal of feeding tubes was moral on the grounds that the Church would consider feeding tubes extraordinary means, then I challenge you to show how and why he erred in judgment based on the Church's official teaching not an MD'S opinion. Do you have that teaching?

      Delete
    3. More importantly, what does Fr Cekada have? Not much. Do you really think he understands Church teaching better than Fr DePauw or Fr Stepanich?

      Secondly, doctors, like lawyers, don’t give opinions in the sense of preferences (I like chocolate and you like vanilla). It is an assessment of a situation based on all available evidence combined with the knowledge, training and experience the doctor possesses.

      If Dr Gebel said she could be made to eat and drink but her husband wasn’t having it even attempted, that’s foul play.

      Finally, Fr C is basing what is Ordinary and extraordinary upon outdated medical knowledge and technology from the 1950s. Theologians who made teachings in medical field did so by using a highly qualified Catholic doctor as a resource. The official teaching of the Church—the application of the correct principle to the correct situation—cannot be done without an excellent understanding of the medical condition and treatments. Not only did Fr C, NOT have such information but he dares to challenge Dr Gebel’s expert opinion based on his “common sense.”

      Let me know if your sick and you want “Dr Cekada” treating you based on his “common sense.”

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. So you have nothing. You condemn a priest for having an opinion on a matter of morality (not medicine) because he disagrees with a medical doctor. You also criticize a Sedevacantist priest for using "outdated" knowledge from the 1950s? Did you expect him to contact the pope then? Maybe the local bishop in the Vatican II sect? Until you prove he sinned based on a moral theology book from pre-V2 or other, then your opinion is just that and you have no grounds to condemn the priest as one who condones murder.

      Delete
    5. No, I have everything. Fr C has NO MEDICAL AUTHORITY in opposition to Dr Gebel, no privileged information, and uses his “common sense.” You can’t apply principles of morality to a situation you don’t understand?

      He should have made sure he had (a) updated, professional medical opinion, and (b) ALL the relevant facts. He had neither. Score: Introibo 1, Fr C 0

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  18. Introibo,

    What? You think I'm being impolite to you? Why? I'm not.

    The "Pissed Trina" was a humorous play on "Pistrina Liturgica." They are constantly bringing up the Schiavo case for the sole purpose of discrediting their sworn enemy, Fr. Cekada, but, admittedly, not as much as the guy on the pulpit. And they do have an iniquitous agenda.

    The question about miracles was, of course, rhetorical.

    I was merely pointing out that Fr. Cekada's utterances had no bearing on the decision to terminate Terri Schiavo. Ok?

    Did I surmise correctly regarding the below?
    [But - reading between the lines - I see what's happened here. Fr. Cekada was probably arguing that the hospital or care facility were using feeding tubes because feeding her by hand was not possible in terms of the level of attention they could offer, so in effect she was being fed by tube which he deemed an "extraordinary" means of keeping one alive, and he doesn't think one is bound to keep people alive by extraordinary means.]

    I don't think it's "scandalous." I just think he concluded incorrectly. But let's grant that it's "scandalous." You act as if Fr. Cekada has a monopoly on scandal in trad circles. He doesn't, as we both well know. But ever since Fr. Cekada trashed you (or however you want to put it) on una cum I've noticed that you keep on mentioning Fr. Cekada's disagreement with you and are constantly using the word "benighted." It looks like you're angry and hurt. Are you?

    As someone who thinks you're essentially a good guy (without knowing you from Adam), let me tell you that your oft-criticism of Father Cekada is not a "good look." Just sayin'...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your point is well taken. I apologize for being harsh. Maybe I should refrain from responding to comments when I’m operating on less than three hours sleep! As to Fr Cekada, I will continue to disagree with him on Una Cum and Schiavo, but I will mute my criticism as much as possible. He has done much good as I have already stated several times.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo @ 4:10 pm

      No problems. I understand.

      I must say that you're very attentive to your customers, but being on a sede blog operating on three hours sleep is just crazy! You need to be at your best. There are Feeneyites lurking about; irascible sedeplenists (actually, you could sort them out in your sleep); Fr. Cekada fans; sedes that just like being difficult; assorted kooks looking for trouble, etc. (Trying to be humorous here).

      Now as for disagreeing with Fr. Cekada (it apoears to be a trad pastime) and others - if you think they're wrong on important matters I'd expect you to give no quarter.

      I know it can feel good and (to yourself) look good when you're verbally eviscerating an opponent. I've often been guilty of it myself, of course. But I went back after a year or two and read some of my criticisms towards others which I thought were "cute" and "witty" and I cringed. After the passage of time they looked ugly and childish - I realized that I don't need to play the "ad hom" game - it did nothing to enhance my arguments. If anything, it detracted from them.

      Anyhow, God bless you too, and have a restful weekend!

      Delete
  19. Anon @2:54 - What about incubators for premature babies? Are they extraordinary?

    Anon @2:05 - No one needs to use anyone to discredit Fr. Cekada in the Schiavo matter. Fr. Cekada did that to himself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why ask me Anonymous 3:11? I think you should ask a real authority on the Catholic Church's moral theology such as a doctor or lawyer.

      As for the shot at Fr. Cekada (to Anon 2:05)why don't you provide what Introibo cannot provide- something from the Church's magisterium and then I'll agree with you. Well? Do you have anything from the magisterium that proves Father Cekada committed an error, sin, scandal or that "discredits" him?

      Father Cekada is a priest and as such has every right to weigh in on what constitutes morality. If you disagree with his judgment, that is fine but your opinion based on a MD does not make him a criminal nor does it discredit him. If you have a teaching of the magisterium that changes the game and I'd like to see it for myself. If you don't have it then you are just another opinion that doesn't amount to squat.

      Delete
    2. No. Fr C has no right to put his unqualified nose in a matter of life and death. How can you make a judgement without the proper facts on which you apply those principles. He is not even a REAL theologian like Frs Stepanich And DePauw.

      If you can’t understand that then you might want to pull the plug on yourself. You’re already brain dead.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    3. I know that nobody likes JPII, me included, but wasn’t he a valid Priest? Please see following:
      mn.gov/mnddc/news/inclusion-daily/2004/09/091504fladvschiavo.htm

      Delete
    4. Thank you for the information! Yes, Wojtyla was both a valid priest and valid bishop. As horrible as he was, he did get things right on abortion and euthanasia. Even a broken clock is right twice each day!

      It sad that Wojtyla got it right And Fr Cekada got it wrong.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  20. Introibo - do you have that teaching? (I'm a different anonymous)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To Which teaching do you refer ?

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  21. Introibo -

    The teaching that Anonymous @ 2:54 was talking about at the end of his post. But feel free to do it at your convenience or whatever.

    ReplyDelete
  22. “Thou shall not kill” is a commandment. Terri Schiavo was killed, plain and simple, regardless of the spin.

    ReplyDelete