The powers that be. The people who write the dictionaries, the people who write the diagnostic and statistical manuals, the people who educate the young and train aspiring professionals and experts–the people who genuflect to every shibboleth from every special interest group that opposes you on this issue.

Remember the purpose of the Newspeak project: “The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible.” That can’t really happen, language does not really restrict thought though it was fashionable to believe so in Orwell’s time. But restricting language does make communication of non-approved ideas much more difficult.

Is there any source that doesn’t spin the definitions in a politically-charged way?

No. Observe “racism”. Racism against white has been defined away by the academy. Observe “white supremacy”–it’s been redefined to include any system that has a disparate impact on protected classes, such as that of depriving felons of the vote or requiring them to disclose felonies on job applications.

And if there isn’t, then dammit, do we just have to define every related term before using it?

Not if you agree with the premises that are being smuggled in to the definition. If you disagree, then yes you’ll need to explain or be misunderstood by those who don’t know that the smuggled-in assumptions aren’t shared by everyone. You will be talking literal nonsense to those people.

“Of course. That gives men an idea if the book is worth the purchase price and the investment of time to undertake a quick-and-dirty or inspectional reading. The latter tells me if it’s worth a line-by-line reading.”

Wednesday or Thursday I’ll visit my public library. We still have those here in TX. To see if there’s any way Art Deco can avoid buying the book.

Trying to help out.

It seems you are somewhat dismissive of a gay lobby. Are you aware of all the scandals regarding pro-homosexual events in the Church over the last couple of years? Same-sex people are more than welcome, but it’s a problem when people who are openly homosexual are focused on and ‘approved’. And there are problems in our seminaries with it as well.

I read Goodbye Good Men, and believe it to be true, although perhaps quite more limited in time and place than the book would lead one to believe. And I also think many things have changed.

“Cannot recall the last time I heard a priest mention any of them. ”

Thanks be to God, our new pastor has talked about that specifically. Now to get the confession times to be more than 20 minutes a week.

“is organize a consolidation of diocesan seminaries and regular houses of formation.”

EEK! Both the cardinal at the archdiocese near me, and the bishop of my diocese have a tendency to kneel at the donkey, and not at the cross. The only reason that we have some great seminaries is that they are influenced by orthodox, faithful bishops. If the PTB near me had their way, these seminaries would be teaching a watered down, liberal/dem perspective on, well, everything.

“not that many flamers’

Perhaps – my gaydar is completely out of tune. But effeminate men abound, and that can turn people off. Add in the Church of Nice, then why bother setting aside Sunday mornings?

Straight talk is rare, as you said above. And now we have no straight talk from Rome. I’ve been drafting a letter in my head for several days now.

My Diocese has some special recognition for donors to the annual appeal over a certain amount. There’s a special Mass and reception with the Bishop next month. I’m thinking of going with a shirt imprinted ‘I stand with Vigano’, but I doubt I have the guts for it.

Of course. That gives men an idea if the book is worth the purchase price and the investment of time to undertake a quick-and-dirty or inspectional reading. The latter tells me if it’s worth a line-by-line reading.

1. When I recommended you read Cozzens’ book, that didn’t mean I agreed with all his conclusions. Are you merely relying on the reviews?
2. Mormonism hasn’t escaped the decline.
http://religiondispatches.org/mormon-numbers-not-adding-up/
Essentially when young Mormon men reach 18 they were traditionally expected to become missionaries. In the past the social stigma assigned to young Mormon men who didn’t go was enough to force the marginally committed to go. No longer, and they are leaving and not looking back.
3. I never argued that the homosexual sub-culture was the only theological or moral ill afflicting the Catholic Church. The Pope mentioned Gnosticism, which keeps rearing its ugly head. Also the Vatican has a huge problem with plain old financial corruption (and personal ambition, but I’ll leave that for another day). The Institute for the Works of Religion, popularly known as the Vatican Bank, absolutely refuses to work with Italian or other foreign regulators. Search on “Monsignor 500,” the Vatican accountant who was so nicknamed in Vatican and Roman circles for the wad of 500 Euro ($650) bills he used to carry under his cassock and flash around. Italian police grew suspicious of Monsignor Nunzio Scarano when in January 2013 he reported that someone had stolen the fine art collection from the apartment he maintained in his hometown of Salerno. Art appraisers estimated the stolen art was worth nearly $7M, and when police visited the “crime scene” they discovered the Monsignor lived in a luxury 17 room, 7500 square foot apartment that he had purchased for $1.7M dollars. They conducted electronic surveillance on him and later that same year arrested him for corruption when he and then Italian secret-service agent Giovanni Maria Zito arrived in a private jet from Switzerland in Rome on suspicion of attempting to smuggle $26M+ into the country. The money belonged to an Italian shipping magnate who wanted to repatriate the money without paying taxes. “Monsignor 500” was acquitted on the corruption charge by an Italian judge who ruled that because the plan fell through, a last minute problem with the Swiss Bank meant the men returned without the money, meant it didn’t meet the elements of corruption. “Monsignor 500” was convicted of making false accusations against his co-defendant, claiming that Zito had stolen $217K from him, but the prosecution was able to prove that Scarano willingly paid him the money as his cut for taking part in the scheme. He remained under indictment for withdrawing $650K (or $560K, take your pick as I’ve seen both figures reported though not in dollar amounts) from his Vatican Bank accounts which he used for personal expenses. He told donors the money was for a home for the terminally ill, not his multi-million dollar lifestyle. When he was arrested his Vatican accounts, all ten containing $2M, were frozen. I have not been able to find out anything further about the case since the early reporting, so it appears the Vatican has made it go away.

All else aside, isn’t bearing false witness a sin?

4. I don’t expect the Holy See to police my diocese. I would like to police it myself, but I don’t have the time to monitor the shell game that the Vatican and the USCCB are playing with corrupt priests.

I’m basically worn out, so I’m done responding.

I think you mean ‘mutually re-inforcing’.

I highly suggest you read Father Donald Cozzens’, at the time of publication the

Read the reviews when it came out. The reviewer wasn’t impressed with his argument and Cozzens himself was pushing a program of accommodation with the culture rather than purification of the Church.

1. Declines in Sunday attendance are to be found pretty much in every denomination, though the severity varies. I think it’s possible Mormons and Pentacostalists have escaped, but that’s about it.

2. No doubt flamers in the priesthood alienate people. If my own experience is representative, there aren’t that many. The two I’ve met were ordained in 1966 and 2012 respectively. The former died in 2008 the latter’s effeminacy is quite mild.

3. No doubt heresy and heterodoxy driven by latent homosexuality and it’s resentments and apologias has an entropic effect on any denomination and more on the Catholic Church than on any other. The thing is, a priest corps shot through with ‘Jungians, Unitarians, and goofies’ (in the words of Fr. Joseph Wilson) has an entropic effect no matter what the motor of this trash is. It is, of course, worse, when it is accompanied by gossipy cliques (some of whom are fellating each other).

4. Again, the Holy See hasn’t the manpower to police your diocese or anyone else’s. They can articulate standards, but implementation will inevitably be decentralized. One thing the Holy See might do is organize a consolidation of diocesan seminaries and regular houses of formation. About 15 English-speaking seminaries and 1 Francophone seminary would do for North America. A couple of houses of Jesuits, a couple of Franciscans, &c. The problems would be easier for the Holy See and interested bishops to track and police.

5. One sociologist of religion (on Mars Hill Audio Journal) offered that in his research, one of the most organizationally destructive things a denomination can do is fiddle with the order of worship. The Novus Ordo, the cheap modern architecture of most parishes constructed in the last 50 years, and the elimination or dissipation of mundane piety (manifest in the Rosary, Friday abstinence, novenas, and frequent confession) have with scant doubt taken a horrible toll. It’s not unusual to encounter a priest who takes steps to discourage confession. It’s been a while since I’ve seen discussion of survey research on the question, but the last time it was being bruited about that perhaps 1 in 10 baptized Catholics were making a confession even once a year.

6. And who is thinking o’er the horizon? A hardline Franciscan of my acquaintance once said he’d been instructed that you give a sermon and you don’t mention one of the four last things, you’ve wasted your time. Cannot recall the last time I heard a priest mention any of them.

7. Again, the laity squawk horribly when you propose merging parishes. Mergers there must be. We haven’t the priests or the pewsitters to justify the cost of all this real estate.

8. You effectively exclude homosexuals, I’d wager you don’t get more vocations, but you do get better vocations. The thing is, one of the most severe wounds the Church has suffered in the occident in the last 60 years has been the collapse of orders of women religious. Male homosexuality is not why the number taking their final vows each year has declined by 97% in that time.

“Again, the notion the vocation shortage is ‘artificial and contrived’ is a nonsense meme. The number of lay Catholics appearing for Mass drops by 1/3 during a period of time when the population of the United States increases by 40% and Michael Rose fancies that’s not going to be reflected in the number of young men who present themselves as candidates for the priesthood.”

The two phenomena are related, whether you want to acknowledge the facts or not. First, the RCC has a huge problem with a gay subculture.

http://www.wlrn.org/post/popes-reference-gay-lobby-broaches-taboo-topic

“Representatives of the Latin American and Caribbean Confederation of Religious Men and Women had a question-and-answer session last week with Pope Francis.

In their summary of his remarks, the pope said that in the Curia, “there are holy people, but there is also a stream of corruption … the gay lobby is mentioned, and it is true, it is there. We need to see what we can do.” ”

The Pope later played down his remarks, although he did famously say that if a gay person is sincerely seeking God, who is he to judge. A Vatican spokesman refused to comment, saying the meeting had been closed. No recording devices were allowed, but attendees were openly taking notes. And later they released their transcript of the session to the extremely liberal Chilean website “Reflexion y Liberacion” so I can only conclude that the Pope was sending an oblique message to the Curia.

I highly suggest you read Father Donald Cozzens’, at the time of publication the president-rector of Saint Mary Seminary and Graduate School of Theology in Cleveland, book “The Changing Face of the Priesthood.” Unlike Neo I can’t separate the widely tolerated homosexual sub-culture in the priesthood (It’s not in the book but when asked to comment for various news articles he estimates between 20-60% of priests are homosexual) from the pedophilia crisis. What the Pope referred to as the “gay lobby” is simply Vatican shorthand for the homosexual sub-culture. The don’t work in unison. It’s simply that there are senior prelates who are homosexual, and a great many lower ranking priests who are homosexual. It is the worst kept secret in Rome. Some gay priests keep their sexual orientation entirely secret and maintain their vows of celibacy so now one knows who they are. Some let close friends or associates know their orientation, and either keep or break their vows. But a large percentage choose to lead a double life, actively hooking up for gay sex on the down-low while in public maintaining La Bella Figura, the correct appearance.

The “gay lobby” simply means that the actively homosexual members of the Curia know who the other ones are, and they practice a form of double blackmail. They won’t stick their necks out (every man for himself) but the won’t out each other as long as nobody outs them. And this culture is not limited to the Vatican but pervades the clergy. And it does make every priest who is in on the lie, even the straight ones who have lied or otherwise covered up for their gay brethren (this is particularly common among Jesuits), subject to blackmail.

This is why I can’t separate the homosexual sub-culture from the pedophilia crisis. As one gay monk told a Vanity Fair author, living in a monastery is like living in “Big Brother House.” Everybody knows everything. So when a pedophile priest is reported to his superiors, if the superiors have the slightest bit of dirt on them they try to hush it up lest their crimes be revealed. So they hush it up, and transfer the priest out of the diocese.

Pope Benedict tried to clean up the “gay lobby.” But he did it the RCC way, and the RCC is a past master at protecting itself. Rumors are OK, but not public scandal. So he ordered that those priests leading double lives be transferred out or retired. Not even Pope Benedict could avoid the rumors. People couldn’t fail to notice his long time relationship with his ruggedly handsome personal secretary nicknamed “Bel Giorgio” or Handsome George in English. Pope Benedict received his own nickname in Rome, La Maladetta. It was a play on words; in Italian the Pope’s name is Benedetto meaning “blessed.” La Maladetta means “cursed,” and notice the Pope also got a sex change in the renaming.

I don’t know the truth of the rumors, but I do find Benedict’s resignation curious and I wonder if the Pope’s remarks about the gay lobby at the Vatican, given to people openly taking notes, wasn’t his way of giving them a warning.