Total Eclipse of the Doctrine

As many, many, MANY people did this past week, my family and I headed toward totality in Oregon.  It was a grand geekfest that homeschoolers revel in without a doubt.

Now, when we hit the road for vacation each year, it’s a veritable crap shoot what kind of Mass we’re going to get.  We step out of our comfort zone and just hope for the best.  It’s a 50/50 shot at best.  This year was no different.  We’re used to the usual happy-clappy sort of thing but it does get a wee bit annoying when it’s just out-and-out heresy.  I mean, who wants to go to Mass and feel like you’d like to give the priest a good tongue lashing.  So what did we get?  We got the Fr. James Martin, SJ wannabe.  (Insert exasperated sigh.)  I guess the priest just wanted to take the opportunity he had with his congregation doubled in size by eclipse watchers to go for broke.

Not all of the priest’s comments were heretical. Some were just ridiculous but let’s just look at them shall we.

  • It was the gospel on the Canaanite woman.  This priest’s big take away was that Christ had to learn to deal with people who thought differently than them instead of marginalizing them.  (As if Christ didn’t know his messianic mission and who that extended to.)
  • Next, the priest said that the Church is going through this today with, for example, women. He said that the Church didn’t know what to do with us.  Accept us, reject us or “SEND US TO THE BACK OF THE BUS.”  No joke, he said it.  What was totally ironic is that the church was named after Mary.  Uhhhhhhhhh….
  • Then, of course, the prayers of the faithful basically went on to allude to ALL of the other marginalized that the Church has forgotten. Gag!  That was his homage to all of those in sin who want to keep sinning.
  • And then there was something about him being shocked to find out, as a newly ordained priest, that he was expected to be obedient to his bishop.  The horrors!

I quickly leaned over to my husband and pointed to the side door.  “That’s our exit after Mass, honey!”  Again, I’m on vacation.  We loaded into the car and quizzed all the kids who sat through the Mass with a confused look on their face because, well, even they know lunacy when they hear it.  I’m sure my older children were probably just praying we didn’t have to hang out too long after while mom gave father what for.  We had fun to get to, after all.  Yeah, the kids were able to zero in on the heresy right away.

We had friends with us and I mentioned to one of them that I was relatively sure that this priest must own the whole Fr. James Martin, SJ library.  I was not off in any way on assumption because the very next day Fr. James Martin, SJ broke Catholic Twitter with this one:


What?!?!  Is there a part of the Dark Web from which they all get their talking points?!  Were they all in the same class?   Brothers from another mother, perhaps?  Really, the cultish ways are kind of scary.



Gotta find this rather hysterical that Father “Look how mean and judge-y people are to me!”  and who claims not to be a theologian would throw out the heresy accusation.  Oops.  I mean, that’s right up there with him calling people “haters” awhile back.  Let’s stop to pause and think about the fact Fr. Martin almost weekly gives a “mean tweets” reading and he goes and calls those who follow the Catechism heretics.  I don’t think the hypocrisy gets any better than this.

It seems that some rather faithful priests/people decided to call him on his heretical views (and came to the same conclusion as the kids camping with us). What a riot! (Hysterical list of responses not to miss!) and here’s another rebuttal by ChurchPOP.

Ironically, Fr. Martin likes to say WE do not see Christ as truly human and truly divine but he’s the one who denies the divinity thing.  Let me let you in on a not so secretive idea.  God doesn’t contradict himself,  Fr. Martin.  While, yes, God placed Himself on the human timeline in the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, this didn’t lead Him to ever be contrary to His divine nature.  In other words, Christ understood His messianic mission while He needed to learn how to walk as a toddler as pointed out by the Catechism and many a good priest.  Fr. Martin, SJ.?  Well, he’s, oh, so fond of the fully human side (a la’ the Last Temptation of Christ type of human) but he is the one who seems to buy into Nestorianism on the fully divine issue.  I’m sure he’s fully aware and understands the doctrine on the matter.  I think he just prefers to lead people astray.

Now, why does Fr. Martin and his ilk persist putting forth this silly notion?  Well, this was shown quite clearly in the “homily” I had to endure.  It’s to put forth their social agenda.  If they get people to think Christ didn’t know how to deal with the marginalized but learned that he was wrong, shouldn’t we have to achieve that to be Christ-like?  (Can you even believe they are trying to float this? It’s simply a narcissistic play to the rest of the congregation.) Problem. This isn’t what Christ did.  Does he believe people are that gullible?  Well, I guess they are or he wouldn’t have a following.

Nice try Fr. Martin and cult.  Nice try.



11 thoughts on “Total Eclipse of the Doctrine

  1. Sad part is Martin, Roisica and Radcliffe keep getting promoted by the. Jesuits and the Vatican. WHAT were they thinking???. Too many sorry cino Bishop’s like Fernandez,, Santos of Brazil. And cocopalmeiro, Paglia and Sororondo running as .loose cannons in Arg. And the Vatican sad to say.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. We attended a Mass at a nearby parish who pointed out in his homily that the daughter perhaps had a “mental illness” not a demon as the Gospel proclaimed and people didn’t know about this at the time. Never mind that Jesus cast out demons and sent his Apostles to do this also. He then went on to say we had to understand people that were different than ourselves ( out city has a huge homeless problem) and try to help them. Although he did say we needed faith in our lives he overlooked the obvious point that Jesus was now beginning to heal those of the Gentiles that did have faith. So, are we to conclude that this didn’t and doesn’t occur now? Luckily he didn’t bring up women in this as yours did but he’s generally progressive, so with great effort I prayed for him. He at least is an older priest probably indoctrinated from the liberal seminaries in the sixties, but I was hoping that the younger ones aren’t feeding into this not nenes. Every time I hear if including more women are m wondering why. I’m a lector only because not enough guys stepped up. I don’t believe women should be doing the readings when the priest or even a deacon is there who can actually pronounce some of the names and is should be better versed in a geology. Women have never taken for granted. They’ve always been active in the church back in the fifties when we supported the parish through Altar Societies, choirs, bake sales and yes even cafeteria workers in our parish schools, but guess that’s not what they have in mind now.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Love your blog, OMM, and your analysis here is spot on. And yet I can’t help but get the feeling that much of the Catholic blogosphere & twitterverse is paying way too much attention lately to the musings of Father Martin. To me, Fr M seems more like a SYMPTOM of the problem than the problem itself. For 40, 50 years or longer, liberal Jesuits like Fr M have been wishy-washy about upholding Catholic doctrine. This isn’t new. In the past, though, faithful Catholics could simply point to some recent pronouncement from the reigning pontiff or the CDF, shrug and say, ‘Father Cool Priest, S.J. is clearly out of step with the teaching of the Church. Case closed. Move along.’ Now, though, we find ourselves in a situation in which a priest like Father M, despite still being out of step with the perennial teachings of the Church, seems very much to be IN STEP with the thinking of the Cupichs, McElroys, McGraths… and, yes, Bergoglios who occupy positions of power within the Church. That’s what is making everyone so antsy about Fr M lately. It’s not news that he’s wrong about stuff. What’s new is the uncomfortable suspicion that the powers that be within the Church hierarchy no longer agree with us that he’s wrong about stuff.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Oh, I agree that he’s not the first heretical Jesuit but he’s certainly the one with the most notoriety and position at the Vatican and so I shall continue to point out the lunacy. A lot of people do not understand how wrong he is. It’s so easy to point out the Church teachings that he tries to obscure and so I shall. Least I can do.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Here’s the subtext: Jesus evolved on the issue of gentiles, so likewise he would evolve on the issue of gay marriage and sodomy if he encountered them in his ministry. One could not have a more Hegelian, materialist view of Jesus. This certainly is not the Jesus of the Gospels and it is not Catholic. Furthermore, this is precisely the modernist heresy that has been condemned by at least 5 popes. It also smacks a bit of Teiliard de Chardin.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. The error is called “agnoetism” – it is implicitly Nestorian, and it is directly addressed in CCC #473-4: “But at the same time, this truly human knowledge of God’s Son expressed the divine life of his person. “The human nature of God’s Son, not by itself but by its union with the Word, knew and showed forth in itself everything that pertains to God.” Such is first of all the case with the intimate and immediate knowledge that the Son of God made man has of his Father. The Son in his human knowledge also showed the divine penetration he had into the secret thoughts of human hearts. By its union to the divine wisdom in the person of the Word incarnate, Christ enjoyed in his human knowledge the fullness of understanding of the eternal plans he had come to reveal. What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.”

    I asked Fr. Martin one time about it in a combox he was participating in. His participation stopped after my question with the CCC reference and Denzinger reference (#248, older numbering).

    Liked by 2 people

    1. That is not surprising. He seems to ignore any debate when it comes to people who give him arguments consistent with Church teaching. He prefers, only, to read ad hominem attacks in order to bolster his martyr complex.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s