APRIL 10, 2016
Cardinal Oswald Gracias is one of Pope Francis’ “liberal-minded” prelates
Bishops Call for Episcopal Solidarity, Collegiality to Avert Interreligious Crises
Thailand, September 10, 2001
Some Asian bishops have called for “episcopal solidarity and collegiality” to avert interreligious crises in Asia.
Local Churches have to “bear the brunt” when Vatican offices issue documents “without prior consultation with local ordinaries or episcopal conferences” they told fellow bishops in an Aug. 24 letter to the FABC central committee and episcopal conferences throughout Asia.
The letter also urged Asian Church leaders to “take up the question” with the appropriate Church authorities.
The bishops met Aug. 20-25 in Thailand to discuss important issues affecting interreligious dialogue and relations in Asia, including “Dominus Iesus: On the Unicity and the Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church,” issued Sept. 5, 2000, by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
In some Asian countries, they said, “groups inimical to Christianity are making use of Vatican documents to attack the Church and to build a climate of suspicion and antipathy.”
Citing the Church´s collective “responsibility” to avert such conflicts, they said that “an appeal to episcopal solidarity and collegiality” offers the “best” solution. “We leave it to your discretion to determine the best way to approach this question with the proper ecclesiastical authorities.”
The bishops were attending the Fourth Formation Institute for Interreligious Affairs (FIRA IV) at the Redemptorist center in Pattaya, 150 kilometers southeast of Bangkok. It was organized by the Federation of Asian Bishops´ Conferences (FABC) Office of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs (OEIA).
The FIRA IV final statement stressed that Churches in Asia “do not ignore the proclamation of the Good News,” but are seeking “effective and culturally acceptable” ways of announcing Gospel values.
The statement noted that Dominus Iesus’ tone — “tending toward the dogmatic and authoritarian” — and the distinctions it drew between the Catholic Church and other Churches as well as other religions “tended to offend” and “to a great extent stand in the way of better relationships and hamper dialogue.”
The Church leaders asked if such a document was “opportune” at a time when the general religious atmosphere around the globe “borders on the delicate and at times even explosive.”
However, they acknowledged some positive aspects. “Far from denying the Church’s commitment to interreligious dialogue, ‘Dominus Iesus’ affirms it as integral to the Church’s evangelizing mission,” they said, adding that it “encourages theologians to seek answers to many unresolved issues.”
In their final statement FIRA participants called for the promotion of a “culture of dialogue,” stressing that that “while sharing our experience of Christ with others, we must be careful to avoid using exclusive language or to make normative claims.” They urged each diocese to establish a center for interreligious dialogue so that it can organize training courses, dialogue sessions and interfaith prayer meetings at various levels.
Seminaries and formation institutes, they added, should include courses on other religions and theology of interreligious dialogue, as well as organize exposure and live-in programs with people of other religions.
For the culture of dialogue to grow from below, Basic Human Communities or Basic Christian Communities should be used to promote dialogue of life and to cultivate other life-related programs, they said.
They also encouraged the establishment of Christian live-in meditation and spirituality centers.
FIRA IV participants also recommended that basic courses on all religions be offered in Catholic high schools and colleges “so that prejudices can be overcome and a respect for the beliefs and symbols of other religions can be cultivated in the younger generation.”
In my October 2005 report CATHOLIC ASHRAMS http://ephesians-511.net/docs/CATHOLIC_ASHRAMS.doc and a number of others thereafter, I documented that the ashram movement, its theologians and sympathetic bishops (who are many), openly advocate a separation from Rome and the setting up of an autonomous Indian “church”. These theologians and their bishops have infiltrated and control the seminaries in India to the extent that almost every one of our seminaries grooms future priests in Indian spirituality (Hindu and Buddhist meditations) and modernist philosophies.
These same theologians rejected and lambasted the Vatican documents Dominus Iesus and Jesus Christ the Bearer of the Water of Life (on the New Age) among others. See the reports at our web site.
They have a powerful presence at the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC) and some of the individual national bishops’ conferences are no less spiritually corrupt than ours is. This is reflected in the type of false ecumenism and interreligious dialogue that the post-Vatican II Church is indulging in Asia and gradually all over the world.
Priests from India are now missionaries to the West. Most of them are theologically progressive and corrupt.
Many of the top Indian and Asian bishops, like the progressive theologians who have groomed them, reject what they perceive as the “dogmatic”, “authoritarian” and “patriarchal” attitude of Rome and its “narrow parochialism”. Indian theologians have publicly and with one voice condemned Vatican Documents while the Bishops’ Conferences remained silent.
The 2001 call (not an isolated one) by the Asian bishops for “episcopal solidarity and collegiality” is plain humbug. Given more freedom than what they have now, they are capable of doing anything; a number of our recent reports on the Synods on the Family and on Cardinal Oswald Gracias, Archbishop of Bombay, currently the President of the FABC, and one of the elite G-9 group of Cardinals, reveal the direction in which things have moved. Assigned by Pope Francis to the drafting committee for the final Synod report, he was one of the first (see further below) princes of the Church to endorse (“predict“) the devolution and decentralization reform of papal authority that Pope Francis is advocating since his November 2013 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium. See
QUO VADIS PAPA FRANCISCO 26-THE DECENTRALIZATION OF DOCTRINAL AUTHORITY
In March 2015, I had rhetorically asked
IS THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY IN THE LIBERAL CAMP AT THE SYNOD ON THE FAMILY?
http://ephesians-511.net/docs/IS_THE_ARCHDIOCESE_OF_BOMBAY_IN_THE_LIBERAL_CAMP_AT_THE_SYNOD_ON_THE_FAMILY.doc: the demand of the Latin Rite bishops of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of India (CCBI) for the Synod on the Family to relax the Church’s stand on contraception.
Michael Voris ChurchMilitant.com names Cardinal Oswald Gracias as one of the leading liberal high-ranking prelates, see page 3. See also pages 3 and 4 where other Catholics identify the Cardinal as a “liberal”.
Vatican reform will decentralize Church decision-making, predicts Indian cardinal
(Catholic Register, Canada) August 20, 2013
A world Church needs a world perspective and Pope Francis knows it,
Cardinal Oswald Gracias
told The Catholic Register on a visit to Toronto Aug. 9.
Gracias is one of eight cardinals chosen to advise Pope Francis on reforming the Vatican administration. Representing each continent, the special commission includes only one Italian and no true Vatican insiders. The commission will meet with Francis the first three days of October, but the cardinals have already been talking to each other informally and are planning to meet as a group before their deliberations with the Pope, Gracias said. Each of the eight have met individually with Pope Francis to discuss the commission’s mandate, and Pope Francis has urged the commission to reread Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Evangelii Nuntiandi and reflect on the new evangelization.
“There’s got to be some reflection on this whole topic of the Vatican, how to make it more effective, to make it of more assistance to the Holy Father and to make it of more assistance to the Church. That’s really the way I would see it,” said the Indian cardinal, who is archbishop of Bombay, India, (though the city has changed its name to Mumbai, the archdiocese still prefers Bombay) and a canon lawyer.
The days of Italian dominance over the inner workings of the Vatican may be coming to an end. “We were speaking of Italian predominance and that has been one of the criticisms,” Gracias said. “The Church is a universal Church.”
A Vatican bureaucracy which more closely resembles the Church it serves doesn’t mean a kind of political balancing act requiring just the right numbers of Germans, Brazilians, Chinese and Nigerians.
“I’m not overly sensitive or overly concerned about national representation,” Gracias said. “The Church has got to remain above nationalities and narrow parochialism. It’s got to have a world view.”
In the cardinal’s view, the Vatican won’t acquire a world view through osmosis from its selection of foreigners to work in Rome or by stumbling upon a perfect administrative structure. Gracias believes the Church is evolving back into a more synodal form of government that marked the first 1,300 years of Church history and the continuing tradition of the Orthodox Church. But reform will also require a renewed sense of purpose.
Ten Bishops Have Final Say on Synod Document
Although most Synod Fathers have rejected the Kasper proposal, the final draft committee could still adopt it
By Joseph Gonzalez, ChurchMilitant.com
Vatican City, October 21, 2015
[…] As the Synod winds down to a close, all eyes are turning towards the drafting committee for the final Synod document. Although the Synod small circles in the main upheld Church doctrine, the final drafting committee, comprised of 10 bishops, has the final word on what the Synod document will say. And the final drafters include an overwhelming majority of liberal-minded bishops: Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Abp. Bruno Forte, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Cardinal John Dew, Cardinal Oswald Gracias*, Abp. Victor Manuel Fernandez and Fr. Adolfo Nicolas.
“It’s coming into focus that the progressives are going to have to do an end run around the Synod,” said ChurchMilitant.com’s Michael Voris. “The floor vote by bishops will not go well for the progressives so they have to do something different.”
With only three days left in the 2015 Synod on the Family, the liberal bishops will likely try to score a coup, if not through the small circle reports, where they have largely lost with regard to the Kasper proposal, then through the final document.
*The ChurchMilitant.com link on the Indian Cardinal is:
Synod Father gives interview to condemned LGBT group New Ways Ministry, October 19, 2015
DANGER AHEAD. Synod document drafting committee member: Familiaris Consortio? “Circumstances have changed!” Divorced-and-remarried, “decentralization” still on the agenda
Brown emphases theirs
October 22, 2015
Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, one of ten mostly-liberal prelates assigned by Pope Francis to the drafting committee for the final Synod relation, has unexpectedly emerged in recent days as a champion for greater “openness” to homosexuals. His comments in today’s Vatican press conference
are true to form, and given his role in drafting the Synod document hints at something that can be manipulated in favor of Kasperite and liberal concerns.
It is telling that in speaking of decentralization he, and other champions of this idea, repeatedly refer to the problem of polygamy in Africa as an example of issues that need to be dealt with by local bishops’ conferences. One has to ask if this is an agreed-on liberal talking-point to humiliate the African bishops into endorsing the “decentralization” option.
As we said yesterday, we have no reason to relax our vigilance as the Synod enters its final days. Continued prayers and mortifications are all the more necessary in the lead-up to Saturday, when the final relatio is consigned to Pope Francis.
From News.Va’s report on today’s Synod press briefing (emphases ours) – take note that the Cardinal’s name is weirdly misspelled throughout as “Gracious”:
Gracious was asked for his thoughts on “healthy decentralisation.” He said that the Church is one universal body but this also means that there are diverse circumstances in this body. He said that the Church had to deal concretely with situations. It would therefore be appropriate for Episcopal Conferences to study behaviours which occur in their context, he thought.
He used polygamy as an example. He said that this was not an issue in India but was in Africa so it would be fitting for the African Church to investigate this. He added that bishops would need to have the right training and assistance theologically and canonically.
He also said that the drafting committee received between 700-800 “modi” or “comments” for the final text. They were given to experts to be sorted into various different areas. They were looked at by the drafting committee then given to the writers.
The Cardinal was asked about Familiaris Consortio #84 (the document from the 1980 Synod on the Family). In this document St. John Paul II said that the divorced and civilly re-married could not be admitted to the Eucharist. He was asked if the drafting committee would raise this issue in the final document because it had been spoken of often at this Synod. Gracious said that a number of issues were similar but that circumstances have changed. He pointed out that in Familiaris Consortio it also stated that cases should be looked at carefully. He said that St. John Paul II, in that paragraph, stated that we must not put everyone in the same category. The Cardinal said that we cannot treat all people in the same manner. The one who broke up a marital bond is different to another who did not want that to happen and tried by all means to keep it. Gracious said, “To be honest, we don’t have a solution.” He said that there needs to be a study of scripture, moral theology, doctrine, tradition and, hopefully, as understanding is deepened, so too will a way forward emerge.
Cardinal Gracious added that there are divergent views but it is important that a key text is produced which can offer pastoral direction at this time.
Synod danger: Changing our language, changing our religion
By Andrew Guernsey, Rome, October 24, 2015
Liberal reformers in the Church have lobbied for years to eliminate language from the Catechism and other church documents that articulate Church teaching that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered,” and that divorce and civil remarriage is “adultery.” Such liberal reformers hope the synod might provide just this window of opportunity. The prospect of a new more “pastoral” vocabulary on sexual sin in the Church has raised concern among faithful Catholics who see it as a Trojan horse to undermine the Church’s teachings.
Four main pieces of language are among those challenged:
“intrinsically disordered” to describe the nature of homosexual acts
“adultery” to describe sexual activity between the divorced and civilly remarried
“indissolubility” to describe the absolutely binding character of the marriage vows
“love the sinner, but hate the sin” to distinguish between persons and sinful behaviour
This language-liberalizing agenda has become a more public part of synod discussion than it’s controversial at last year’s midterm relatio report that inserted language speaking of “positive elements” in homosexual unions. These linguistic controversies re-emerged as flash points from the very beginning of this month’s synod when Fr. Thomas Rosica of the Vatican Press office declared that “there must be an end to exclusionary language” and a new “language of mercy” especially in speaking about homosexuals and remarried divorcees. […]
Two Cardinals on the Pope’s committee of 10 who drafted the final report of the synod, which is yet to be made public, have also endorsed changes of language about sex and marriage, notably Cardinal Wuerl in an interview with the National Catholic Reporter, and Cardinal Gracias, in an interview* with the dissenting “Catholic” LGBT lobbying group New Ways Ministry where he also called for an end to the language of “intrinsically disordered” to describe homosexual acts. […]
*The LifeSiteNews link on the Indian Cardinal is:
Church reform requires decentralization, synodality
By (liberal Jesuit Fr.) Thomas Reese, February 11, 2016
On the agenda of the most recent meeting of the Council of Cardinals was what might be the most important issue in the reform of the Roman Curia — the decentralization of decision-making in the church.
The council is made up of nine cardinals, six from outside of Rome, who are advising the pope on the reform of the Vatican Curia. This was their 13th meeting since the council’s creation by Pope Francis shortly after his election.
The Feb. 8-9 meeting of the council included a discussion of the Holy Father’s discourse on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Synod of Bishops (Oct. 17). This talk developed theme of “synodality,” and spoke of “the need to proceed with a healthy decentralization” in the church.
The pope’s speech “constitutes an important point of reference for the work of reforming the Curia,” according to Vatican spokesman Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi.
So far, the council’s discussions appear to have been mostly theoretical without any concrete proposals.
Historians point out that decision-making in the church has been greatly centralized in recent centuries, as the papacy imitated absolute monarchies and responded to the Reformation and the French Revolution. In the last 200 years, improvements in communication technology (beginning with the telegraph and railroads) have supported this thrust toward centralization.
In earlier centuries, the papacy played a much smaller role in the governance of the church. Local and regional councils or synods often met to resolve both theological and pastoral questions. They even passed judgment on their brother bishops.
Rome was very influential in Italy but not so much elsewhere. Popes became involved when disputes could not be resolved at the local level or when losers appealed to Rome, the church of Sts. Peter and Paul.
Disputes taken to Rome were important but rare.
At the Second Vatican Council, there was much discussion of collegiality and subsidiarity. Collegiality stressed the important role of bishops in the governance of the church. The principle of subsidiarity held that decisions should be made at the lowest level possible in society and the church.
Because of the council, episcopal conferences were given more authority over liturgy and other pastoral and teaching functions in the church. The council asserted that the modern episcopal conference has many similarities to the ancient patriarchates.
In the post-conciliar church, there has been much debate about the role of bishops’ conferences in the church (see Episcopal Conferences: Historical, Canonical, and Theological Studies, edited by Thomas J. Reese, S.J., Georgetown University Press, 1989).
Progressives tended to argue for more decentralization, while conservatives feared this would lead to disunity in the church. The papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI curtailed both the teaching authority of bishops’ conferences and their ability to make decisions about the pastoral life of their countries.
John Quinn, retired archbishop of San Francisco, argues that the church should look to its early history of councils and patriarchates, which could sometimes even pass judgment on the decisions of bishops.
“In the first millennium,” he points out, “regional councils were a brake on bishops who might sing extra chorum,” who were out of sync with the other bishops.
“For example, if a bishop excommunicated someone, he had to bring that to the regional council so that one would not excommunicate and another admit to Communion,” explains Quinn. “So there is ancient precedent for individual bishops being bound by the regional council, and this could be reaffirmed today.”
This could have dealt with the problem of some U.S. bishops denying Communion to a pro-choice politician while other bishops did not.
One of the obstacles to dealing with the sexual abuse crisis was the inability of bishops’ conferences to pass legislation binding on its members without the approval of the Vatican. Nor could conferences punish bishops who did not comply. They were powerless to police their own. The same is true with financial scandals.
Others worry about giving conferences authority over bishops.
“I would be concerned about empowering episcopal conferences with general authority over individual bishops,” says Mercy Sr. Sharon Euart, a canon lawyer. “The activities of episcopal conferences are often dependent on the recommendations and interventions of conference staff persons as well as the perspectives and positions of the conference officers.”
“Giving conferences authority over individual bishops,” she says, “could result in staff, who may or may not have the knowledge and/or experience needed, exercising ‘power’ over individual or provincial bishops, which would seem to be inconsistent with the nature of the authority proper to a diocesan bishop according canon law.”
Of course, this is exactly the same problem we have with the current system, where in theory only the pope has authority over bishops, but in practice it is the Vatican staff that is usually intervening in the affairs of diocesan bishops.
Alas, no governance system, either ecclesial or secular, is perfect since it has to be run by fallible and sinful human beings. Any system that gave conferences authority over bishops could include the possibility of an appeal to Rome.
But the current highly centralized system has come under heavy fire. Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, India, reports that practically all of the Asian episcopal conferences he consulted called for giving them greater authority over liturgical translations, which are currently micromanaged by the Vatican*.
Quinn would go further. “The conferences should be able to write their own texts in their own languages,” although he acknowledges that there is a value in having some eucharistic prayers that might be common for use in all countries.
Some would like to see episcopal conferences have the authority to allow a married clergy. Francis is rumored to be open to optional celibacy if episcopal conferences request it.
The appointment of bishops is another highly centralized process that has historical roots going back only a couple of centuries. Currently, the papal nuncio (the pope’s representative in the country) submits three names (a terna) to the Vatican Congregation for Bishops, which then makes recommendations to the pope.
In ancient time, the people or priests elected their bishops. There were also periods when regional councils or synods did it, as is common today in the Eastern churches.
Pope Leo the Great proposed a checks-and-balances system that required that a bishop be elected by his priests, accepted by his people, and consecrated by the bishops of the surrounding region. All three groups had to be in agreement on a candidate.
“The appointment of bishops is in dismal shape and clearly needs reform,” says Quinn. “There is almost no meaningful input at the local level.”
He believes that the terna submitted to the pope should come from the bishops of the ecclesiastical province. The United States is divided into 33 provinces, each presided over by an archbishop.
“If the nuncio or Rome has some objection, this should be openly discussed with the provincial bishops and the two entities should come to some resolution,” explains Quinn. “In other words, appointments should not be made just by Rome and the nuncio without the primary participation and role of the regional bishops.”
On the other hand, many Catholic progressives would shudder at the thought of the current flock of American bishops choosing their own successors.
“Empowering our current U.S. bishops would mean empowering a conference that is more conservative than Rome on just about every topic,” cautions Professor Stephen Schneck of The Catholic University of America.
“Likewise, the current staffing at [the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops] is far more conservative than it was even five years ago. At a theoretical level, empowering the conferences seems terrific. But, in practice, it could be much worse than having Francis’ supporters directing things from Rome.”
Francis, however, has shown that synodality is not just about who makes decisions. He has made clear to the Synod of Bishops that he will be making the final decisions, but he also emphasized a process that is highly consultative. Prior to both synods, a questionnaire was distributed in order to get input from both clergy and laity.
At the beginning of the synod, he told the bishops to speak boldly and not worry about disagreeing with him. We have yet to hear a bishop make the same speech to his diocesan pastoral council or his priests’ council.
“A commitment to synodality would require a reform of episcopal conferences not only with respect to the authority of the Curia but also, and perhaps more importantly given the U.S. situation, in relation to the sensus fidelium emerging in U.S. local churches,” explains Richard Gaillardetz of Boston College.
“Episcopal conferences, in other words, must manifest and encourage synodality through ecclesial listening practices not unlike the 1980s pastoral letter process,” which involved wide and transparent consultation with the laity.
“It would be a difficult and perhaps theologically dubious step to promote synodality as a work of episcopal conferences,” agrees Paul Lakeland of Fairfield University, “without beginning from the grassroots and examining the place of synodality as the free exchange of ideas and opinions within any given diocese. Synodality can be a structure, but it is perhaps more importantly an attitude of mind, one which will only work if it permeates the entire body of the faithful.”
“Unless you incorporate thoughtful, caring and courageous laypeople into the work of the USCCB — those who have the ability to influence, blow the whistle, speak the truth to power while they help shape the work of the conference — the church will remain dependent on leaders operating with little accountability or challenging diverse perspective,” says Frank Butler, former president of FADICA (Foundations and Donors Interested in Catholic Activities).
Every governance system has its advantages and disadvantages. Centralized governments provide unity but can also become unresponsive to local needs.
The church, which for the last several centuries has swung toward the centralized model, needs to incrementally move in the other direction. But structural changes without corresponding changes in attitudes toward consulting the faithful will not respond to the needs of the 21st century.
*Cardinal Oswald Gracias was responsible for the heretical, modernist, Hinduised, New Age distorted 2008 St Pauls New Community Bible which he eventually withdrew from circulation, and revised (excising around 90% of the offending commentaries and line-drawings created by 30 of his theologians) following a crusade led by this ministry.
NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 07-UNPUBLISHED LETTERS AGAINST ITS ERRONEOUS COMMENTARIES-THE EXAMINER
(ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 20-HALF-TRUTHS FROM CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS
NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 27-CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS STILL IN DENIAL OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS ERRORS
This is the Cardinal who wants greater autonomy over “liturgical translations”.
Maybe he could start by correcting some long-standing as well as current abuses which include:
A NEW UNDERSTANDING OF HOLY MASS WITH THE BLESSED SACRAMENT FATHERS
(ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
THE ST PIUS X SEMINARY CELEBRATES HINDU DEITY GANESH (ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
CHURCH MOUTHPIECE THE EXAMINER ACCUSED OF PROMOTING HERESY (ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
TAMIL MISSAL TRANSLATION FRAUD-LAITY WIN COURT CASE AGAINST CHURCH
THE GOLDEN SHEAF-A COLLECTION OF ARTICLES DEALING WITH ECCLESIASTICAL ABERRATIONS
THE ONGOING ROBBERY OF FAITH-FR P K GEORGE
THE PAGANISATION OF THE LITURGY IN INDIA-C B ANDRADE
THE PAGANIZED CATHOLIC CHURCH IN INDIA-VICTOR J F KULANDAY
THE TWELVE POINTS OF ADAPTATION FOR THE INDIAN RITE MASS-WAS A FRAUD PERPETRATED ON INDIAN CATHOLICS?
NBCLC-HARBINGER OF THE INDIAN RITE MASS AND LITURGICAL ABUSE
New Age is rampant in the archdiocese and this ministry has sent a number of letters to the Cardinal on
THE LABYRINTH IN THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY
YOGA AND THE BRAHMA KUMARIS AT A CATHOLIC COLLEGE IN THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY
FR JOE PEREIRA-KRIPA FOUNDATION-NEW AGE ENDORSED BY THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY
INSTITUTIONALIZED NEW AGE IN BOMBAY ARCHDIOCESE-HOMOEOPATHY, YOGA AND KRIPA FOUNDATION
FR PRASHANT OLALEKAR-INTERPLAY AND LIFE POSITIVE (ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
THE SALESIANS, OSWALD CARDINAL GRACIAS AND NEW AGE PSYCHOLOGIST CARL ROGERS
CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS ENDORSES YOGA FOR CATHOLICS
PAPAL CANDIDATE OSWALD CARDINAL GRACIAS ENDORSES YOGA
HINDU RELIGIOUS MARK ON THE FOREHEAD 16-CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS WEARS
Financial corruption, nepotism and sycophancy have reached alarming levels in the Archdiocese of Bombay on the watch of Cardinal Oswald Gracias.
SEX-CHANGE SURGEON PRACTICES AT MUMBAI CATHOLIC HOSPITAL (ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
SYNCRETIZED CATHOLIC REPRESENTS INDIAN CHURCH AT VATICAN EVENT (ARCHDIOCESE OF BOMBAY)
One can imagine what would happen if the Indian bishops’ conferences are accorded greater autonomy by Rome.
The Mumbai-based LAITYTUDE blog https://mumbailaity.wordpress.com/ exposes archdiocesan scam after scandal and its owners write unceasingly to the Cardinal, to no avail. The guilty and the rotten get away scot-free and are even defended and rewarded, while the innocent languish.
SHOULD OSWALD CARDINAL GRACIAS HAVE RESIGNED (BEFORE THE 2013 CONCLAVE) AS CARDINAL OBRIEN DID
Some Synod on the Family-related files starring the Cardinal:
CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS INTERPRETS POPE FRANCIS PERSONAL REMARK ON HOMOSEXUALS AS CHURCH TEACHING 20 AUGUST 2015
CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS CHAMPIONS LGBT CAUSE AT THE SYNOD ON THE FAMILY 20/22/23 OCTOBER 2015
CARDINAL OSWALD GRACIAS CHAMPIONS LGBT CAUSE AT HOME 4 NOVEMBER 2015
Cardinal Oswald Gracias is very popular with liberal publications like
LGBTQ organizations’ sites such as newwaysministryblog rave about what a wonderful, compassionate Cardinal he is. He has also a strong presence on the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) which eminent blogger Fr. John Zuhlsdorf has named the “Fishwrap”. We have come across one of their stories on the Cardinal on pages 4-6.
There are others, often by the same liberal Jesuit Fr. Thomas Reese who was sacked by Pope Benedict XVI from his position as editor of the liberal America magazine in 2005.
When liberal organizations find you newsworthy and are non-critical of you, it’s time that you worried.
Even this writer and this ministry have been the subject of disparaging comments by the NCR. See
CRITICISM OF THIS MINISTRY BY THE NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER
25/28 MARCH 2013
In response to the article by John L. Allen Jr (now with Crux), one reader has said that if Cardinal Oswald Gracias were elected Pope, he would be Ganesh I!
Liberalism is a sin. Liberals are not Catholics though they might imagine that they are.
MIRARI VOS (ON LIBERALISM AND RELIGIOUS INDIFFERENTISM)
GREGORY XVI JANUARY 6, 1928
LIBERALISM AND LIBERAL THEOLOGY
LIBERALISM IS A SIN